[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S FY2021 FOREIGN ASSISTANCE BUDGET REQUEST
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JULY 23, 2020
__________
Serial No. 116-112
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://
docs.house.gov,
or http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
41-947PDF WASHINGTON : 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York, Chairman
BRAD SHERMAN, California MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas, Ranking
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York Member
ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey
GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida JOE WILSON, South Carolina
KAREN BASS, California SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts TED S. YOHO, Florida
DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
AMI BERA, California LEE ZELDIN, New York
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas JIM SENSENBRENNER, Wisconsin
DINA TITUS, Nevada ANN WAGNER, Missouri
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York BRIAN MAST, Florida
TED LIEU, California FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
DEAN PHILLPS, Minnesota JOHN CURTIS, Utah
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota KEN BUCK, Colorado
COLIN ALLRED, Texas RON WRIGHT, Texas
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania GREG PENCE, Indiana
TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey STEVE WATKINS, Kansas
DAVID TRONE, Maryland MIKE GUEST, Mississippi
JIM COSTA, California
JUAN VARGAS, California
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas
Jason Steinbaum, Democrat Staff Director
Brendan Shields, Republican Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
Barsa, John, Acting Administrator of the U.S. Agency for
International Development...................................... 7
APPENDIX
Hearing Notice................................................... 62
Hearing Minutes.................................................. 63
Hearing Attendance............................................... 64
STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD
Statement for the record submitted from Represtative Connolly.... 65
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Responses to questions submitted for the record from
Representative Engel........................................... 67
Responses to questions submitted for the record from
Representative Sires........................................... 114
Responses to questions submitted for the record from
Representative Cicilline....................................... 118
Responses to questions submitted for the record from
Representative Phillips........................................ 133
Responses to questions submitted for the record from
Representative Omar............................................ 137
Responses to questions submitted for the record from
Representative Spanberger...................................... 140
Responses to questions submitted for the record from
Representative Malinowski...................................... 149
THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S FY2021 FOREIGN ASSISTANCE BUDGET REQUEST
Thursday, July 23, 2020
House of Representatives
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Washington, DC
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:40 a.m., in
room 2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Eliot Engel
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Mr. Engel. The Committee on Foreign Affairs will come to
order. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the committee at any point. And all members will have
5 days to submit statements, extraneous material, and questions
for the record subject to the length limitation in the rules.
To insert something into the record, please have your staff
email the previously circulated address or contact full
committee staff.
As a reminder to members, staff, and others physically
present in this room, per guidance from the Office of Attending
Physician, masks must be worn at all times during today's
proceedings except when a member is speaking in a microphone.
Please also sanitize your seating area. The chair views these
measures as a safety issue and therefore an important matter of
order and decorum for this proceeding.
For members participating remotely, please keep your video
function on at all times, even when you are not recognized by
the chair. Members are responsible for muting and unmuting
themselves, and please remember to mute yourself after you
finish speaking. Consistent with House Resolution 965 and the
accompanying regulations, staff will only mute members and
witnesses as appropriate, when they are not under recognition,
to eliminate background noise.
I see that we have a quorum and I now recognize myself for
opening remarks.
Mr. Barsa, welcome. I am glad that you are here and that
you realize it is important to appear before Congress and
answer questions. We have had some difficulty getting
Administration people to appear before Congress, so your being
here is really appreciated. Somebody said it was like spotting
a unicorn.
Pursuant to notice, the committee is convened today to hear
testimony on the Trump Administration's foreign assistance
budget request for the year 2021 fiscal year. Your predecessor
Administrator Green and I did not agree on everything, but he
did a good and serious job and I know that he did value the
importance of foreign assistance as a tool for American foreign
policy. I really think he was terrific.
But whatever Mr. Green personally felt, it certainly did
not align with the Administration's views which we have seen
again and again in the budgets the Administration has sent up
to Congress. A budget request is a lot more than numbers on a
page. It is a statement of values and priorities.
And the Administration's values and priorities say that we
should cut our international affairs budget by roughly a
quarter. That we should cut funding for global health. That we
should cut food aid. That we should cut democracy assistance.
Frankly, it is almost what we have come to expect. And after
three and a half exhausting years, we have all heard the
Administration's message loud and clear, and the message seems
to be we do not care.
We do not care about the good that our development efforts
do all around the world. We do not care about the people and
the communities that benefit from this work. We do not care
about the harm done to American leadership when we pull back
from the global stage. We do not care about the people who work
at USAID. And we do not care about Congress which has
resoundingly rejected every budget that the White House has
sent up and which we will again. We get it. This starts at the
top and we all understand the President.
One of the reasons I think foreign assistance is so
important is that it is a reflection of our country's
compassion and generosity, the character of America that is at
the heart of our foreign policy when we are at our best.
Apparently, the President does not think that way. He does not
look back on things like Lend-Lease, the Marshall Plan, the
Berlin Airlift, or PEPFAR as the hallmarks of strong global
leadership.
This is a President who praised the Chinese Government's
tactics after Tiananmen, who writes off most of a continent
using a term that I will not repeat here. Praising the Chinese
Government's tactics after Tiananmen, it is really, really off
base. So, unfortunately, we know what to expect. We know to
expect a 50 percent cut to family planning because the
Administration's crusade against women's health says it is
better for women and girls to die rather than have access to
reproductive services. We know to expect reduced assistance to
Central America because the Administration has an anti-
immigrant agenda that says we should scapegoat desperate people
rather than get at the root causes of migration.
But what is especially galling about this year's budget
that was sent to us is that even in the middle of a global
pandemic, one that has come at the cost of nearly 150,000
American lives, the Administration wants to still slash funding
for global health efforts. The slight increase requested for
global health security is good, but it is overshadowed by
massive proposed cuts elsewhere.
Taken with the Administration's withdrawal from the World
Health Organization, which despite its flaws, I believe, is the
international body best equipped to coordinate a global
response to COVID-19, it is almost as though we are waving the
white flag.
So, Mr. Barsa, I am afraid you are a nice guy, but you are
going to run into a little bit of skepticism today as you try
to make the case for this erosion of our foreign assistance
budget. I think we are also going to need answers from you
about a number of troubling management decisions that you have
apparently made since taking over for Administrator Green. So I
will soon recognize you for 5 minutes to summarize your opening
statement, pending which I will yield to our ranking member,
the gentleman from Texas, Mr. McCaul, for any opening remarks
he has.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this
important hearing.
Acting Administrator, I should say, Barsa, it is good to
see you again. Thanks for being here. I want to start out by
thanking you and your team and your partners in the field.
Especially amidst this global pandemic, the tireless work of
the men and women of USAID to save lives around the world is
critical.
The United States continues to be the global leader in
foreign assistance spending, supporting economic, and providing
food, shelter, and health resources for the most vulnerable
populations. This vital work continues as the world grapples
with the COVID-19 pandemic. So far, the United States has
provided 1.5 billion to over 120 countries to control the
spread of this deadly disease. This commitment builds on over
two decades of U.S. investments of 140 billion in responding to
infectious disease outbreaks and strengthening health systems.
The President's Fiscal Year 2021 USAID request
appropriately prioritizes funding to key policy priorities.
This includes implementation of the Administration's Indo-
Pacific strategy; resources to counter malign activity and
disinformation campaigns of China, Russia, and Iran; support
for our allies and our partners in the Middle East; support for
interim President Guaido and democracy in Venezuela as well as
countries supporting Venezuelan refugees; prioritizes funding
for the United States International Development Finance
Corporation which provides a critical alternative to China's
predatory lending to developing countries; and it also advances
WGDP initiative to promote women's empowerment and economic
opportunity, which I strongly support.
Unfortunately, the request also cuts key global health and
humanitarian assistance resources. Globally, almost 80 million
people are currently displaced around the world. That number is
expected to rise because of COVID. The World Food Program is
estimating that 270 million people will need urgent food
assistance due to COVID-19, an 82 percent increase from last
year. And COVID-19 is already erasing hard-fought gains to
reduce extreme poverty and combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other
infectious diseases.
As expected, authoritarian regimes and terrorist
organizations are looking to exploit this chaos for strategic
gain, such as in areas like the Sahel. So as the disease
spreads in the Middle East, Latin America, and across Africa,
existing economic hardships, political challenges, and
humanitarian emergencies will worsen. In other words, it is now
not the time to cut this key aid. I am deeply concerned the
impacts of COVID-19 will push more fragile States into
conflict.
Our assistance must prioritize prevention and further
destabilization in addition to the long-term impacts including
on education assistance, food security, and vaccine
distribution. This global pandemic continues to spread and the
work that we do overseas makes us safer here at home. And as I
have said before, successful diplomacy and development is cost
effective. Fully funding our foreign assistance programs will
ultimately save taxpayer dollars.
With today's growing fiscal challenges, we must double our
efforts to ensure that every dollar spent is strategic in
advancing U.S. interests. So I look forward to hearing from how
our assistance will be used to push back on China's malign
influence and mitigate the impacts of COVID-19 and ensure
continued U.S. leadership around the world.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. Thank you. I thank my friend. I agree
with his testimony and I think it is very important the points
that were made by both the Chairman and the Ranking Member.
So our witness this morning, Mr. Barsa, John Barsa, the
Acting Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development--Mr. Barsa, we are happy to have you
here and you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF JOHN BARSA, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE U.S.
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Engel, Ranking Member McCaul, and members of the
committee, thank you for inviting me to testify today. It is an
honor and privilege to testify in front of the committee and I
look forward to your questions. I would also like to thank you
for your bipartisan support which has allowed the U.S. Agency
for International Development, USAID, to mount the robust
response to the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic that has
touched nearly every person around the world both at home and
overseas.
The United States must continue an aggressive,
comprehensive response that expands health, humanitarian
assistance, and addresses the ongoing second order effects such
as food security, economic growth, and preventing democratic
backsliding. I am committed to doing so using all available
resources, whether current year or future supplemental, and not
let any opportunities rise for our adversaries to fill the
vacuum in a turbulent world.
Every day, USAID's highly professional and dedicated staff
work to deliver development solutions and build self-reliance
in partner countries, project American values globally, and
advance our foreign policy and national security objectives.
The President's budget request for Fiscal Year 2021 for
accounts that USAID fully and partially manages is
approximately $19.6 billion, including $2.1 billion for USAID
global health programs and $5.9 billion for the Economic
Support and Development or ESDF fund.
USAID will use these resources to advance U.S. foreign
policy objectives by fostering stability in partner countries,
promoting free, fair, and equitable societies, and expanding
opportunities for American businesses. Our investments will
also strengthen our national security by addressing the drivers
of violent extremism and combating the spread of infectious
diseases, each of which represents a potential threat to the
homeland.
Faced with COVID-19, America is demonstrating clear and
decisive leadership. The United States has mobilized to combat
the virus both at home and abroad by committing more than $12
billion for the response to this pandemic. USAID has acted
decisively since COVID-19 cases first began to rise
internationally, working with the U.S. Departments of Defense,
Health and Human Services, and State as part of an all-of-
America response.
With $2.4 billion in emergency supplemental funding
generously appropriated by Congress including nearly $1.6
billion for foreign assistance implemented by USAID and the
State Department, we are providing health care, humanitarian
assistance, and economic security and stabilization efforts
worldwide. This funding is saving lives by improving public
health education, training healthcare workers, strengthening
laboratory systems, supporting disease surveillance, and
boosting rapid response capacity in more than 120 countries
around the world.
We are providing assistance to support communities and
equip them with the tools needed to mitigate the impact of the
virus. The U.S. response to COVID-19 builds upon decades of
American investments in global health. In the 21st century
alone, the United States has contributed more than $140 billion
in global health assistance.
Over the past 20 years, USAID's funding has helped Gavi,
the Vaccine Alliance, vaccinate more than 760 million children,
which has prevented 13 million deaths. Last month, the United
States committed $1.16 billion to Gavi over the next 4 years,
with the goal to immunize 300 million additional children by
2025.
The U.S. President's Malaria Initiative, PMI, has helped
save more than seven million lives and prevent more than one
billion malaria cases worldwide since 2000. America has
invested more than $85 billion to fight HIV/AIDS through
PEPFAR, the largest commitment by any nation to address a
single disease in history. PEPFAR has saved millions of lives
in Africa. USAID continues to invest in global health security
to address existing and emerging zoonotic diseases, which
account for more than 70 percent of new infectious disease
outbreaks. We invested $1.1 billion in this critical area since
2009.
Even as last month, we declared an end to the tenth Ebola
outbreak that has affected the eastern Democratic Republic of
Congo since August 2018. We are now scaling up a response to
fight the confirmed eleventh outbreak in northwestern DRC.
These investments in global health throughout the decades have
enabled partner countries to strengthen health systems and
democratic institutions, enabling them to better respond to
global health crises.
