The President’s FY11 International Affairs Budget request represents only 1.4% of the entire federal budget and less than 7% of national security funding.    Knowing the great need that exists for more funding for development and diplomacy, the military leaders close their letter saying, “we urge you to support no less than the Administration’s request of $58.5 billion for the International Affairs Budget.”

The Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network, of which USGLC is a member, identifies increased funding and accountability of foreign assistance as a priority action in “New Day, New Way: U.S. Foreign Assistance for the 21st Century.”

Click here to view the letter.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made a forceful case to Congress last week on the importance of President Obama’s recently submitted request for the fiscal 2011 International Affairs Budget.  In four separate hearings – on back-to-back days – before House and Senate authorizers and appropriators, Clinton discussed the budget request for U.S. foreign affairs spending and explicitly linked it to our national security and national interests.

Of the $4.9 billion increase from FY2010, $3.6 billion would go to what the State Department calls “frontline states”—Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq.  The remainder represents a mere 2.7% increase that Clinton said would “address global challenges, strengthen partnerships, and ensure that the State Department and USAID are equipped with the right people and resources.”

She acknowledged current economic constraints, citing her former role as U.S. Senator and the valid concerns of constituents across the country: “For every dollar we spend, we have to show results.” But she went on to affirm that the budget request supports programs that are “vital to our national security, our national interests, and our leadership in the world, while guarding against waste, duplication, and irrelevancy.”

In elevating the role of development within U.S. foreign policy, Clinton said the budget “makes targeted investments in fragile societies which, in our interconnected world, bear heavily on our own security and prosperity.”  She also argued for paying it forward, that a little bit now will go a long way: “These investments are a key part of our effort to get ahead of crises rather than just responding to them, positioning us to deal with the threats and challenges that lie before us.”  To bring this point home, she emphasized: “We can bury our heads in the sand and pay the consequences later, or we can make hard-nosed, targeted investments now, addressing the security challenges of today while building a stronger foundation for security and prosperity in the future.”

She highlighted the Administration’s global food security and health initiatives, along with climate change, as the major components of the budget’s investments in development.  A cross-cutting focus of these initiatives is women and girls “who are the key drivers of economic and social progress in the developing world.”

There will also be money for an additional 410 Foreign Service Officers at the State Department and 200 at USAID in an ongoing effort to ramp up civilian capacity.

“These initiatives are designed to enhance American security, help people in need, and give the American people a strong return on their investment,” Clinton concluded.  “Our aim is not to create dependency, but to help people develop solutions that they can sustain for themselves over the long term.”

Senate

“Alleviating Global Hunger:  Challenges and Opportunities for U.S. Leadership”

March 24, 2009 – Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Panel I - The Honorable Daniel R. Glickman, the Honorable Catherine A. Bertini, MFAN Co-chair David Beckmann, Robert Paarlberg.

Panel II - Edwin C. Price, Gebisa Ejeta.

“The Obama administration, especially Secretary Clinton, is actively considering what is needed to make our aid programs better coordinated and more effective…But right now, people outside the beltway don’t have a very effective way to urge their senators to show their support for the Committee’s work for foreign assistance reform. We need a bill or resolution they can ask their senators to cosponsor.” (Beckmann)

“USAID in the 21^st Century”

April 1, 2009 – Senate Foreign Relations Committee

The Honorable Andrew S. Natsios, MFAN Principal Steve Radelet, MFAN Principal Carol Lancaster.

“For our development policies and programs to contribute to the U.S. smart power agenda, we need to be smarter about who sets our development policies, how they inform the decision-making process and where they sit within the U.S. government.” (Radelet)

“There is more consensus today than ever before among our political leadership, public officials, scholars and policy analysts and the American public that promoting development abroad should be a key element in US foreign policy – along with diplomacy and defense.” (Lancaster)

“The Case for Reform:  Foreign Aid and Development in a New Era”

July 22, 2009 – Senate Foreign Relations Committee

MFAN Principal Peter McPherson, MFAN Co-chair David Beckmann, Jeffrey D. Sachs.

