blog logo image

Posts Tagged ‘Food Security Initiative’

Sec. Clinton Goes to Bat for FY2011 International Affairs Budget

Monday, March 1st, 2010
Bookmark and Share

Reuters-Secretary Clinton testifies before Congress

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.”

A Conservative Perspective on Foreign Assistance Reform – Part 2

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010
Bookmark and Share

mark_green_profileIn a piece published in The Daily Caller, former Representative Mark Green (R-WI), who also served as Ambassador to Tanzania from 2007-2009, calls on Congress to maintain support for a strong International Affairs Budget and follow through on foreign assistance reform, saying: “…there’s no denying the fiscal challenges that our elected leaders have on their plate. But there’s also no denying how much of a difference our foreign assistance programs are making in key parts of the world. I hope that our leaders keep these thoughts in mind as the budget season—and political season—moves forward.”

Ambassador Green, now the Managing Director of the Malaria No More Policy Center, has spoken out strongly on foreign assistance reform before, including in a video recently posted on the MFAN website and a Washington Times opinion piece last August.

MFAN Statement: Obama Administration International Affairs Budget Request Further Strengthens Development

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010
Bookmark and Share

February 1, 2010 (WASHINGTON)This statement is delivered on behalf of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network (MFAN) by Co-Chairs David Beckmann and George Ingram:

MFAN strongly supports President Obama’s FY 2011 International Affairs budget blueprint, which reinforces the President’s commitment to ensuring that “development is established and endures as a key pillar of U.S. foreign policy”  by requesting  increases for foreign assistance programs.  Even at this challenging time, we believe robust funding for development is critical, because the complex problems we are trying to solve in Haiti, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and elsewhere cannot be addressed solely with military firepower or diplomatic outreach.  We must continue to focus on alleviating poverty, fighting disease, and creating economic opportunity in the developing world, in order to improve people’s lives and help set them on a path towards self-sufficiency.

The challenging atmosphere surrounding this budget demands that policymakers do everything possible to make U.S. foreign assistance more effective and accountable.  Building on the unprecedented momentum created at all levels of government in 2009, we urge the Obama Administration to drive foreign assistance reform to a successful conclusion so that we are getting the best results possible for the people in developing countries we are working with, as well as U.S. taxpayers.

We eagerly await the findings and recommendations from two major Administration reviews – the White House’s Presidential Study Directive on Global Development Policy (PSD) and the State Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR).  We call on the Administration to work closely with Congress on House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Berman’s (D-CA) anticipated rewrite of the outdated Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s bipartisan effort to pass the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act of 2009 (S.1524), which would strengthen the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under Dr. Rajiv Shah’s leadership and create new transparency and accountability measures for foreign assistance.  We stand ready to work with both branches on this important and transformative drive towards reform.

For more information, contact Sam Hiersteiner at shiersteiner@gpgdc.com or visitwww.modernizingforeignassistance.net.

Best of 2009: MFAN in the News

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

As part of our “Best of 2009” series, below are of some of the greatest media hits from MFAN and its partners.  The past year saw unprecedented momentum for foreign assistance reform, and MFAN’s members offered keen insight into the nuances of the issue, successfully reaching out to a broad audience and strengthening the development voice in policy discussions.   Keeping development and reform in the news answers Secretary Clinton’s call to make the case to the American taxpayer and prove that development is a “strategic, economic, and moral imperative” tied to advancing American interests at home and abroad.