We are in unprecedented times with the rapidly evolving
situation on the ground in almost every country. We are working
aggressively to obligate all of our resources for COVID-19 as
swiftly and effectively as possible. At the same time, we want
to ensure that we are accountable for the effective use of
funds for COVID-19 and are good stewards of taxpayer dollars.
As we consider how to prevent the next health crisis, we
have to address the root causes of these outbreaks. I remain
focused on USAID's efforts on helping partner countries on
their journeys to self-reliance and will continue to build on
the vision that each one of our programs should look forward to
the day when it can end. Our investments in global health
throughout the decades are a cornerstone to this approach.
We have learned that outbreaks and epidemics are often
exacerbated by failures of governance and transparency and when
we do not address poor governance and conflict, we wipe out
investments in health, education, and other basic social
services. We also recognize that health emergencies have
consequences that can rapidly require broader development
assistance whether support for orphaned children, protection
against sexual exploitation and abuse, livelihoods, and
addressing the deeper root causes of instability and
governance.
While a hallmark of our journey to self-reliance effort is
using analytics to measure progress, we must also measure
regression to see how we may need to adjust our programs.
Looking long term, we remain committed to helping communities
in our partner countries through this pandemic and its second
and third order effects. The COVID-19 pandemic is not simply a
health crisis and our response cannot be just a health
response. We must use the totality of development tools at our
disposal as well.
To focus on how to best operate in the COVID-altered world,
I established a temporary agency planning cell, an executive
steering committee called Over the Horizon to guide the effort.
While the USAID COVID-19 Task Force manages near-term
challenges rising from the pandemic, the Over Horizon team will
perform research, conduct outreach and prepare analyses around
key strategic questions to help USAID prepare for lasting
challenges to the developmental and humanitarian landscape in
the medium to long term. It will then provide this information
to the executive steering committee composed of senior leaders
from across the agency who will craft recommendations for my
consideration.
We are already planning for the medium and long-term
impacts of COVID-19 and because I am committed to make sure
that USAID will remain a trusted partner, the preferred
partner, in countries across the world. Again, I thank you for
this opportunity to testify before you and I look forward to
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Barsa follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Engel. Thank you very much for your testimony. Let me
say this. Over the past several years, this Administration has
attempted several rescissions and other methods of slowing down
or stopping foreign assistance spending. As a result, we have
seen funding obligated in fits and starts with a scramble at
the end of the fiscal year. We saw this again with the slow
disbursement of the COVID supplemental funding hampered by
policy indecision and extra layers of bureaucracy.
The Foreign Affairs Committee has strongly objected to
these tactics in the past and fully expects the resources
provided by Congress to be fully utilized in the manner for
which they were provided. So, Mr. Barsa, let me ask you this.
How much of USAID's expiring funds have been obligated to date?
Mr. Barsa. Congressman, I do not have the exact figure in
terms of the number of funds to date, but I know we are making
good progress and we certainly expect to have all of our
expiring funds obligated by the end of the fiscal year.
Mr. Engel. Well, let me say this then. Do you commit to
obligating all expiring funding as well as current supplemental
COVID moneys before the end of the fiscal year?
Mr. Barsa. Certainly that is the goal. That is the
direction given to my staff and I look forward to working
closely with you and your staff to keep you apprised regularly
as to the progress we are making toward the goal.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. If Congress provides additional COVID
supplemental funding, how will you ensure that the money will
get out the door where it is urgently needed?
Mr. Barsa. Certainly, we have had a--this has been a
learning process. This pandemic just has affected the entire
world, so I am happy to say that as a learning organization we
have improved our processes for getting money out the door
expeditiously, so we are very grateful for the Congress's
generosity with the past supplementals. Should there be another
supplemental, I am very confident that we have the systems in
place to get money out expeditiously and in a responsible
manner.
Mr. Engel. Well, thank you. As I alluded to in my opening
statement, there have been several recent management decisions
under your leadership at USAID and some of those are very
troubling to myself and some of my colleagues. The recent
influx of appointees serving your Agency has a record of
homophobic, anti-immigrant, Islamophobic, and other derogatory
comments appears to be in direct contradiction to the Agency's
aims and an affront to the dedicated career staff who serve at
USAID.
So is this the kind of person you want representing USAID
and the American people? What message are we sending to USAID
employees by allowing appointees like Merritt Corrigan who has
referred to a ``homo-empire,'' and the ``false pretense of
women's equality with men?'' Those are obviously troubling to
us. I hope it is troubling to you and I hope that that is not
allowed to continue.
Mr. Barsa. Congressman, what I can commit to you and your
colleagues on the committee is that all USAID employees
regardless of hiring category are held to the same high moral,
legal, and ethical standards that USAID has always had in
place.
Mr. Engel. Okay, thank you. I now turn it over to our
ranking member, my friend Mr. McCaul.
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Administrator. The Consulate in
Houston just got closed yesterday, and the Chinese Communist
Party has been doing this for decades. They have been stealing
intellectual property. They are currently trying to steal the
research and development for our vaccine for COVID-19, a virus
that they are responsible for coming out of Wuhan, China and
now they want to steal our vaccine to save the world. The irony
is just mind boggling.
They are a force to be reckoned with and I think if
anything comes out of this experience, this twilight zone
experience we are going through, it is the people are waking up
to who the Chinese Communist Party are and what they have done
to the world and what they have done to us for the last two
decades.
Now your Agency has role in this. I want to commend my dear
friend, I wish he was staying with us, Mr. Yoho, for his
probably one of the best bills ever passed out of this
committee, the BUILD Act, and the Development Finance
Corporation, which is going to be our key to defeating the
Chinese Communist Party in its Belt and Road Initiative in
developing nations.
And so my question to you is--I think the DFC has a major
role. I think Adam Boehler is doing a great job. I do think
Congress should fully fund the DFC. The DFC, after all, does
return on its investment. It is one of those departments or
agencies that actually does not spend all the money, actually,
money comes back to the Treasury. I mean that is--how about
that?
So my question to you is, I see USAID and there are other
entities like EXIM Bank, but can you explain to me how you can
transform your Agency to work more effectively in this
countering Chinese Communist Party initiative that the DFC is
taking on right now?
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Congressman. Certainly, all of us
when we come to whatever positions we have, we bring our
previous experiences. So, certainly, I came to USAID from the
Department of Homeland Security where I certainly had plenty of
exposure to malicious, malevolent Chinese intent in any number
of spheres. So coming over to USAID initially heading up the
Latin American Caribbean Bureau, I, you know, certainly saw
firsthand how, you know the Chinese were trying to exert their
influence with debt diplomacy, onerous deals where they are
taking advantage.
So their businesses, I mean there cannot be a greater
contrast in terms of our development roles. We have what is
sincerely a construct called the Journey to Self-Reliance. We
help countries stand up on their own with their economies,
democracies, and their systems, but the Chinese model
development could not be more of an opposite.
We seek to set up and emphasize free, open enterprise-
driven development to build resilient market economies founded
on democratic principles and good government. Certainly, the
Chinese, you know, their efforts to undermine sovereignty
leading to unsustainable debt or forfeitures of strategic
resources and assets, it could not be further from the truth.
So I agree with you. The BUILD Act has been an incredible
piece of legislation. I want to thank you all for your support
of that. Adam Boehler and I, who, Adam, of course, leading the
DFC, he and I communicate regularly. As you all know, I sit on
the board of DFC. So one of the things Adam and I have been
able to do is ensure that we have communications at all levels
between USAID and the DFC. So not only is their communication
at the leadership level in Washington, DC and, more
importantly, in the field, we are working closely together.
So USAID staff in the missions, in the field, are uniquely
positioned to be able to find potential deals, potential
private sector partners. By having that close coordination and
communication with the DFC, we are able to bring these
potential deals and opportunities to the DFC's attention where
they can come in and help finance the deals.
So I am happy to say that the relationship between USAID
and DFC is very strong and looking forward to continued
cooperation in years to come.
Sorry, do you have a question?
Mr. McCaul. No, go ahead.
Mr. Barsa. No. As I say, one of the best ways to counter
China is to continue to do what we do. We have no better
development model. Our efforts to help countries stand up on
their own on the journey to self-reliance is vastly different
from the Chinese model. So we are very proud to provide this
alternative to countries and we are very proud of our work
countering China and we will continue to do so.
Mr. McCaul. Well, I want to thank you for that. And thank
you for your service at the Department of Homeland Security.
And also it is exactly what I wanted to hear, you know, I mean
working together, coordinating together, there is a lot of
overlap between these two entities, I think, and the more you
can coordinate and work together, not just to provide foreign
assistance and humanitarian, which is vitally important for the
Nation and the world, but also in this very important foreign
policy that we are embarking on to counter this malign behavior
from the Chinese Communist Party.
So, sir, let me just say thank you for that and I look
forward to following up with you. I yield back.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. Mr. Barsa, I hope you take back some
of the criticisms and problems that we have with what was
submitted. I hope you take it back and I hope we can have
productive discussions on how to improve it. We met with Mr.
Green all the time and came up with putting our heads together
and coming up with good things that are needed, so I hope we
can establish that with you as well.
I will now recognize members for questions under the 5-
minute rule. Under House rules, all time yielded is for the
purpose of questioning the witness. Because of the hybrid
format of this hearing, I will recognize members by committee
seniority, alternating between Democrats and Republicans. If
you miss your turn, please let our staff know and we will come
back to you. If you seek recognition, you must unmute your
microphone and address the chair verbally.
I will begin by recognizing myself for 5 minutes.
Okay, we will go to Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Sherman. Thank you. Listening to the first three
speakers, it is surprising to see the Administration cutting
our foreign assistance budget. I think the Chairman and the
Ranking Member were eloquent as to why we need to expand what
we spend to help the developing world, and the Acting
Administrator explained how the money that we do spend is spent
effectively. Yet the Administration seems hell--bent on cutting
this aid at a time of pandemic which is taking lives around the
world and at a time when the disruption caused by the pandemic
is leading to hunger, food insecurity, and debt, and at a time
when this cutback is going to increase the influence of our
geopolitical rival.
The particular cut that is being suggested is a 35 percent
cut from what we appropriated last year. Down to 627 is what
the Administration suggests, rather than the 9.5 billion we
actually appropriated and this continues a trend. It would put
our aid at less than one-tenth of 1 percent of our GDP at a
time when there is general acceptance in the international
community that nations should strive to spend seven-tenths of a
percent, and many countries are above that, and when the
average for wealthy nations is 0.4 percent.
So I wonder if the Acting Administrator can explain what--
how would you explain to our men and women in uniform that they
may be deployed, they may die in future crises that could have
been avoided with expenditures far lower than what we spend in
defense and war? How do we explain this Administration's cuts?
Mr. Barsa. Congressman, as you know, the budget you have
before you today was developed over a long period of time,
certainly started out long before the outset of the global
pandemic. And as you are aware, certainly----
Mr. Sherman. If I can interrupt you then.
Mr. Barsa. Certainly.
Mr. Sherman. Then since the pandemic has arrived and
Democrats have proposed substantial additional assistance in
the supplemental appropriations bill, are you a strong advocate
for that supplemental appropriation knowing that the original
budget that you put together was before the pandemic?
Mr. Barsa. Certainly. We are in touch with OMB and State
Department on a daily basis.
Mr. Sherman. How much should we have in supplemental
appropriations for international development aid and
assistance?
Mr. Barsa. OMB and the White House are fully apprised on
the challenges we are seeing on a day-to-day basis.
Mr. Sherman. I need a number.
Mr. Barsa. I do not have a number for you, sir. That number
you seek is part of a larger deliberation with OMB and the
White House. It is part of a much larger package.
Mr. Sherman. Can I count on you and the Administration to
advocate for a robust number?
Mr. Barsa. You can absolutely count on me to advocate for
what I believe are our needs.
Mr. Sherman. Okay. In May, our colleague Ami Bera joined
with--introduced, many of us cosponsored, the bill to
participate in the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness
Innovations, the CEPI, an alliance of countries and private
partners whose mission it is finance and coordinate the
development of vaccines for high priority.
The Administration has talked of discontinuing the PREDICT
2 program and moving to something else that seems ill-defined.
Are we going--do you support CEPI? Do we continue PREDICT 2?
And if we are not continuing PREDICT 2, what is the successor
program?
Mr. Barsa. Okay, regarding CEPI, we certainly recognize
there is an opportunity to leverage Coalition for Epidemic
Preparedness Innovation, CEPI, their mandate to develop
vaccines. Their goals certainly align with the objectives of
USAID's global health security program to prevent the
amplification and spread of emerging threats. So we are
currently looking at potential partnership with CEPI. I have
nothing to announce today, but we are having internal
discussions about possible partnerships with them.
Regarding the PREDICT project, the PREDICT project was--had
a normal life span to it, so it was extended past its normal
termination date. So what we have is a follow-on project called
Stop Spillover which is a natural follow-on to that. So.