“While foreign assistance is part of overall U.S. foreign policy, development must have a strong voice to articulate how a development strategy strengthens foreign policy goals.” (McPherson)

“When we try to achieve defense and diplomatic goals with the same dollars, aid is usually much less effective in reducing poverty. In my mind, that’s the basic reason we need a strong development agency, with its own capacity to plan and carry out programs. These programs should be coordinated with other foreign policy purposes, but distinct from them.” (Beckmann)

House

“Foreign Assistance Reform:  Rebuilding U.S. Civilian Development and Diplomatic Capacity in the 21^st Century”

June 25, 2008 – House Committee on Foreign Affairs

The Honorable Howard L. Berman, MFAN Principal Peter McPherson, MFAN Principal J. Brian Atwood

“Because of these staff cuts, USAID has been forced to move from an implementation to a contracting agency…The existing situation means less coherence in the overall effort, less flexibility and diminished leverage with other private and public donors.” (McPherson)

“Diplomacy and development are mutually reinforcing assets in preventing conflict, but they are distinct missions requiring very different mandates and resources. Unfortunately, these two missions have been pitted against one another as rivals for a limited resource base within the foreign affairs budget (the 150 account).” (Atwood)

“Building a 21^st-Century Workforce”

February 25, 2009 – House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations

Thomas Pickering, Prudence Bushnell, MFAN Principal Jim Kunder.

“The Role of Civilian and Military Agencies in the Advancement of America’s Diplomatic and Development Objectives”

March 5, 2009 – House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations

John Hamre, MFAN Principal Nancy Lindborg, Gordon Adams, George E. Moose.

“…we now must turn more effectively to the challenge of “complex development” in countries burdened by a potent combination of deep poverty, insecurity and weak governance. The solution in these environments is not humanitarian in the sense of saving lives, but rather adapts the fundamentals of development practice to the challenges of these complex environments.” (Lindborg)

“Striking the Appropriate Balance:  the Defense Department’s Expanding Role in Foreign Assistance”

March 18, 2009 – House Committee on Foreign Affairs

The Honorable Howard L. Berman, General Michael W. Hagee,  MFAN Principal Nancy Lindborg, MFAN Principal ReubenBrigety, the Honorable Philip L. Christenson.

“We now have a pivotal political moment, with an emerging and welcome bi-partisan consensus in Washington and beyond around the idea of “smart power – the notion that America’s foreign policy is best served when there is a more balanced application and funding of the now familiar “Three Ds” of Diplomacy, Defense, and Development.” (Lindborg)

“Development assistance is not just a moral good or a matter of enlightened self-interest. It is in our vital national interests. There is no greater evidence of this than the military’s increasing involvement in this sphere.”(Brigety)

“U.S. Assistance to Africa:  A Call to Foreign Aid Reform”

April 23, 2009 – House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Africa & Global Health

The Honorable Donald M. Payne, Earl Gast, Ousmane Badiane, MFAN Principal Steve Radelet, Meredeth Turshen, Bill O’Keefe.

“We can, and must, do better with our foreign assistance. But we must also bear in mind that foreign assistance alone will not be enough to achieve U.S. foreign policy goals…Getting a bigger bang for our development bucks requires being smarter about our development strategy, legislation and organizational apparatus.” (Radelet)

“Hearing on USAID: Management Challenges and Strategic Objectives”

April 28, 2009 – House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform, Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement

Mike Walsh, MFAN Princpal Jim Kunder, MFAN Co-chair George Ingram, Thomas Melito.

“While we perform many important humanitarian and development services around the world, it is notable that there is not a comprehensive model for foreign aid from the United States that addresses, worldwide, our nation’s strategic goals and the needs of the developing world.” (Kunder)

“The trend toward focusing on the results of development projects is a good thing. We should care about whether our developmentdollars are invested in ways that improve peoples’ lives.” (Ingram)

“A Call to Action on Food Security:  the Administration’s Global Strategy”

October 29, 2009 – House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Africa & Global Health

The Honorable Donald M. Payne, Thomas Melito, Helene Gayle, Julie Howard, MFAN Co-chair David Beckmann, Richard Leach.

“The appetite for meaningful reform of our food security efforts – and more broadly our foreign assistance programs – is large right now. But the window of opportunity for enacting reform is small. We must collectively capitalize on this rare moment in history to help poor people around the world.” (Beckmann)

Click here for a recap of foreign assistance reform milestones that were reached in 2008 and 2009.

We must now turn our focus to the year ahead. Drawing attention to our agenda and moving it forward will be challenging in 2010 for many reasons, including a competitive policy and budget landscape and the coming pressures of mid-term Congressional elections.

As a community, we need new energy for our campaign, with several important developments on the horizon:

• The release of White House recommendations from the Presidential Study Directive on Global Development Policy, which aims to create a whole-of-government approach to development;
• Further progress on House and Senate foreign assistance reform bills, which have already drawn bipartisan support, and the anticipated unveiling of a rewrite of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961;
• The delivery of initial findings from the State Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, which will lay a foundation for more effective policymaking, budgeting, implementation, and coordination of State Department- and United States Agency for International Development-led development programs; and
• The beginning of Dr. Rajiv Shah’s tenure as Administrator of USAID, which faces dual challenges of rebuilding after years of neglect and supporting ongoing U.S. interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other conflict zones.