  • Ray-OffenheiserThe Advisors Obama Is Missing (ForeignPolicy.com-Ray Offenheiser, January) Despite his public commitments to elevate and strengthen U.S. global development efforts — those that alleviate poverty, fight disease, and create opportunity in developing nations while bolstering our security and prosperity at home — as a critical component of his foreign policy, he has yet to name even one senior official to be put in charge of bringing these critical changes to life.
  • Huffington PostThe U.S. Can (and Must) Do a Better Job Fighting Poverty, Disease, and Lack of Opportunity in the Developing World (Huffington Post-David Beckmann and Steve Radelet, March 17)  We support President Obama’s efforts to elevate development because the prosperity, health, and security of Americans are, now more than ever, inextricably linked to prosperity, health, and security of people in the developing world. We are urging foreign assistance reform because the economic and geopolitical realities of today, and the challenges of the future, demand that we use every dollar as effectively as possible to fight poverty and disease, increase prosperity, strengthen weak states, and further other U.S. strategic interests abroad.
  • lg_George-Ingram.jpgReorganization of USAID Is Focus of Senate Bill (CQ, July 29)  “There is clear, bipartisan momentum behind efforts to modernize the U.S. foreign assistance system to meet the diverse geopolitical and economic challenges we face,” George Ingram and David Beckmann, co-chairs of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network, an umbrella group seeking a broad reorganization, said in a statement. “While there are many issues to be resolved, we are optimistic about success because both houses of Congress and the Obama Administration are making dynamic progress.”
  • Committees Plan to Take Foreign Assistance Back to the Drawing Board (CQ, August 3)  “Reducing duplication, mandating reporting and accountability, being able to track resource flows, reducing double counting — those are things that I would anticipate that the appropriators would embrace,” said Todd Shelton, senior director for public policy at InterAction, an umbrella group of aid organizations that contributed to the paper. But rewriting the Foreign Assistance Act is the most important step in an overhaul, said Sheila Herrling, senior policy associate at the Center for Global Development.
  • Washington Post logoLeadership Vacancy Raises Fears About USAID’s Future (The Washington Post, August 5) “Both President Obama and Secretary Clinton have said how important development is. Increasingly, it’s a painful contrast between their rhetoric and the reality of having no leadership” at USAID, said Carol Lancaster, interim dean of the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, who served as deputy administrator of the aid agency under President Bill Clinton.  While development groups and experts have welcomed Obama’s boosting of the assistance budget, many are “very, very disappointed” with the lack of progress in reforming the aid system, said Brian Atwood, who headed USAID in the 1990s.
  • Ritu SharmaClinton Puts Spotlight On Women’s Issues (The Washington Post, August 18) Ritu Sharma, president of the anti-poverty group Women Thrive Worldwide, said she already sees the results of Clinton’s efforts in the bureaucracy. When Sharma’s staff recently attended a meeting about a new agricultural aid program, she said, one State Department official joked, “We have to integrate women — or we’re going to be fired.”  Still, Sharma questioned whether the program would succeed in reaching poor women, especially given the weaknesses in U.S. foreign assistance.
  • 20061031_markgreen_2Reform the right should embrace (The Washington Times-Mark Green, August 20) At a time when our national-security and foreign-policy priorities have become increasingly dependent on effective development, our political leaders must act swiftly and put partisan politics aside in order to enact reforms that will make our foreign-aid programs more efficient, more effective and therefore more capable of supporting and advancing our national interests around the globe.
  • NPR logoExperts Concerned by Leaderless USAID (NPR “All Things Considered”-Ray Offenheiser and J. Brian Atwood, August 27) Mr. OFFENHEISER: The State Department has advanced this quadrennial diplomacy and development review under Secretary Clinton that’s ambitious and potentially visionary, but there isn’t a development voice at the table presently, and that’s what we’re all concerned about.  Mr. ATWOOD: It’s a mess. It’s not fair to the taxpayer, but I think more importantly, it’s not fair to the poor of the world that we’re not doing our bit.
  • It’s Time for Foreign Aid Reform (Huffington Post-David Beckmann, August 27) The Obama administration has now made ambitious pledges to increase foreign assistance and modernize the system. This is largely because of an unprecedented consensus around the need to make development a pillar of U.S. foreign policy amid the complex and interconnected challenges we face.
  • Kerry and Lugar Push Obama on USAID (CQ, September 22) In an effort to expedite the process, the senators encouraged the president to appoint someone who has already been vetted by the Senate for another post or is well-known on Capitol Hill. Neither mentioned any names, but the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network, a coalition of development advocates, has organized their own unofficial poll on who should lead the agency.
  • Associated Press logoEx-Gates Foundation exec named foreign aid chief (AP, November 10) Given that speculation, and the delay in appointing an administrator, David Beckmann, co-chair of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network, said the administration needs to move quickly in defining Shah’s responsibilities.  “They’re going to need to give him some clear signals that he has real power,” he said.
  • David-Beckmann-photo-small-2Administration Names Agriculture Official to Run U.S. Aid Agency, Ending Delays (The New York Times, November 11) “This administration has inherited a very weak and fragmented Usaid and aid infrastructure,” said David Beckmann, the president of Bread for the World, a Christian group that advocates for hunger relief. “By getting someone in that position, Mrs. Clinton has taken a step forward.”  Mr. Beckmann called for Mr. Obama to restore the agency’s profile by giving Dr. Shah a seat on the National Security Council, and for Mrs. Clinton to give back its independent budget and policy-making authority, which had been subsumed by the State Department.
  • Politico logoShah meets with Kerry (Politico-Laura Rozen, November 19) ”The fact that we have a nominee with huge potential — finally — is a good thing,” O’Brien continued. “But he’s coming late to the conversation. And there’s a real question as to whether he is going to be given the face and authority going forward. The problem isn’t him. The problem is, is development going to be given a real seat at the table.”
  • Bill FristRaj Shah and America’s Development Future (Roll Call-Bill Frist, December 17) Dr. Shah has what is needed to carry on President Bush’s global health legacy and fulfill President Obama’s extraordinary development vision. The Senate should confirm him, and the Obama administration should give him the political support and resources he needs to succeed. Millions of lives will be affected by this choice.