Mr. Sherman. Okay, so you do have a successor program.
Mr. Barsa. We do.
Mr. Sherman. I do want to ask, your predecessor stated on
the record that USAID is committed to the clearance of land
mines and unexploded ordnance in Artsakh or Nagorno Karabakh.
Do you continue that dedication?
Mr. Barsa. Oh. Certainly, Mark Green, the predecessor's,
dedication was well-founded. Happy to have received reports
that we have almost had diminishing returns in terms of huge
success rates in terms of the amount of work that has been
cleared to date.
Mr. Sherman. We still need to finish the job.
I yield back.
Mr. Engel. Thank you.
Mr. Smith.
Mr. Smith. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Administrator Barsa, for your
testimony. I thank you for the work you are doing on COVID-19.
You know, Congress in a bipartisan way came together and
provided substantial new money to combat this insidious
disease. My own state of New Jersey certainly has had its
disproportionality in terms of death and sickness. Half of all
of those who have died in my State were in nursing homes, so
hopefully there are some lessons learned there for all of us
going forward. But again, thank you for your leadership on
that.
I would like to bring up two issues, the first is the Ebola
issue. I remember I chaired four hearings on the Ebola outbreak
in Sierra Leone and Liberia. We all came together and we came
up with significant amounts of money to combat that horrible
manifestation of that disease. Likewise, that is happening
again and I know we have spent $342 million at USAID on the
Ebola issue and I want to thank you for that.
And unlike Liberia and Sierra Leone, the DR Congo
experience, there are now therapeutics. There is a vaccine that
helps to protect our healthcare workers and, of course, other
people. On June 25th, the Minister of Health for DRC declared
the end of the Ebola outbreak in eastern DRC. It has affected
3,470 confirmed cases, about 2,287 related deaths.
But as you pointed out, there is a concern about a new
outbreak. Maybe you could speak to that because vigilance,
obviously, needs to be very robust. And again, thank you for
the deployment. It is a story that has not been told by the
media or anybody else that there have been vaccinations. I
remember we had the doctor from Samaritan's Purse after he
healed having gone to Texas come and testify at my hearing. He
was one of the lucky ones who survived.
So many others, obviously, succumbed to death. But all
those lessons learned from that horrible experience have now
been applied and our government under both Administrations, the
previous and this one, continue to work hard to find
therapeutics and vaccines. So you might want to speak to that.
Second, on the Desert Locust crisis, I have introduced a
bill joined by my good friend and colleague from California
that frankly sets up a working group to try to be proactive on
this locust problem. Obviously, it is a--Ms. Bass, who is our
chairwoman; I am the ranking member of the Africa Committee. We
have made it clear that we really want a forward thinking--this
is not the last time the potential of a crisis here exists, you
know, we are going to see it again and again. So this working
group would come up with best practices on eradication
hopefully on killing these bugs before they ravish the crops.
And on the food insecurity issue, FAO and others have all
pointed to a looming crisis, but I still do not think we have
done enough. I am not saying you, but I think as a world we
have put $20 million into the effort, but perhaps you could
speak to that as well because you and I have talked so many
times over the last 5 months. Kip Tom, who is our Ambassador to
the U.N. food agencies, I have talked to him several times as
well.
This idea of a new bill, and thankfully the chairman is
putting it on the docket for next week, would create a working
group that would really, hopefully, be forward thinking and do
even more to mitigate this crisis.
Mr. Barsa.
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Congressman. Thank you for your
longtime support of USAID. It truly is the honor and privilege
of a lifetime to lead the talented men and women of USAID,
specifically when you see how for the Ebola, for our disaster
assistance response teams, the way they deploy into the face of
whatever crisis, and for, as you mentioned, Ebola, the
herculean efforts in combating Ebola.
You know, we are so happy to see that, you know, while the
outbreak in eastern DRC, you know, has ended, we remain very
concerned and vigilant. We are monitoring nearly 1,200 Ebola
survivors in the east DRC. We are monitoring the new outbreak
in the northwest DRC. And we are always on the lookout--we are
cognizant of the constant threats of new Ebola outbreaks
occurring not just in the DRC, but other African countries as
well.
So one of the things we are able to do is as the outbreak
was coming to end in the east, we were able to pivot resources
and redeploy staff and equipment to deal with the outbreak. So
watching that, watching the professionalism of the men and
women that are able to do that, it is a great source of pride
for me. And, certainly, I have learned a lot since becoming
Acting Administrator of USAID, and part of what I have learned
is the life cycle of a locust.
Certainly, with the economic contraction of the pandemic,
food insecurity is very much on my mind particularly in Africa.
So one of the things I have learned, so certainly while aerial
spraying is the preferred method to treat infestations, it has
to occur in certain periods of the life cycle after the locusts
hatch but before they grow wings. So what is key then is
monitoring to ensure that the available aircraft with
pesticides can deploy during that window.
So it has been challenging to maintain monitoring with the
pandemic and some rains that are occurring right now, but we
are adding additional resources to the monitoring to ensure
that our partners at the U.N. Food and Agricultural
Organization, FAO, can deploy aircraft and pesticides to meet
and get to the locusts during that crucial period when they are
most vulnerable to eradication.
Mr. Smith. Thank you so very much.
Chairman.
Mr. Engel. Thank you.
Okay, we are now going to call on Mr. Meeks who is coming
here--he is not here, but he is going to come----
Mr. Meeks. I am here though.
Mr. Engel. I know. All New Yorkers are always here, so.
Mr. Meeks. But thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me first echo
your concern about the appointment of Ms. Corrigan given the
record of statements and I believe bigoted comments that she
has made, and there should not be any tolerance for that at
USAID or anyone that is heading an Agency such as that. So I
want to, you know, first say that I strongly support your
comments earlier.
And it is particularly important because most of us, just
about all of us in the U.S. Congress this week are very heavy
hearted and have a very heavy heart today with the passing of a
great American and a true humanitarian, Congressman John Robert
Lewis. And, annually, Representative Lewis and I, along with
Representative Hastings, have proposed language to the State
and foreign operations appropriations bill supporting efforts
to foster diversity and inclusion in international affairs and
provide protections for minority and indigenous populations
abroad, so this year is no different. And in my estimation,
there is no greater way to honor and continue Representative
Lewis's legacy than by bolstering diversity and inclusion
initiatives here in the United States and abroad.
I am going to have probably more questions than I expect to
be able to, Ambassador Barsa, you will be able to answer, so I
am going to try to ask them quickly. But maybe before or also
afterwards, or I should say afterwards, you will give me some
answers in writing if I cannot get to all of them. So let me
also state that I want to reflect to the record that I believe
that the Administration's requested budget cuts to humanitarian
accounts are the wrong thing to do morally and it also
absolutely sends the wrong message to the world.
So my first question, Mr. Ambassador, is do you agree that
upholding diversity and inclusion while allocating and
distributing U.S. foreign assistance is in our national
interest? Do you agree with that?
Mr. Engel. Microphone.
Mr. Barsa. I am sorry. Yes, I very much value diversity and
inclusion. Yes.
Mr. Meeks. So therefore there should be accountability in
that regards, and the first critical step to accountability on
diversity and inclusion is tracking and reporting granular data
as it relates to the companies, the organizations that USAID
contracts with. So does USAID, to date, capture self-reported
data on the composition of the companies it contracts with as
it relates to gender, race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation of
shareholders, the board, and senior management?
Mr. Barsa. We certainly have the same, the high standards
for diversity and inclusion of all the work. You are asking
about the certain mechanics in how we hold our partners
accountable. I am afraid I do not have that data with me, but I
am happy to respond to the question for the record or work with
you and your staff afterwards.
Mr. Meeks. Very good. I would like to see the data if you
have it, if it is on record, so that we can see it and know
what kind of, you know, the number of African Americans that
are on these various boards, et cetera, the diversity of the
companies you are working with so that we can see the
transparency.
And I would say that it would be a good idea that if you
have this data that it be published annually for transparency
and for accountability. And I would also like to work with you
in regards to being committed to erasing the barriers for
companies, including, you know, let you know that we are
working together so that small and minority-owned and
disadvantaged business enterprises and universities and
nongovernmental organizations, currently, that many have come
to me about encountering difficulties navigating the
acquisitions and assistance process at USAID. So I would love
to work with you on that end in the future.
Time is running out quickly. Let me just run this right
past you. I am concerned, you know, we often talk about
providing alternative development solutions to Chinese loans in
Africa. However, the Chinese have effectively mobilized
billions in loans each year to strategically gain access to
major ports, railways, and other vital infrastructure and
markets in Africa. And we have the largest financial markets in
the world and I believe we can make deep inroads and have a
greater impact in Africa by USAID, so I would like to talk to
you in regards to that.
Also I just want to bring to your attention and ask you
about, you know, the COVID pandemic has been devastating to
livelihoods of hundreds of millions in Africa as well as those
of African descent. Likewise, as we talk about, you know,
Colombia, you know very well that I have been one of the co-
chairs of the Colombia Caucus and Colombia is one of our
strongest allies in the Western Hemisphere and I would hope
that we would have a plan that we are looking at, you know, to
make sure that African Colombians and indigenous community
leaders and that we are protecting African Colombians and
indigenous communities with USAID funds and assistance and
efforts to protect these individuals.
I see I am out of time so I yield back. But I look forward
to talking to you, and if you can answer some of these
questions in writing afterwards or let's set up a meeting so
that we can talk about some of these important issues. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Engel. Well, thank you, Mr. Meeks.
I wonder if the witness would like to answer some of those
questions?
Mr. Barsa. The witness would like to answer all of the
questions. Certainly, there were a lot of topics covered there.
So, Congressman Meeks, certainly, as we have discussed
before as you may be aware and others may be aware, as a former
staffer here in the House of Representatives working for a
former member here, I fully appreciate the role of Congress in
not just appropriations and authorization, but oversight. So I
certainly value and I know intuitively the best government is
government where there is communication. So if I do not get to
anything right now during my testimony, I look forward to
getting back with QFRs and continued conversations at any point
in time.
So a lot of things were being touched on right there.
Certainly, and I will try to get them in order. Regarding
infrastructure investments by the Chinese in Africa, certainly
as we have discussed before, the partnership between USAID and
the DFC is key in terms of helping identify other investments
that we can make. One of the best things we can do to counter
Chinese influence and Chinese investments is to gather
information of onerous deals where the Chinese take advantage
of other countries and their vulnerabilities and share that
with other host countries so they do not go down the same path
and allow the Chinese to take advantage of them. So we work on
the information sharing.
We also work on alternatives development investment.
Regarding Afro-Colombians, so as certainly heading up the Latin
American Caribbean Bureau when I traveled to Colombia it was a
great honor and privilege to meet with Afro-Colombian leaders
within Colombia and other groups that have been traditionally
disenfranchised. And I was proud to see the work USAID does in
empowering them and helping ensure they are fully integrated
into the economy and society, so I am pleased with the work
going on in Colombia. I understand there is more to be done,
but I am very proud of the steps we have made.
Congressman, there was another issue. I should have written
it down. But anything I have not got to I am happy to respond
to QFRs or followup meetings or phone calls.
Mr. Engel. Yes, there were a few other questions that Mr.
Meeks had and so we will followup with you.
Mr. Barsa. Okay, happy to.
Mr. Mast. Mr. Chairman, will the chair yield for a
question?
Mr. Engel. What? Who is asking?
Oh. Well, I am about to call on Mr. Chabot because he was
here.
Mr. Mast. So no?
Mr. Engel. Well, I am willing to--Mr. Chabot?
Mr. Chabot. Go ahead, if it is quick. Yes, go ahead, Brian.
Mr. Mast. Thank you, Mr. Chabot. It is simply a question.
Mr. Meeks was looking for diversity numbers.
Mr. Barsa. Oh.
Mr. Mast. And I was wondering, is there a metric that Mr.
Meeks wanted to see met? Not just these numbers out of the
blue, was there an expectation? Maybe Mr. Meeks could answer
that later on somebody else's time, but that was the question.
What number does he want to see met for all of those things
that he was asking about.
Mr. Engel. All right. Thank you, Mr. Mast.
Mr. Chabot.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
hearing. And thank you, Mr. Barsa, for being here today and
answering our questions. A number of us on both sides of the
aisle have done a lot of work on the Rohingya genocide over the
years, and I want to particularly recognize somebody who is not
here or someone that is not in Congress anymore, and that is
Joe Crowley, who had been very involved in this for a long time
and I had worked directly with him. I cannot tell you the
amount of work and how committed he was to this cause. There
was a lot of other people, but he is not here to pat himself on
the back, so I will. I mean, he was very committed, and a real
loss to this institution, I believe.