MFAN will work aggressively to maintain momentum on reform. We ask for the support of the entire community of people and organizations that strongly believe in U.S. efforts to alleviate poverty, fight disease, and create economic opportunity for people in the developing world.

We are fortunate that highly-placed Obama Administration officials and Congressional leaders are aware of the challenges before us and resolved to drive reform to a successful conclusion. President Obama pledged during his campaign to double U.S. foreign assistance and modernize it, as well as “elevate, streamline and empower a 21st-Century US Development Agency” in order to ensure that “development is established and endures as a key pillar of U.S. foreign policy.” And more recently, newly-confirmed USAID Administrator Shah said, “Not since the founding of USAID in 1961 and the passage of the Foreign Assistance Act have we had such an opportunity to fundamentally re-imagine our nation’s development strategy and strengthen the organization that leads it.”

These words, the plight of the world’s poorest people, and the urgent need to craft a successful U.S. foreign assistance program to support our foreign policy call us to action. We look forward to working with you in 2010 to realize our shared goals.

David Beckmann and George Ingram, MFAN Co-Chairs

See below for a complete list of cosponsors of the bill:

In their opening statements, the Committee’s two highest ranking members underscored the importance of reforming U.S. foreign assistance and the unique opportunity created by reform efforts already underway including SFRC’s bipartisan Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act (S.1524).  Ranking Member Lugar said S.1524 is an “essential input into this [reform] process” and that it “has attracted the strong support of most development groups, led by the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network.”  Chairman Kerry said, “This is a moment of significant challenge and change, fluidity, at USAID. But it’s also a moment when people across government recognize that empowering our development agencies and giving them the resources they need is absolutely essential to achieving our larger foreign-policy goals.”  Lugar (R-IN) followed by saying, “USAID must be a full participant in policy making and budgeting. It also must be able to independently evaluate the effectiveness of foreign assistance programs and provide coordination between agencies.”

Before Mr. Shah began his testimony, he was introduced by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), who described him as a “strong, creative, and results-driven leader” whose “nomination sends a clear signal that development and humanitarian aid are core components of U.S. foreign policy.”  Mr. Shah’s testimony covered his experience at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and his brief stint at the Department of Agriculture, as well as his vision for restoring capacity at USAID and making it responsive to 21st-century challenges.

Mr. Shah said, “It is an honor to appear before this Committee as the nominee for USAID Administrator at a time when there is such broad, bipartisan recognition of both the importance of development to our foreign policy and the critical need to improve the way we work to help achieve it. I would suggest that not since the founding of USAID in 1961 and the passage of the Foreign Assistance Act have we had such an opportunity to fundamentally re-imagine our nation’s development strategy and strengthen the organization that leads it.”

Many of the questions directed at Mr. Shah communicated a sense of frustration with the Administration over the lack of consultation with Congress regarding the QDDR and the PSD.  Mr. Shah was asked to describe not only his vision for restoring USAID, but list specific steps he could take immediately toward reforming U.S. foreign assistance.  In response to Chairman Kerry’s question about his vision for USAID, Mr. Shah said, “we need to give our mission directors and our staff in countries the flexibility and the tools to think long term. We need to reinvest in the planning and evaluation capacities at AID…And we need to look at our contracting system and how we work with our external implementing partners to benefit from the areas where we do that well with great efficiency but improve on areas where we can save money and achieve outcomes more efficiently.”

Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), who chairs the Subcommittee on International Development and Foreign Assistance, asked Mr. Shah directly about the line of reporting given the creation of the “F” Bureau at the State Department under the Bush Administration, which migrated many of USAID’s functions over to State and created the Director of Foreign Assistance title.  Mr. Shah responded that he would be “responsible for the development budget and the AID budget, and…engaged deeply with other key partners that are making those determinations, at OMB and elsewhere.”  More importantly, he will “absolutely” have a direct line of communication with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Other questions focused on specific sectors of development, asking Mr. Shah how he plans to engage with respect to global food security, global health, education, and good governance.  At the conclusion of the hearing, Chairman John Kerry (D-MA) noted his confidence that Mr. Shah would be confirmed and that he would do everything he could to “expedite” the process.

Click here for Shah’s Responses to Kerry’s Questions for the Record.

Click here for a Full Transcript of the Shah Nomination Hearing .

Chairman Kerry:  “First, we must decide whether USAID will remain the principal US development agency, and whether the Administration is committed to streamlining the proliferation of departments and agencies handling foreign assistance programs today. Second, we need to strike the proper balance between the State Department and USAID…Third, we have to ask tough questions about whether USAID’s growing national security mission is compatible with its development aims.”