Other notable stories from 2009 include: The Kojo Nnamdi Show with MFAN Principal Sheila Herrling, Center for Global Development, and member Paul O’Brien, Oxfam America; Huffington Post op-ed by MFAN Principal Noam Unger, Brookings Institute; USA Today with quotes by MFAN Principal Carol Lancaster,  Montara Center for International Studies, and member Paul O’Brien; All Africa op-ed by Ray Offenheiser, Oxfam America; Huffington Post op-ed by J. Brian Atwood, Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs; and Huffington Post op-ed by Ritu Sharma, Women Thrive Worldwide.

MFAN Member Op-Blog: Did Hillary just offer us the “Red Pill?”

Monday, January 11th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

Paul O'BrienOxfamMFAN member and Vice President of Policy & Advocacy at Oxfam America Paul O’Brien weighs in on Secretary Clinton’s visionary development speech last week, reminding us that “development is full of complexity, pain and gritty truths.”  This is a useful message for foreign assistance reform advocates, as we look to build on 2009 progress in a challenging landscape.  Tell us what you think of O’Brien’s piece in the comments section below.

Did Hillary just offer us the Red Pill?

In many decent movies, there is a moment which tells the larger story.  For good movies, the moment becomes short-hand in pop culture for larger truths.  In my favorite movie, the Matrix, it happened when Morpheus offered Neo a choice between the blue and red pill.  Take the blue pill and he got the quiet comforts of living in a fantasy world.  Try the red one, and he would start to see reality with all its pain, and gritty truth.

Did Hillary Clinton try to pull the development community out of the Matrix yesterday?  Perhaps, and forgive the tortured metaphor, but we live in our own Matrix:  On one axis are the different sectors in which we want to work–health care, education, food security and so on.  On the other axis are the different types of countries in which we have to do development…from fragile states to fully functioning democracies.

For years now, reform efforts have gotten stuck in that Matrix.  The F Bureau tried to solve the problem by drawing out the matrix and sticking everything we already did into one box or another.  Perhaps because  they were forced to manage their way out of a leadership problem, the matrix didn’t work—no one wanted to see all the existing accounts rearranged in a new table—they wanted a real vision for development.

And so now, we find ourselves with some people looking for reform through sector based initiatives—the Global Food Security Initiative, the Global Health Initiative and so on; while others want to divide the world up along different types of countries and give good performers to the MCC, bad performers to an empowered OFDA, and everything in between to USAID.

I’d like to think that what Hillary said yesterday is STOP!  We have to do BOTH, and they may not always be in conflict.  We need to listen to what different types of countries want, and understand that a truly democratic government is a better mirror of its people’s needs than the priorities of foreign donors.  But at the end of the day, we also need to be able to fill short-term gaps in countries where governments are unwilling or unable to provide for their own.  In the world of gritty reality, different countries require different approaches.  And we have to be able to meet countries where they are, in order to help them get where they would like to be.

In other words, I think she was offering us a red pill.  The legacy of this speech may not be her big lists of priorities, but her reminder to all of us that development is full of complexity, pain and gritty truths.  Countries are poor for a reason and the solutions aren’t trite or easy.  The question now is whether policy makers and their development partners are ready to grapple with reality.  Taking Neo’s leap may mean that in countries that are doing right by their people, we have to surrender some control of our aid dollars in exchange for results that last.  And in others, we support citizens to hold their governments to account, and help meet basic needs in the meantime.  If Administrator Shah and Secretary Clinton can help us escape the old Matrix of employing either blank checks or crippling control,  they will  honor a good movie and they can truly call themselves “Neo”-reformists.