So I was hoping that you could update us, Mr. Barsa, kind
of what is going on. What is the outlook on the intermediate
long-term for the Rohingya? And how does the Administration's
budget request reflect efforts to support the Rohingya, as well
as to hold the Burmese military accountable and alleviate the
desperation of a million Rohingya refugees who are currently in
Bangladesh rather than in their own country?
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Congressman. Certainly, in
relationship to our government-to-government contacts, I would
have to refer you to the State Department. But I am proud to
report, since August 2017, the United States has provided more
than $951 million in emergency assistance to assist in the
Rohingya. This support is to the refugees, the affected host
communities in Bangladesh, and multiple conflict-affected
populations within Burma with humanitarian development
assistance.
We work with impacted host communities by providing support
and development assistance. For example, 17 percent of the
people in Cox's Bazar live below the extreme poverty line which
is a full 5 percent higher than the rest of the community or
the rest of the country, and we fully recognize that host
communities have borne the socioeconomic brunt of the Rohingya
refugee influx so our efforts go in to support not just the
refugees themselves, but those host communities who are
sheltering to give them space.
So I wish I had an answer as to when this crisis would end,
but we are doing what we can to support the Rohingya.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you very much. With all that is going on
around the globe and in this country, it is easy for us not
necessarily to remember those people, but there are an awful
lot of people suffering, so. And I know the Administration is
committed to improving that and we want to thank you for that.
I will move to another line. Last year, Congressman
Connolly and I, in a bipartisan manner, introduced the Global
Health Security Act, which I am pleased to say was included in
this year's NDAA, the National Defense Authorization Act, in
which among other things affirms U.S. commitment to the Global
Health Security Agenda. Could you discuss how investments made
under the Global Health Security Agenda have helped member
countries cope with the latest global health security crisis,
COVID-19?
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Congressman. The United States of
America and the United States people by extension are the most
generous people in the history of the world. So our investments
over decades in global health have enabled countries not just
to deal with a crisis or an outbreak at hand, but to build
infrastructure and capacity.
So we know, for example, clean water is an essential health
service, and not all the countries have--able to provide clean
water to all their populations the way they should. So part of
the larger health investments we make are things like access to
wash, clean water, and access to sanitation.
So a country's ability to respond to the pandemic is not
just, you know, access and availability to PPE. It is the
infrastructure that has been developed with the assistance of
USAID over decades to help with detection, with communications,
with all manner of services. Healthcare responses are best
built upon an existing infrastructure. And so we are proud to
be--I am proud to be leading the Agency, you know.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
Mr. Barsa. Yes.
Mr. Chabot. Absolutely. And I am trying to get one more
question in, so I will cut you off there. I apologize.
But the United States cannot solve every problem. We wish
we could, but we cannot solve every problem around the globe.
Could you identify some problems that you took a hard look at
when crafting this budget and said this is just a problem the
taxpayers could not or should not have to foot the bill?
Mr. Barsa. I do not have a specific example, but certainly
we realize that USAID cannot do it alone. So I am happy to
report that I have had regular meetings with counterparts in
the U.K., Canada, to realize that a lot of developmental
challenges are challenges that the developed world should
tackle together.
So, while we are the most generous country in the history
of the world, the most generous country now in development
assistance, fully cognizant that not all the stress should be
borne on our shoulders and that we should be working
collaboratively with other countries.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you very much. I appreciate it, and yield
back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Chabot. We now go to Mr. Deutch
of Florida, who is with us virtually. How is the weather down
there?
Mr. Deutch. We are doing Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And
thanks, Acting Administrator Barsa, for your testimony. We
appreciate you joining us for this important hearing.
For nearly 60 years, across both Democratic and Republican
Administrations, USAID has performed invaluable lifesaving work
around the world from combating the spread of HIV/AIDS to
providing access to safe water and family planning to investing
in nutrition and education. And in an era of unprecedented
humanitarian catastrophe even before COVID-19, the dollars
invested in U.S. foreign assistance helped make our country
safer.
During the pandemic, the importance of USAID has only
grown. The supplemental funding for USAID's humanitarian
accounts is a critical tool in the global pandemic response. As
chairman of the Middle East Subcommittee, I know how critical
our aid is to the Middle East and North Africa where over $150
million provided to MENA countries supports pandemic response
as well as vulnerable refugee populations.
But there is more work to do, and now more than ever
reckless cuts to U.S. foreign assistance only undermine U.S.
national security and global stability. USAID's importance and
the importance of U.S. foreign assistance, particularly as we
are seeing now for global health, is an issue of bipartisan
agreement. And all of us on this committee, including my
friends across the aisle, have rejected and will continue to
reject cuts to USAID's budget that politicize the Agency's
work, undermine its effectiveness, and threaten global and U.S.
national security.
And, Acting Administrator, the bipartisanship is why I must
join my colleagues in expressing deep concerns about recent
appointments at the Agency. For the President to knowingly
appoint people with a history of derogatory comments about
refugees, LGBTQ people, and women, which also deeply
contradicts USAID's mission, actually undermines the important
efforts of USAID around the world.
Their past statements call into question their ability to
effectively lead this important Agency and its dedicated work
force, and I am not so inclined, Acting Administrator Barsa, to
share your full confidence in these appointees and I would urge
you to reconsider your support for their appointments.
Now with my remaining time, I would like to ask about the
region that I focus much of my time on and in particular the
West Bank. In August 2018, the Administration announced a
freeze on all assistance to the Palestinians in the West Bank
of Gaza subject to a White House review. At the end of 2019,
Congress passed a law that I authored with Mr. Wilson to help
remove legal barriers and restore Palestinian assistance. The
assistance as you know provides funding to things like
hospitals in East Jerusalem, Israeli-Palestinian co-existence
programs, it fosters stability which benefits and strengthens
the security of both Palestinians and Israelis, and it furthers
the prospects for peace.
But since the bill passed, the Administration has continued
its effective freeze. The USAID mission to the Palestinians is
effectively closed except for a few staff members who work on
regional programming. In April, the U.S. provided $5 million in
international disaster assistance funds to help meet the
challenges of COVID-19 in the West Bank, and Congress approved
$75 million in economic support funds in a bipartisan way
subject to all existing laws and conditions in Fiscal Year 2020
that the Administration has not yet spent. And on July 9th, the
House Appropriations Committee passed a bill providing $225
million for development and humanitarian assistance in the West
Bank in Gaza.
Can you tell us, Acting Administrator Barsa, what is the
status of the Administration's review of Palestinian assistance
and will it be completed in time to program the $225 million
that the House recently appropriated?
Mr. Barsa. Congressman, thank you for your question. Thank
you for your longstanding support of USAID and thank you for
your efforts of passing ATCA.
So I wish I had an answer telling you that the interagency
deliberations have completed, but discussions on how best to
implement ATCA are still taking place at the interagency level
and I look forward to working with you and your staff once I
have something to report on the implementation. But it is
currently being reviewed to find how best we can move forward.
Mr. Deutch. I appreciate that, Acting Administrator Barsa.
Can you provide some light into what that interagency process
looks like? Who has reviewed, who still has not reviewed? What
needs to happen for that to be completed?
Mr. Barsa. Unfortunately, I do not have the details.
Certainly, as any major policy, there are many actors who need
to be consulted with, but these internal deliberations are
still ongoing and really look--and I share your hope that these
deliberations can finish shortly so we can report back to you
on how we are moving forward.
Mr. Deutch. I appreciate that. Are you a part of those
deliberations?
Mr. Barsa. My staff is, yes. Certainly.
Mr. Deutch. Okay. So--and, presumably, they report back to
you. Can you share with us who else is part of that process? It
has just been ongoing for a long time and certainly it feels
like it is being dragged along. Who else is participating in
those? Can you tell us that?
Mr. Barsa. I am afraid I cannot comment on those internal
deliberations, sir. But I share your desire that the internal
deliberations do conclude rapidly so we can move forward, which
is the intent of Congress. I fully understand and appreciate
that.
Mr. Deutch. I appreciate that. Again, the goal is to
strengthen security and stability to advance the prospects for
peace. That is what this funding can do if we can get through
this process once and for all. And I appreciate your commitment
to help see it through and hopefully quickly.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Deutch.
We now go to Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you,
Mr. Barsa. I appreciate you being here.
Administrator, you said earlier this year that the USAID
should not be doing and does not do works untethered from
national security, I think; is that right?
Mr. Barsa. Yes, sir.
Mr. Perry. Sound about familiar? Okay. Is it your
assessment that the State and foreign appropriations bill under
consideration pursues agenda items that engage in works
untethered from national security policy, currently?
Mr. Barsa. I have not seen the details of the legislation,
but certainly it is my belief, certainly, conversations with
other members of the interagency, we are all in agreement that
USAID is the method of smart power or soft power. Since our
inception in 1961, USAID has played a role in the national
security apparatus and we are proud to do so.
Mr. Perry. Anything in particular that you would like to
elaborate on based on your experience that you have seen in the
past that you would prefer not to--for us not to continue to
engage on or expectations that you have in the conversations
that you have had about what we will be forced to engage in
based on the agenda in the appropriations bill as you
understand it?
Mr. Barsa. I am afraid I am not quite sure I understand
your question, sir.
Mr. Perry. So is there anything that we are going to fund
and forced USAID to do in the past that we should not be or
that you think that we are going to be?
Mr. Barsa. I am not cognizant of anything.
Mr. Perry. Okay, all right.
How do you think that USAID can help counter the malign
actors like Russia and China in the Arctic?
Mr. Barsa. Well, in the Arctic that is a little bit outside
of my zone. I certainly do not have a mission in the Arctic, so
I would have to maybe perhaps defer----
Mr. Perry. Should we?
I am serious. I mean they are there and you are an
instrument of national diplomacy and national security and you
are not present, right, that is--but they are.
Mr. Barsa. In terms of economic development programs, soft
power projection, no, I am not currently in the Arctic.
Mr. Perry. And we should not be as far as you are
concerned?
Mr. Barsa. Well, we are certainly looking at always
opportunities. For example, in Greenland we are proud to be
part of the stand-up of a mission there. We certainly are
looking for opportunities. We have no commitment yet on
programming in Greenland, but we are certainly looking at ways
that we can build our expertise to help out there, if need be.
Mr. Perry. Okay. And is China and Russia also pursuing
opportunities in that location and others adjacent?
Mr. Barsa. In terms of their activities in the Arctic, I
would have to refer you to State or DoD.
Mr. Perry. Okay. What do you think that there are some of
the more successful tactics in pushing back against the Belt
and Road Initiative both on the State and local level from your
agencies or your director at standpoint?
Mr. Barsa. I think one of the best things we could do to
counter the Belt and Road Initiative is to communicate. As I
said previously, one of the best things we have to counter
China is to let people know and build awareness about our true
and honest pathway to self-reliance. Our development models
could not be more diverse.
So, certainly, when I was leading the Latin American
Caribbean Bureau, one of the things I was emphasizing was
information sharing within the Western Hemisphere. So if there
was an attempt by the Chinese to engage in a country, you know,
whispering sweet nothings in their ear trying to lead them down
the path that lead to debt diplomacy or onerous deals favoring
Chinese companies, one of the things I was trying to emphasize
then and I am emphasizing now, is the ability to communicate,
to have my teams, my missions in the field, share information
of the Chinese past practices because once other countries
realize the pattern of behavior by the Chinese, the information
becomes more clear.
Then when the United States, through our programming, our
work with the DFC, we can provide alternatives, then it is much
easier. So the best thing we have to counter Chinese influence
is to be honest and open and tell people what they are. Faulty
PPE during the COVID pandemic, deals that only favor Chinese
companies, there is a slew of evidence to show that our model
is the preferred model.
Mr. Perry. Do you think you have been successful? I mean
does it work because--obviously, the communication I would
agree is important, but, you know, money talks, right, and most
of these places, they are very aggressively seeking financial
assistance in that regard. And so while the rhetoric and the
track record is certainly viable but money talks, so how
successful have you been?
Mr. Barsa. We have been pretty successful. So, you know, so
money does talk, but then there is the short-term moneys like
Okay, you can get a whole bunch of money from the Chinese right
now, but long term to show that you are going to be strangled
by debt for decades and you are going to lose sovereignty and
autonomy. That is part of the thing.
So part of what we try to do by communicating is realizing,
hey, this short term, you know, check you are going to get from
the Chinese, you are going to be paying that back for decades.
You are going to lose autonomy. You are going to lose
sovereignty. So money does talk, so part of what we try to do
is communicate the long-term financial implications and the
political implications.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Perry.
We now go to Mr. Keating, virtually.
Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Acting Administrator, you say you coordinate with the
Department of Defense and Health and Human Services. I am in
Armed Services as well. Were you notified in February when for
the first time in our history a pandemic put us on a level of
alert from the Department of Defense? Did they communicate to
you, if you coordinated?
Mr. Barsa. Certainly, in February I was still leading the
Latin American Caribbean Bureau of USAID, so I am afraid I do
not have any answers as to what may have been communicated with
the DoD at that time. I am happy to provide an answer for the
record.