Ranking member Lugar:  ”There is a broad consensus among development experts that the loss of these functions at USAID is inhibiting the success of our development programs.  Our development efforts will never be as effective as they should be if the agency that houses most of our development expertise is cut out of our relevant policy and budgetary decisions.”

USAID Administrator Nominee Shah:  ”USAID must become a more agile, focused, flexible agency that is accountable to Congress and the American people.”

Shah:  ”If confirmed, I plan to work with this committee and consult with the broader development community and those it seeks to impact to help craft and implement a development strategy that delivers on the President’s and Secretary’s vision of USAID as the world’s premiere development agency.”

Senator Menendez:  ”I believe as many others do that USAID has been decimated” and that this is a “great disservice to our country.”  We need USAID to be a “full participant” in policymaking and budget decisions.

If confirmed, Dr. Shah would become the leading voice for U.S. efforts to alleviate poverty, fight disease, and create economic opportunity at a time when we face big challenges in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and across the developing world.  He will also step into the middle of a cross-government effort to reform U.S. foreign aid to make it more effective and accountable in the face of these challenges.

The following questions are critical to the success or failure of this transformative reform effort, and should be directed to Dr. Shah by members of the Committee tomorrow:

• If development is to truly be a coequal partner to diplomacy and defense in the formulation of U.S. foreign policy, what does that mean for the role of USAID as the U.S. government’s primary development agency vis-à-vis the State Department and the Defense Department?

• Given the strong support in the Obama administration for elevating development alongside diplomacy and defense, should the USAID Administrator have a seat at the National Security Council to serve as the voice of development in these interagency debates?

• What are your top development priorities, and how do you see USAID’s role in places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq?

• How would broader foreign assistance reform – including reexamining the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act – serve to make U.S. development activities around the world more effective?

• How do you propose to change USAID’s downward trajectory and steer its elevation and resurgence as a global leader on development?

Click here to read MFAN’s statement on Dr. Shah’s nomination.

The Quotes:

“This bill arises from the conviction that our investments in foreign assistance require much more effective coordination and much more thorough evaluation.  In the absence of reform, we will continue to spend billions each year without confidence that these funds are achieving the greatest development impact possible.”

“This legislation demonstrates Congress’s commitment to strengthening the capacity, accountability and effectiveness of our foreign aid programs.  With the U.S. facing critical foreign policy and development priorities worldwide, it is vital that we update our foreign aid programs to reflect the new challenges of the 21^st century.  I look forward to working with the Administration to advance our shared goal of strengthening foreign aid.”

“I’ve been able to see our foreign assistance dollars in action and am proud of the role we are playing in producing positive change in the lives of millions around the world, but at the same time, I share the frustration of many Americans that our foreign assistance efforts have often lacked transparency, coordination, monitoring and evaluation.  This bill begins to reinvigorate USAID to improve the coordination, execution and efficiency of U.S. assistance so we can make each dollar go farther. The bill also establishes a body capable of evaluating the impact of our investments to make sure we are truly meeting our foreign policy objectives.”

“Reducing global poverty through development assistance is a moral imperative that also contributes to our national and economic security.  By providing greater resources to increase transparency and efficiency, the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act puts us on a glide path toward restoring this vital pillar of our foreign policy.”

“This legislation will position the State Department to make better programming and funding decisions by establishing more rigorous transparency mechanisms and authorizing an independent counsel to examine all of our foreign aid programs.  Accountability is critical to ensure our foreign aid programs are accomplishing the intended purposes for the benefit of the recipient country and U.S. taxpayers.”

“This is one of the most significant pieces of foreign assistance legislation that has passed out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in decades. I am proud that this is truly a bi-partisan bill, developed in a collaborative manner and that it includes input from a wide range of voices. These programs are critical to millions of people around the world, they contribute to our mutual economic health, and are in the direct national security interests of the United States. Furthermore, this legislation implements strong, new accountability and oversight provisions to ensure that foreign assistance is being used as intended and delivering a return on our investment. Today marks an important step, but it is just the beginning. I am committed to continue working with the Committee members and Administration to build up our foreign assistance programs, not just to where they used to be, but to where they need to be.”

The Senators:

1. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-MA)

2. SFRC Ranking Minority Member Dick Lugar (R-IN)

3. Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ)

4. Senator Bob Corker (R-TN)

5. Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD)

6. Senator Jim Risch (R-ID)

Tell us your answers in the comments section.  The winner will receive undying affection from supporters of foreign assistance reform.