Mr. Keating. Thank you so much. I co-chaired the
subcommittee, we have had hearings, on Europe and Eurasia. Our
allies have come together in unprecedented ways in Europe under
the COVID-19 pandemic. Don't we have a force multiplier in
general and specifically on by working with our closest allies?
Mr. Barsa. Well, we do, absolutely, sir.
Mr. Keating. And do you think it undercuts everything you
have said this morning in that case when the Global Response
Pledge by these allies, and looking at North America alone,
Canada were the co-chair. Didn't Mexico--Mexico participated in
this, yet the U.S. is absent. Forty-seven countries pledging to
this, and do not you think that undercuts our efforts? We are
sending at best a mixed message. Can you explain why that is in
our best interest not to work with our allies on the Global
Response Pledge?
Mr. Barsa. Regarding specifics of that pledge, I really
cannot comment on that. But I can tell you is we----
Mr. Keating. They have raised over $18 billion together on
this, but the U.S. is absent.
Mr. Barsa. In terms of the actual interaction, I would have
to get back with you on details. But what I can tell you, I am
in regular contact with my counterparts in the developed
world--the U.K., Canada, and other contact group countries--so
we are in coordination.
Mr. Keating. Well, contact is one thing. If we just said--
sorry, my time is limited, Acting Administrator. But you just
said money matters. So, you know, it is nice to be in contact.
Look at Mexico is involved in this. Forty-seven countries are
involved and we are absent. It just strikes me as we are making
a statement and a contradictory one to everything you said.
Mr. Barsa. Well, Congressman, I am afraid I am sorry. I
believe we have some connectivity issues.
In terms of the larger principle of coordinating with other
donor countries, that is very important and we certainly do do
that. I cannot really comment. I am happy to get back to you in
terms of that specific argument. But just because we coordinate
internationally does not mean that every venue--coordination
happens in a variety of different ways.
Mr. Engel. Okay. I----
Mr. Keating. But this is such a pronounced one. It is a
global pledge. And this is a no-brainer for the U.S. and we are
not there, so I really think it is sending some kind of message
to our close allies. It undercuts everything you are working
for in USAID, and I find it just not only contradictory but
mind boggling that we are not part of this.
In any case, I just question too when we are pulling out of
the WHO, does not that curb our ability to work along the same
lines you are saying? I agree, and you will never get a better
supporter of USAID than I am, and this is something that is
bipartisan on the committee, but when you claim these other
major actions being taken, you cannot see how that undercuts
your mission?
Mr. Barsa. Congressman, again, thank you for your long-term
support for USAID. We are very grateful for that. Just a little
bit of context in the World Health Organization. So last year,
the World Health Organization received 4 percent of overall
U.S. funding on global health issues. Ninety-six percent of our
funds went to organizations or activities outside of the World
Health Organization.
So--and since the decision was made to withdraw, we have
been actively looking for alternative partners. Our commitment
to global health remains strong. We will not be retreating from
any corner of the world stage when it comes to global health
matters.
Mr. Engel. Okay, thank you. We are going to have to leave
it at that.
Mr. Keating. But I have 10 seconds left. If you are looking
for things, how about the Global Pledge, global response? It is
there right in our face. I yield back.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Keating.
Mr. Wilson.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, Chairman Eliot Engel, and
we appreciate your strong and longtime bipartisan efforts on
behalf of our country.
I am also grateful, Administrator Barsa, that you are here.
Your prior service as a congressional staffer, you worked with
a superstar, Lincoln Diaz-Balart, so I know you are well-
trained. And, indeed, with our colleagues, Congressman Deutch
and Keating, I have a great appreciation of what USAID has
achieved around the world.
And you should correctly as you have pointed out, we are
the most generous nation in the history of the world. And in
line with that, with the Wuhan virus global pandemic, it is
exacerbating the existing humanitarian crises around the world
including as the World Food Program has estimated that there
will be an 82 percent increase in people needing food
assistance as a result of the pandemic, how is USAID
prioritizing food security to respond to this?
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Congressman. And yes, it was an honor
to serve under Lincoln Diaz-Balart as well. I am certainly
grateful for that in my life.
My first full day as Acting Administrator USAID was on
April 13th. On that day, I sent out a video to the entire USAID
work force laying out my three priorities. Priority 1 was the
physical and emotional well-being of staff, priority number 2
was continuing our important operations around the world, and
priority number 3 was thinking through the second and third
order effects of the pandemic.
It was clear to me as I assumed the reins of my current
position that the secondary, tertiary effects of the pandemic,
its effect on fragile societies, economies, and democracies
were things that are going to be with us for a while.
Understanding this, seeing this coming down, I set up a
planning cell within USAID. We are calling it the Over the
Horizon Task Force.
Part of the goal of this task force was to break outside of
silos and think collectively about the challenges that USAID is
going to be faced with, not just in the next 3 months or 6
months, the next three, six, five, 10 years down the road. So
food insecurity is certainly one of those challenges. As we
have seen, we have economic contraction throughout the world
which has led to disruptions in supply chains, abilities for
people to harvest food, get food to market, so we are very
concerned about that.
So our USAID partner of FEWS NET, they forecast globally a
25 percent increase in the number of food-insecure people in 46
vulnerable countries. So we are very much looking at again, the
secondary and third order effects of the pandemic. This Over
the Horizon Task Force, their work it should be completed by
the end of the Fiscal Year and the data they provide from this
comprehensive view is going to inform not just our
decisionmaking at USAID, but it will inform conversations with
OMB and the products of that analysis will be shared with you
and your colleagues here to help inform your decisionmaking as
well.
Mr. Wilson. Additionally, I am really encouraged to see our
relationship with India developing. I was honored to be with
President Trump and Prime Minister Modi in Houston, the largest
welcome program in the history of the United States, to welcome
a foreign head of State. To see the relationship and the
positive development that Prime Minister Modi has achieved, the
world's largest democracy--America, the oldest democracy--what
is our relationship now with India?
Mr. Barsa. I think it is a wonderful success story because
our relationship has evolved from a traditional donor-recipient
relationship to a peer-to-peer relationship. We are actually,
right now, we are proposing a U.S.-India development foundation
where we would help India mobilize their own resources to
address the country's most serious developmental challenges
looking to use innovative finance tools.
So that peer-to-peer relationship we have there is
something we are extremely proud of and we look forward to
working with them.
Mr. Wilson. And then another issue that has to be addressed
is human trafficking, and so what are you proposing to address
this?
Mr. Barsa. Well, again, similarly to food insecurity, I am
concerned about human trafficking as well because certainly,
again, during this COVID-affected world we are seeing malign
actors not just at a State level, but criminal elements as well
trying to take advantage of the situation. So all of our
programming has historically had an aspect of countering human
trafficking, trying to give light to it, trying to give
capacity building and reporting and what not.
So again, just like food insecurity, I am afraid on the
human trafficking front we may be seeing increases. I do not
have the data in front of me right now, but my gut tells me
that we need to be more on the lookout for that and that is
certainly the message I am putting out to our missions.
Mr. Wilson. Well, we are grateful for your service.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
We now go to Mr. Bera.
Mr. Bera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
You know, when I think about, you know, one of the best
investments that we have made, you know, post-World War II, it
really has been the aid and development plan. If you think
about the history of what we have been able to accomplish in
the last 75 years, the Marshall Plan, probably the most
successful aid and development plan in the history of the
world. Rebuilding Japan, you know, stepping up and taking Korea
from one of the poorest nations in the world 40 years ago to
this remarkable developed economy.
And, you know, Acting Administrator, you talked about
PEPFAR and the millions of lives that that investment has
saved, that is a testimony to the real impact of aid and
development around the world, but also to the men and women
that serve as our partnering and implementing agencies and
NGO's and I thank them for the work that they do every day.
We face this unprecedented, you know, challenge, probably
the biggest global challenge since World War II in the global
pandemic, COVID-19. And, you know, Mr. Keating alluded to this
a little bit and Mr. Sherman also talked about the legislation
to authorize CEPI that Congressman Yoho and myself have
introduced, the SAFE Act, Securing America from Epidemics. We
think this is a smart piece of legislation and authorizing and,
you know, funding CEPI would be incredibly helpful.
We also know the global alliance that is coming together
with Gavi and CEPI and I appreciate your mentioning Gavi in
your opening remarks. Part of this is the COVAX Pillar which,
you know, is part of Gavi's initiative. When we think about it,
there is roughly 200 COVID-19 vaccines currently under
development around the world and that is why we need something
like this COVAX Pillar.
You know, we may need more than one vaccine to beat this
virus. We do not know which country is going to develop that
vaccine, but we do know if we all work together at a global
level, you know, if, you know, for instance the United Kingdom
comes up with the successful vaccine for seniors, the United
States may come up with one that works better for kids, you
know, we have got to all work together.
And, you know, I think the President said it, you know, Dr.
Fauci said it, and, you know, as a physician, I believe that
until we find a safe and effective vaccine, manufacture not 300
million doses for the United States but six to seven billion
doses, potentially, for the world and then distribute and
vaccinate the world, we will not defeat this virus.
So, you know, I think that is why it is incredibly
important for us to be part of this global alliance with Gavi,
with CEPI, et cetera. And, you know, it is kind of this
principle of safety in numbers that, you know, we do not know
which vaccine is going to work and we can pull resources from
around the world that does not preclude what the Administration
is doing in terms of bilateral agreements. I believe it is
complimentary to some of these bilateral agreements with the
manufacturers.
Acting Administrator Barsa, would you share that opinion
that, you know, it is important for us to be part of this
global vaccine coalition, and how best can we engage in this?
Mr. Barsa. Oh, absolutely, I do agree with you. Certainly,
we are proud of our work with Gavi. And again, for CEPI we are
looking at ways we could potentially partner with them. But one
of the things I think it is worth reiterating is vaccines are
just one portion of the response. The holistic response to not
just this pandemic but other healthcare emergencies, as again I
mentioned before, my belief in the importance of having access
to wash, water and sanitation services.
So a response to a pandemic, while vaccines are important,
the holistic approach that we have at USAID gets to the
infrastructure helping governments, you know, respond to the
health crises. Often times you will see a health crisis and it
follows a political border because sometimes there are
challenges in terms of governance and governance ability to
provide clean water and clean services, which is why our health
accounts being fully integrated with the best of our
development portfolio we feel is the best way to build capacity
for governance to strengthen their health systems and response.
But we certainly, certainly agree with the critical role
vaccines, you know, have, should we have a vaccine. That is a
portion of it, access to clean water, any other things also are
critical, so proud to have that integrated here in USAID.
Mr. Bera. Great. And, you know, in my remaining time, you
know, a few members who brought up the Chinese approach, you
have brought it up, the economic coercion, et cetera, we will
never have the resources as a single nation to necessarily
combat the billions that China is able to do. You touched on
multilateral coalitions of like-minded nations, and certainly
when I have talked to the EU, our allies in Australia, et
cetera, can you maybe give a quick example of some of the
multilateral conversations that are taking place with regards
to aid and development?
Mr. Barsa. We are certainly, and similarly as I mentioned
the DFC communications between organizations occurs at
different levels, certainly at the staff level we are
coordinating with the EU and others and I have participated in
contact meetings and virtually via Zoom with counterparts in
the U.K., Canada, and the rest of the developed world, so we
are discussing it at different levels.
Mr. Bera. Right. Thank you.
Mr. Engel. Okay. We are going to have to go to Mr. Yoho.
Mr. Yoho. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate it.
Mr. Barsa, thank you for being here. I appreciate the
accolades Mr. McCaul said about the DFC, but that was a team
effort. That was this body. That was Congress working the way
it is supposed to on a bilateral, bipartisan manner. And we
need to continue that because we are focusing on what is best
for America, and if we do that things work out a lot better
instead of dividing.
What the DFC does need and that is for all the members
here, is it is critical that it has equity authority. We put in
$150 million that would run that but only if it has equity
authority. If not, we need a billion dollars for that to work
properly. And I know you know the numbers. You have talked with
Adam Boehler, and it is imperative that when you are talking
with the Administration or members of the Appropriations
Committee, your ex-boss, recommend to him and how important it
is to have that.
I want to move on and I want to go into some things and,
you know, I tend to be real blunt on things and I know I offend
some people sometimes. I know that is hard for people to
understand, and I do not mean to, it is to call things out. And
I heard Gregory Meeks talking about--and I have got the utmost
respect for Gregory Meeks. The diversity, hiring, and things
like that so that we have an array of all people involved, and
I agree with that 100 percent.
But do you feel or are you mandated by Congress that that
is the role of you as the Administrator for USAID or should
there be a separate GAO person to do that or a special
diversity inspector general? Real quickly, if you could answer
that.
Mr. Barsa. Certainly. My time in and out of government for
decades of service, certainly different, you know, every
organization has offices of civil rights or diversity.
Certainly, I do believe the need for having a diverse and
inclusive work force and to make sure that everyone has
opportunities not just in hiring, but in able to advance in
terms of overall responsibilities and who should be in charge
for the executive branch----
Mr. Yoho. Okay. And his question was he wanted the numbers
on that. We have had that mandate for a long period of time,
right? Do you have any feeling it is not being fulfilled?
Mr. Barsa. I am certainly cognizant that we can do better.
Mr. Yoho. Sure.
Mr. Barsa. So we recently had a GAO report that showed
where USAID is doing better and I embraced the report and look
forward to committing to improve at USAID, certainly within my
span of control, what I can do at USAID.
Mr. Yoho. And that is all you can do.
Mr. Barsa. Yes, sir.
Mr. Yoho. What I want you to do is, you have people that
monitor that stuff that make sure that is done. Your job is to
make the mission and get responses from the mission. As I look
at what you do, I have this pie chart and I am sure you have
seen it. It is from CRS July 17, 2020, and it talks about, you
know, where the money goes in USAID. You know, 26 percent
humanitarian, 32 percent health and population, 12 percent--but
when it comes down to the things that really make a difference
in a country, which is infrastructure development, and I know
that kind of flows into DFC, there is only 3 percent that goes
in that.
We were talking about Ebola. I do not want to put you on
the spot, but Ebola was discovered in the early 1970's, about
1974. The Canadians had a vaccine that was going through phase
1 trials, I think it was in 1976 or 1978, and it was tabled.
Since the discovery of that virus, there has been a total of
12,950 people die from Ebola, total.
All right. So we knew about it, we could have done
something, and this is why it is important that the bill Ami
Bera and I have cosponsored for the authorization, the SAFE Act
for CEPI is so critical that we get that through there, because
what CEPI does, as you know, coordinates efforts between other
nations to bring this together so that we are ahead of the next
zoonotic, and it is important that we do that. I think your
mission, and I do not want to tell you what your mission is,
but you should triage any country we go into.
And I hear this body wanting to ding a President because he
is cutting budgets. You know, in medicine with your eyes, there
is myopia, there is hyperopia, and then there is another one
called fecalopia. One is nearsighted, one is farsighted, and
the other one is self-explanatory. We as a body, if we do not
focus 15 or 20 years from now where this country is going to
go, you think this budget cut is bad today, look at the
pandemic. Look at the decrease in revenues. Look at the
unemployment. And this body wants to ding a President.
By god, it is time that we raise up our vision and we look
down the road of where America is going, because China is
killing us around the--I should not say killing. They are
beating us around the world and we can do better and we need to
do better. And it is people like you and your organization that
if you focus on a mission, you are going to make a significant
impact for generations to come. And if we do not, we will be
but a footnote in history.
I yield back, and I am sorry I did not ask you a question.
Mr. Engel. But we enjoyed it anyway, Mr. Yoho.
Mr. Yoho. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Engel. Thank you.
Next, we have Ms. Titus, virtually.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you to the Administrator for being here. You
know, I so admire the work of USAID. I have encountered parts
of, or members of your team all around the country and places I
have visited through the House Democracy Partnership and I
always think that you do so much with so little. And the soft
power that you exhibit and you provide is such a big part of
our diplomacy and that keeps us from having to use military
means.
But I am a little concerned with the--or not a little, I am
a lot concerned with some of the people that you have on your
team and you have defended them recently. And I know that
Merritt Corrigan has been mentioned but she is not alone. And
as somebody who has made statements that are contrary to, I
think, what should be the goal or the mission of USAID, indeed,
what has been stated as the mission, you have got Merritt
Corrigan who called the U.S. a ``homo-empire with a tyrannical
LGBT agenda'' and said that ``women's biological imperative is
to be mothers.''
You have Mark Lloyd and he is the new religious freedom
advisor who has shared numerous Islamophobic posts to his
Twitter and Facebook pages, even called Islam a ``barbaric
cult.'' And then there is Patrina Mosley who is advisor to you
on the Center of Excellence on Democracy, Human Rights, and
Governance. She comes from the Family Research Council that has
been designated a hate group that spews anti-LGBT views and
opposes sexual and reproductive rights.
Now USAID's role is to champion the values of respect,
empowerment, and diversity around the globe. You know, you
have--you want inclusion, you want equality. You have a zero-
tolerance policy against discrimination and harassment. I
wonder how you reconcile these peoples backgrounds and agendas
with the agenda of the Agency, how you are keeping track on
what is going on in these various minority groups with these
people now in charge of it, and what, how and where you are
going to deal with that during this pandemic which often
exacerbates the discrimination and harassment of these very
same groups?
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, ma'am, and thank you for your long-
term support for USAID.
As Congressman Yoho alluded and as everyone else has
alluded, the importance of the USAID mission is critical. We
are mission-focused. And I can again assure you and your
colleagues that every USAID employee regardless of hiring
category is held to the highest legal, moral, and ethical
standards that USAID has always had.
Mr. Engel. Thank you.
Ms. Titus. Well, it just seems a little contrary to what
you are supposed to be doing to have people in these leadership
positions to take contrary positions or have a contrary agenda.
How are you checking on some of this policy? How are you
monitoring maybe the impacts of COVID on the global LGBT
community or on women's rights in some of these places where
the virus has led to more violence perhaps or more harassment,
more discrimination, if you have people in charge of these
divisions who do not really have that mission in their heart
even if that is what it says on their application form?
Mr. Barsa. Well, certainly, as I mentioned before so early
on it was clear to me that this pandemic was more than just a
healthcare crisis. The effect on fragile societies,
democracies, and economies are going to be long-term and
serious, so when you have economic contraction in any country
in the world, you often see things that flow from that. Some of
that is increased levels of violence, as we spoke before in
possibilities of human trafficking, and particularly for women
and other minorities who are more vulnerable. Women throughout
the world have a greater percentage of involvement in informal
economies, for example, so when you have economic contractions,
those informal economies are the ones that are most often
affected first.
So in terms of the onset of the pandemic, you know, our
concern is that because of the secondary, tertiary effects of
this pandemic, a lot of our work promoting inclusion and, you
know, for women into the workplace, into the economies and
societies, our protection of LGBTI, a lot of these things are
put at risk. So we are increasing our surveillance on all these
efforts and we are doing our best to rise up to the challenges
as they present themselves.
Mr. Engel. Thank you.
Ms. Titus. Well, I hope that is the case. I know that
people do not work for USAID because of the money. It is not a
job they are going to get rich on. They do it because they
care, that it is in their heart to go and pursue these kinds of
programs abroad. It helps the people there and then it also
helps us.
It just seems to me that it would be extremely difficult to
pursue that agenda of equality and empowerment if you do not
have it in your heart and, apparently, in the hearts of many of
the people you have at the top levels is a very different kind
of feeling that is not about those things that USAID has long
stood for and pursued.
I will yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Ms. Titus.
Mr. Mast.
Mr. Mast. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
You know, most in this hearing, I do not know how many are
still watching online, but it seems most have left. But an
argument that I have heard over and over, bipartisanly, is one
of the most frustrating arguments that I hear coming off of
Capitol Hill. It is bullshit. That is the best way that I can
say it and this is the argument. That people come into this
room and stand on this Hill and continually say, well, what do
I say to the service member going overseas that we could have
prevented it by sending some U.S. taxpayer dollars somewhere
else? That is a false narrative. It is a false argument that it
is either one or the other, either we send something over in
terms of U.S. aid or the U.S. service member has to go
somewhere else and fight. That is not the truth and it should
not be put forward on this committee. It is one of the worst
things that I hear over and over.
Now I do not want to diminish the work that USAID does or
the people that go out there and do it. They do some yeoman
work, some outstanding work in some terrible places across the
globe. But my colleague, Mr. Sherman, he posed the question
early on. He said, what do we say to the service member who
comes home injured, you know, saying that we could have
prevented this by sending that food over or this over? We
cannot allow that argument to continue. It is not true. It is a
false argument.
You say to that service member, thank you for your service.
Thank you for knowing full well the hazards of your chosen
profession. Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Coast Guard, our
men and women who put on a uniform in defense of this country,
they know exactly what it is they are signing up for. They know
exactly the hazards and the risks that are posed to them by the
jobs that they choose to go out there and do, and they are
proud of the work that they ask to go out there and do on
behalf of every citizen of the United States of America.
And that is my biggest ask out of this hearing for anybody
that is still watching online that is still in their offices or
back home that did not come here to the floor of this hearing
room, pay attention to that. Stop making that argument. Stop
using our service members as an excuse to send the taxpayer of
some U.S. working citizen over to some other country.
It is not to say that there are not good uses over there,
but that cannot be the excuse because it is a false narrative.
Here is a true narrative. Every time we send a dollar overseas
somewhere else, we are taking a dollar that could have
otherwise been spent here in the United States of America. So
let's ask this question. Either we are in an outbreak and a
pandemic or we are not. Either we are or we are not.
But if we are, is there a better time to take those dollars
that would have gone somewhere else not on U.S. soil and keep
them here on U.S. soil helping American citizens, helping
people in our cities, helping people in our towns, helping
people in our areas that are affected? If not now, then when do
we say keep those dollars here in the United States of America?
We do not need to look at this as though if we cut 35 percent
from foreign funding this year that that is something that goes
on in perpetuity forever or whether it is 20 percent or 10
percent or whatever that cut might be. Now is an important time
to keep dollars on U.S. soil. Probably has not been a more
important time in my generation to keep those dollars here to
help Americans, to help people in our communities.
And the argument is that we have to send it over to
somebody else and then we are using our service members as this
false narrative to say that is why it has to be done. I will
repeat my statement in the beginning. That is bullshit. And I
yield back.
Mr. Engel. Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you.
I respect my friend from Florida's service. He talks about
false narratives. He just presented one. The dollars going
overseas are an opportunity cost because those are dollars not
being invested in America and that has been proved false for
decades. Dollars going overseas through effective programs are
investments for America. They are investments in laying the
groundwork for trade and investment. They are laying the
groundwork for the creation of many kinds of new jobs for
Americans. They are investments for expanding our economy. And
as we are learning in COVID-19, we do not live on an island all
alone. We are part of humanity. When something happens over
there, it can affect us over here. Investing in health
infrastructure globally protects Americans.
So I reject the narrative we have just been given, and I
hope most Americans watching will too as well. Foreign
assistance can be, when it is effective, a very inexpensive
investment in all Americans' future and it protects the world
from all kinds of harm--cyber, physical, economic.
Mr. Barsa, I did not hear your answer other than a
reassertion that AID is committed to equity and fairness, but
Ms. Titus ran, you know, gave you a catalog of individuals in
your Agency who have spewed hateful statements about LGBT
members, about those who adhere to the Islamic faith. You have
one member on your staff from the Family Research Council that
has been dubbed a hate group.
Are those people's views representative of yours or of the
current philosophy governing AID?
Mr. Barsa. Congressman, I have to reiterate what I said
before. While someone is working for me at USAID, regardless of
hiring category--civil service, foreign service officer, or
political appointee--everyone is held to the same high legal,
moral, and ethical standards that have always existed.
Mr. Connolly. Mr. Barsa, that does not answer the question.
That begs the question. These are people with a history. Are
you comfortable with that history in hiring them and having
them on your payroll in representing the United States of
America?
Mr. Barsa. I have systems in place to ensure that people
who are representing the United States as USAID employees do
live up to the high standard.
Mr. Connolly. So if somebody came to you with an explicitly
hate-filled, racist rant and a history of it, posting it,
tweeting it, going on bots and spreading it, as long as they
said, well, that was then, this is now, I will adhere to the
standards of AID, from your point of view that is a qualified
employee or at least it is not a disqualified potential
employee?
Mr. Barsa. Throughout the appointment of political
appointees occurs as a conversation between the White House and
whatever agency in place. So regarding the vetting and
placement of employees, I would have to refer you to the White
House. What I can assure you, once they are in as an employee
of mine at USAID, we have certain standards that we uphold
people to.
Mr. Connolly. Well, I have been working with AID for over
40 years and I have never seen it peopled with individuals who
have those kinds of records and I think it is a shameful moment
for AID, and it is shameful if you are right that those come
from, because they are political appointees from the White
House. It is another blot on this White House.
Let me ask real quickly, the proposal is you take a 50
percent hit. Given the pandemic we are involved in and its
ramifications in refugee camps, its ramifications in
aggravating the HIV/AIDS crisis that is expected to grow by 10
percent over the next 5 years, how in the world can you absorb
a 50 percent cut and do your job in meeting those many, many
crises around the world?
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Congressman. As you are aware and
your colleagues are aware, the budget you see before you was
certainly developed, started, the process that got us here with
this budget started long before the outbreak of the pandemic,
so extremely grateful for the generosity of the U.S. Congress
with supplemental bills. I understand there is another one
being negotiated right now. But the budget you see before you
was developed before the pandemic.
Mr. Connolly. So will there be a revised budget presented
to Congress in light of the pandemic and in light of, and the
analysis of the impact of the pandemic on your obligations and
your opportunities to respond?
Mr. Barsa. So certainly my understanding is negotiations on
a potential supplemental are taking place right now between
OMB, the White House, and the appropriators. So certainly, we
are in contact, close contact with OMB in terms of the
challenges we are seeing here and now. And, certainly, one of
the things I mentioned previously in the testimony, on my first
day I put out an announcement to my staff that one of my
biggest concerns was the secondary and tertiary effects of the
pandemic.
So I have stood up an analytical cell. We are calling it
the Over the Horizon Task Force to look outside of silos to
look at things like insecurity, a backsliding in democracy,
holistically, what the challenges are going to be before us not
just in 6 months, but in 6 years on the out years. So this, the
product of this analytical cell, this Over the Horizon Task
Force, will go to inform conversations that we have with OMB,
and the product of that task will be given to your colleagues
to help inform your decisions so we can all be making data-
driven decisions when it comes to allocations----
Mr. Connolly. When can we expect to see that?
I know my time is up, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Barsa. The planning cell is due to be finished by the
end of the fiscal year, so the end of September.
Mr. Connolly. So we will see a revised budget by the end
of----
Mr. Barsa. I am not saying you will see a revised budget.
So the analytical cell, the Over the Horizon Task Force, which
is looking at holistically the challenges, I should have that
information to inform conversations about budget, that
information should be available by the end of the fiscal year.
Mr. Connolly. Mr. Chairman, I know my time is up. I would
just say to you as the committee of jurisdiction that is the
originator of the authorization for AID, I would hope that we
could get a revised budget that is much more realistic in light
of the pandemic. My time is up and the chairman has been
gracious. Thank you.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Burchett.
Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I too, add me to
the list as I stated earlier. I am incredibly saddened that you
will not be back with us. Of course, I do not know if I will be
back with us or not either. But, regardless, you have been
nothing but class to me and I really appreciate it. And I still
want to take you up on that offer of hanging out with you in
New York City 1 day. Somebody said that would be like an
episode of Seinfeld, me and you up there, so I kind of look
forward to that. That would be really cool.
Thank you, sir, for being here. I am really concerned about
China and the Belt and Road Initiative. I guess I come from it
from a little different angle. My father fought in the Pacific,
fought the Japanese all the way across the Pacific, and then he
went to China after the War, a short while, and fought the
Communists. And I learned at a very early age some of their
goals and things that were maybe a little different than some
of my buddies growing up did.
And so I looked at them, I have always looked at China
through, I guess, rose-colored glasses. Or not rose-colored
glasses, but you know what I mean. I am just always very
skeptical of anything they do, any initiatives. And I am
wondering if you could explain to me a little more how we are
responding to their Belt and Road Initiatives. And just I mean
in a more of--I do not need the--I do not want all this
technical garbage, I just want to know from the heart what you
say that you all are doing.
Mr. Barsa. Well, thank you, sir. Well, from the heart, I
did not have any family that fought in the Pacific in World War
II, but I had a mother who fled communism as a young girl, as a
young lady, and so I have a visceral mistrust for communist
systems and I know what they do and how they abuse their
people.
So, but coming in so you go with the data, so it is not
just a visceral mistrust of the Chinese when you look at the
data what they are doing across the world with debt diplomacy,
with these one-sided deals where, you know, somebody said
earlier money talks, but they give the promise of money in the
short term, but with these long-ended conditions which
basically tie up countries so they lose their autonomy, lose
their sovereignty.
So one of the best things we can do is to provide
alternatives to the Chinese development model. We truly have a
development model which is premised on what is called a journey
to self-reliance where we help countries stand up on their own,
to stand up and get up on the own feet. So what we are doing
across the world, you know, it differs. What we are doing in
Latin America, showing, you know, deals that the Chinese did in
Jamaica, letting other people know.
So our missions in the field have a key role in helping
share information with countries who might be tempted to fall
for Chinese lies. We also help with infrastructure development.
Again, we mentioned our work with the DFC. We help find ways so
we can invest in deepwater ports and other infrastructure in
ways that benefit countries. Again, the best thing we can do to
counter China is to be more open and talk about what we do.
Mr. Burchett. Well, what is working specifically? When you
mentioned deepwater ports, I note for the record that actually
China is building the deepwater port in Israel, which to me is
alarming, but that is on another subject. But I would like to
know what is working and what can we do more of that is
working?
Mr. Barsa. Well, I can give you more details and anecdotes
either for the record or following up with you later on, but an
example right now is what we have done in the Solomon Islands.
We supported a critical infrastructure assessment by Solomon
Island engineers. Bina Harbour in Malaita Province is one of
the last undeveloped deepwater ports in the South Pacific where
China has been angling for increased influence. USAID staff led
the infrastructure scoping mission together with several
agencies to assess the port and complementary infrastructure.
And because of our efforts and our openness, ultimately,
the government turned away from Chinese support. That is one
example. Happy to followup with you and your staff with more
examples as well.
Mr. Burchett. All right. Well, I appreciate that.
And, Mr. Chairman, I believe I am just about to run out of
time, so I will yield back, maybe to Mr. Castro. I am not sure.
Mr. Engel. Mr. Burchett, you said such nice things about
me, you can have all the time you want.
Mr. Burchett. Oh, okay. Well, if you bring me one of those
New York pizzas. I actually drove through your area this past
week. I have never been to New York and it is not Knoxville,
Tennessee, I will tell you that.
Mr. Engel. Well, we want you to come back.
Mr. Burchett. Yes, sir.
Mr. Engel. Please do.
Mr. Burchett. Thank you, brother.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. Thank you.
Mr. Castro.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Administrator, for being here to testify.
And as some of these questions or part of the question may have
been asked, I apologize. I was on the House floor.
So as we speak about the meaning and significance of USAID
global leadership during one of the greatest health crises the
world has known, it is critical that USAID representatives
carry out the true message and mission of USAID in a way that
reflects U.S. values. However, a series of recent political
appointments to USAID contradicts these values. At least three
recent positions have been filled by personnel that have
histories of Islamophobic, homophobic, and anti-immigrant
comments. I speak specifically of Merritt Corrigan, Mark Kevin
Lloyd, and Bethany Kozma.
Some of these comments include, ``America is a homo-
empire,'' ruled by the ``tyrannical LGBT agenda'' and Islam a
``barbaric cult'' and women should not hold office because they
will ``always advocate for themselves at the expense of men,
and revel in it.''
So, I know you did not make these comments, but you are the
Administrator. And can you please explain to us today why these
people remain in their leadership positions at USAID and will
you take action to replace them? And, if not, please explain
how USAID will mitigate the damaging message their
representation imparts to partner countries and agencies and to
USAID personnel who remain under the leadership of these
people.
Mr. Barsa. Congressman, as the Acting Administrator of
USAID, it is my responsibility to ensure that each and every
employee of USAID, regardless of hiring category--civil
servant, foreign servant, or political appointee--lives up to
the highest legal, moral, and ethical standards that USAID has
always held in place. So I am proud to say that the work of
USAID overseas and here at headquarters remains unimpeded by
this. So we are very proud of the way we are executing our
work, and again I can assure you and your colleagues that every
employee is held accountable.
Mr. Castro. And I appreciate that and I do not doubt your
sincerity in wanting it to be a place that respects all people.
But you have some folks in key positions who have made very
bigoted comments. Have you had a conversation with them? Have
you admonished them, at a minimum? What action has been taken?
Mr. Barsa. I am not going to comment on personnel
decisions, but again I can assure you and your colleagues that
we have the mechanisms in place for oversight and ensuring that
every employee regardless of hiring category actually lives up
to the standards that we have and have always had.
Mr. Castro. I just want to convey to you what a damaging
message it sends around the world for USAID, which is a
development organization and it is supposed to help people in
need, people of color, LGBTQ people, vulnerable people all
around the world, to have folks like that in the employ of an
agency, really, any Federal agency or government agency, but in
the employ of what is our gem of reaching out to the world,
USAID.
Can you tell me what role Johnny McEntee and the
Presidential Personnel Office, PPO, play in pushing these
people as nominees? Did you or someone at USAID first recommend
them or were their names initially put forward by PPO?
Mr. Barsa. Congressman, certainly in this Administration
and in my previous service in the Bush Administration, the
placement of political appointees is with all Administrations,
conversations between the White House, obviously, through the
Office of Presidential Personnel, primarily, and the host
executive branch agency.
Mr. Castro. Okay. I yield back, Chair.
Mr. Engel. Thank you very much. Mr. Espaillat?
Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Administrator, for being before our committee. Again, I also
want to stress my displeasure, my objection to the precedence
of folks that have made anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ,
Islamophobic statements in an agency that is really there to
help other countries develop, and that should be an agency that
recognizes diversity and allows for those diverse groups within
the agency and in our country and abroad to develop.
And so I am concerned that these statements will hamper, if
not break the development of good programs in countries that
need the help, particularly during this pandemic across the
world. And I would like to see the Administrator perhaps put
out a statement that names these individuals and actually moves
away from their statements in an unequivocal way to send a
clear message that the Agency and his leadership does not stand
for what those folks had to say. At the very least, if not look
into their past impressive practices and see whether those
practices will impair the Agency's ability to do the great work
that they should be doing across the world.
My question is regarding--I know that, Mr. Barsa, you have
a vast experience in Latin America and the Caribbean, and we
see how the pandemic is now spreading throughout Latin America
and the Caribbean, Brazil, Mexico. We know that it hit early on
Ecuador really hard, the Dominican Republic in the Caribbean
and other island nations. And I want to know what is our plan
with regards to the distribution of PPEs, ventilators, and
other equipment, lifesaving equipment to those countries.
We can whine and complain about China, but the fact of the
matter is that they go in there and they take ownership of
major projects. I know that we have attempted to do that, but
we have not done it in a significant way in the region. Right
in our backyard we are being outflanked by China because they
are coming in maybe in a predatory way, which I disagree with,
but they are coming and taking on major projects and major
infrastructure projects that are critical to the development of
those countries.
So I want to know particularly now during this pandemic in
the Caribbean and in Latin America, what is the plan for USAID
to distribute PPEs, ventilators, other important equipment to
help those nations? Mr. Barsa?
Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Congressman. Certainly, so my time,
you know, my experience in dealing with natural disasters at
Department of Homeland Security, one of the lessons it is
ingrained in me, how disasters evolve over time. So a lot of
the assumptions and decisions that are based in one period of
time may be revisited as information changes, so we are seeing
just that with this pandemic. So part of the benefit of us
having our presence in this country's missions, we are able to
work with the host countries in seeing what the needs are as it
develops.
So regarding PPE, right now we are--we have a policy in
place where our implementing partners are able to purchase PPE
locally, but we are constantly assessing what the needs are in
a particular country. The pandemic is hitting countries
differently, so it would not be prudent to come up with a
cookie cutter, one-size-fits-all to respond to the pandemic. So
our response----
Mr. Espaillat. Yes, but let me say, for example----
Mr. Barsa [continuing]. In each country is tailored to the
specific challenges. So be it----
Mr. Espaillat. Let me say, for example----
Mr. Barsa. Oh.
Mr. Espaillat [continuing]. Administrator, you know, rapid
test kits, which are needed everywhere because this is testing,
tracing, treatment, the TTT. Rapid test kits, they are direly
needed in many places across Latin America and the Caribbean.
What are we doing to provide that to those countries?
Mr. Barsa. There is a comprehensive view we have toward the
pandemic. Understanding that test kits are part of the
response, they may not always be available, certainly in
amounts we like, but again in terms of the tailoring of our
response, the response of the pandemic in Haiti is different
than the response in Dominican Republic and different from the
response in Colombia. So we look to see what assets are
available and what is needed. We try to tailor response in the
best way possible to the country's specific needs.
Mr. Espaillat. Okay. Let me just say that it has been very
difficult for the Latin American and the Caribbean and they are
in dire need of test kits, of ventilators now, of course PPEs,
and we are coming right into hurricane season. I want to know,
Mr. Barsa, what preparations has USAID done to help Caribbean
countries that are on the pathways of hurricanes and will be
hit hard right in the middle of this pandemic during this
hurricane season? Is there any preparation from USAID to assist
these countries?
Mr. Barsa. Again, Congressman, it is especially a great
point of pride coming into USAID, especially from the
Department of Homeland Security where I was so involved with so
many disaster responses with FEMA, coming in to find a
professional team at USAID so adept, so talented in disaster
response.
But similarly to FEMA, our responses right now are modified
based on the challenges of the pandemic. So we are closely
coordinating with FEMA in coming up with best practices for
hurricane response particularly when it comes to putting people
in shelters. How do you do that with safe distancing? How do
you do that with PPE for the displaced personnel?
So we are in constant communication with FEMA on sharing
best practices and how to respond during the pandemic, but we
are ready and we are braced for any hurricanes. Hopefully we
will not have to, but we have seen, certainly, the reports that
this may be a more active hurricane season than most, but we
are prepared to the best way possible to respond.
Mr. Engel. Well thank you. And then we will----
Mr. Espaillat. I am deeply concerned.
Mr. Barsa. Excuse me?
Mr. Espaillat. I am deeply concerned about the hurricane
season in the middle of the pandemic in that region.
Mr. Barsa. We all are. Yes, sir. Thank you.
Mr. Espaillat. Finally, the statement, on the statement,
will you put out a statement on the appointees, their anti-
LGBTQ, anti-immigrant, and Islamophobic statements?
Mr. Barsa. To ensure that there is no confusion, on June
24th I put out a statement publicly. It is available on the
website. I can give it to you and your staff, reiterating our
values--excellence, integrity, respect, empowerment, inclusion,
and commit to learning. So I have reiterated----
Mr. Espaillat. Will you name the names?
Mr. Barsa. I commit to you without naming names, because
again all employees regardless of hiring category are held to
the same high legal, moral, and ethical standards.
Mr. Engel. OK. We are going to have to go on to----
Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Engel. Thank you, Mr. Espaillat. Mr. Guest?
Mr. Guest. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Acting Director Barsa,
first, I want to thank you for taking time out of your schedule
to be with us today. We are facing challenging times both as a
country and challenging times across the globe. Also I want to
thank you, you and I had the opportunity to visit by phone two
and a half, 3 weeks ago to talk about some of our commonly
shared interests and also to talk about some of the goals of
USAID.
I wanted to talk to you, and I wanted to highlight a
program that the USAID has there and that I am proud to say is
housed in the 3d congressional district at Mississippi State
University, Mississippi State's innovative lab for fish, and it
is part of your Agency's Feed the Future Program. Since
September 2018, and in partnership with other research
universities, Mississippi State has the opportunity to manage
that program and support USAID's aquaculture research and
capacity building, and actually it has been implemented in five
developing countries. We have seen that in Bangladesh,
Cambodia, Kenya, Nigeria, and Zambia.
And so this is a very important project, very important
program where your Agency is able to partner with research
universities so that we continue to export across the globe the
opportunities for countries to better themselves and actually
to be able to feed their populations. So, first of all, I want
to thank you for your support of that program.
I want to thank Mississippi State University and my good
friend Dr. Mark Keenum for partnering with USAID, and I want to
thank Dr. Keenum for him being an advocate for global food
security, as this program again will help feed more than 800
million people across the globe who suffer from hunger.
But I do want to ask you a question as it relates to again
a topic that you and I had the opportunity to visit on a couple
weeks ago, and that being the Nation of Venezuela. I know in
your written report there on page 7, you address on page 7 and
then page 8, you talk about the Administration's stand. You
talk about how the Administration is working with the people of
Venezuela to recover their country and actually to change their
future as they seek to throw off the chains of a dictatorship
that they are currently suffering. And so I just wanted to ask
you for just a couple minutes if you could expand before this
committee about things that USAID is doing specifically in
Venezuela as we seek to help the Venezuela people again retake
their country, and as you said, retake their future.
Mr. Barsa. Thank you very much, Congressman. Certainly, as
I stated before, on the personal level of my mother having to
flee Communist Cuba at a young age and growing up with that,
certainly have a special place in sensitivity for the suffering
of the Venezuelan people inside and outside of Venezuela. So I
am proud to be leading an organization that is doing so much to
alleviate or attempting to alleviate human suffering within the
borders of Venezuela and helping with those displaced
Venezuelans and to host communities and countries that are
hosting them.
Certainly, to date, the United States has provided more
than $856 million in humanitarian and development assistance to
support programs inside of Venezuela and with 17 neighboring
countries. Our programs expand democratic spaces by supporting
civil society organizations, independent media, human rights
organizations, and the democratically elected national assembly
and interim government of Juan Guaido.
Certainly, the suffering from the failed economic system of
the regime led by Maduro, even before the pandemic, you know,
we were seeing and hearing reports of collapsing medical
systems, of malnutrition, and other suffering inside the border
of Venezuela. Unfortunately, with the pandemic the situation
has even gotten worse. Part of the tragedy before us is that
Maduro's regime blocking our ability and other countries'
abilities to get much-needed humanitarian assistance inside the
borders of Venezuela.
It is extremely frustrating knowing that we could help
alleviate human suffering and the regime will not let us get in
humanitarian assistance, certainly in the scale necessary.
Mr. Guest. Well thank you. And I am out of time, so, Mr.
Chairman, at this point I will yield back.
Mr. Engel. Thank you very much. Ms. Wild?
Ms. Wild. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Barsa, I do not
anticipate that we will agree on everything, but I think there
are a few things we can probably agree on. I would like to move
through them quickly. Can we agree that responding to COVID-19
required Congress to pass emergency stimulus packages in both
Houses to address the virus' spread in the United States?
Mr. Barsa. I am certainly grateful for the generosity of
the U.S. Congress as a supplemental, and we have done our best
to put that money to good use.
Ms. Wild. Can we also agree that we did not have sufficient
money appropriated in Fiscal Year 2020 without those stimulus
packages?
Mr. Barsa. Well, we certainly, throughout the budget
process we could not anticipate something that had not occurred
yet.
Ms. Wild. And can we agree that while we do not know when,
there will probably be future pandemics?
Mr. Barsa. Well, I guess it is a mathematical possibility,
yes.
Ms. Wild. Can we agree that addressing future pandemics
will require global cooperation?
Mr. Barsa. We could agree on that, yes.
Ms. Wild. Great. Because eradicating a pandemic requires
global cooperation, can you then, sitting here today as Acting
USAID Administrator, commit to significant investments in
global health and foreign aid in Fiscal Year 2021?
Mr. Barsa. I can easily commit to that because that is what
we have been doing for decades.
Ms. Wild. Okay then. You would object to the decision to
pull U.S. funding for the World Health Organization, and you
would also object to the President's Fiscal Year 2021 budget
which cuts foreign aid by 21 percent, especially since you know
that international health organizations make up a large
percentage of that foreign aid?
Mr. Barsa. I think this is where we part ways. No, and
certainly, certainly the World Health Organization, the
President's decision to withdraw from the World Health
Organization was based on a number of factors, and certainly
that is certainly the prerogative, and we certainly do not
disagree with that decision.
As I stated before, in terms of our investments in global
health last year, only 4 percent of the money the United States
spent on global health, only 4 percent went to the World Health
Organization. And since that decision has been made, we have
been actively looking to find alternative partners to continue
the work we have been doing throughout the world.
Ms. Wild. So now we need to find alternative partners
because we pulled out of the WHO. The fiscal 2021 budget
includes a 21 percent cut in foreign aid, but a 20 percent
increase in modernizing our nuclear arsenal. How does that
imbalance in the President's priorities reflect our desire for
global cooperation to deal with future pandemics?
Mr. Barsa. Ma'am, in my decades of service in government
and outside of government, I have never met a government agency
that said they had enough money. Certainly, these decisions on
budgets are difficult ones that are Solomonic. You always have
to, hey, I have scant resources, so in terms of the allocations
between different agencies, I would have to direct you to OMB.
Ms. Wild. But you would agree, would you not, that the
desire for global cooperation to deal with future pandemics is
at odds with decreasing the budget for that kind of foreign
aid?
Mr. Barsa. I am certainly cognizant that the decisions on
the overall budget are difficult ones with scant resources and
nobody has everything they would like to have. So we stand by
the budget before you. It is the end of a--this budget before
you is the end product of a process that started long before
the onset of the pandemic.
Ms. Wild. But we have to adjust to changing circumstances.
Let me just ask you, do you have any idea what the COVID-19
pandemic has cost the American taxpayer?
Mr. Barsa. No, I have not seen--I do not have any of those
figures before me.
Ms. Wild [presiding]. Well I would just ask that you heed
the advice of President Bush's Deputy Assistant Administrator
of USAID, Lester Munson, who said prevention is far cheaper
than an ex-post cure.
With that I yield back, Mr. Chairman. I recognize Ms.
Wagner for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Wagner. Thank you. And I thank the Chairman, wherever
he may be, for organizing this hearing.
And I thank you, Administrator Barsa, for your time this
afternoon and for your service to our country. We look forward
to working with you to strengthen our international development
programming, promote support for humanitarian aid, and maintain
robust U.S. leadership abroad.
Today, we are seeing rivals like China and Russia exploit
instability and crisis to undermine democratic values and
respect for human rights. The United States' insistence on
collaboration and self-sufficiency makes us the partner of
choice for countries seeking a helping hand to grow their
economies, improve health systems, fight corruption, and so on.
We must continue to play a leading role in helping
marginalized, poor, and vulnerable people around the world
build a better future.
Administrator Barsa, the Chinese Communist Party continues
to disseminate dangerously inaccurate and misleading
information about COVID-19 and its origins. How is USAID
supporting programs to correct CCP falsehoods and ensure that
our partners are basing pandemic response efforts on accurate
information?
Mr. Barsa. Certainly, Congresswoman, thank you for your
question. As part of your question, the premise of your
question is these falsehoods are being perpetrated by the
Chinese Communist Party, so one of the best tools we have in
this information is to counter with our own information, to
expose the lies when they occur, to find and to highlight
instances of faulty PPE, faulty information.
So communication is one of our best tools. What we have
going for us is the honest assessment of what we do, our
developmental model, the options that we have in terms of
helping countries on their journey to self-reliance to stand up
on their own two feet. So we are doubling down on
communications in the Indo-Pacific, Latin American Caribbean,
and everywhere we are seeing the Chinese try to exert their
malevolent influence.
Mrs. Wagner. Thank you very much. When this global health
request was developed we were not in the middle of a global
pandemic. How is USAID working to prevent backsliding in our
existing global health programs such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis,
malaria, and maternal and child health?
Mr. Barsa. Well certainly the Chinese Communist Party's
lack of transparency at the onset of the pandemic set us back
and made things more difficult for USAID. Again, thank you
again to you and your colleagues for the generosity in the
supplemental bills so far.
When we first started our funding to respond to the
pandemic, we initially targeted our efforts in the Indo-
Pacific, Europe, and Africa, some places that had high transit
routes with China, which is more likely to be the start of this
virus that started within China. Because of the lack of
transparency we got there too late, so then we had to expand
our work to now we are globally.
As was mentioned before, USAID has spent decades investing
in global health infrastructure, access to clean water,
strengthen epidemiological systems, a whole suite of
activities, so we are proud of the fact that these investments
have paid off in terms of better response, and it is lamentable
that because of the Chinese all of these systems are being
challenged.
Mrs. Wagner. USAID is doing great work to advance the Indo-
Pacific strategy, reassuring our allies and partners in the
region. However, Southeast Asian countries on the front lines
of escalating competition between the United States and China,
I think, worry that a strategy focused on the Indo-Pacific will
somehow diminish their role in regional affairs.
How will USAID promote Southeast Asian countries'
centrality in achieving a free and open Indo-Pacific?
Mr. Engel. Mr. Barsa, could you give a rapid response?
Because I am told we are expecting a vote on the floor very
soon.
Mr. Barsa. Very rapidly. We have a regional developmental
mission in Asia, which is a regional hub for all activities in
Southeast Asia, but the competition with China is certainly not
limited to Southeast Asia. We are seeing, unfortunately, its
competition worldwide. And happy to respond further with you
with questions for the record.
Mrs. Wagner. I appreciate that. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. Mr. Phillips?
Mr. Phillips. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, Mr. Barsa.
I appreciate your time today. I have to start by recounting our
phone call on June 12th which I did enjoy, and I also shared
some of the concerns shared by many of my colleagues about a
number of the hires made. And rather than go over that ground
again, I would be remiss if I did not bring it up, but I want
to focus my attention on the Local Works program first.
As you know, it looks to advance locally led development in
countries all around the world, which means local people
becoming empowered to take the lead in the development process,
including priority setting and decisionmaking, management, and
a whole lot more. I love that program. I believe it holds up
the Administration's priority of achieving self-reliance. I
just welcome a very quick synopsis of your thoughts on the
program, Mr. Barsa.
Mr. Barsa. I think the program is emblematic of exactly
what we are trying to achieve, I mean self-reliance, to help
private sectors in each country grow on their own, so to set
the environment for the growth. I firmly believe that jobs
aren't created by government but they are created by the
private sector, so having these programs in place to help
private sector and economies grow, exactly what is needed for
long-term, sustainable economic development.
Mr. Phillips. I could not agree more. And as you, of
course, know, the program gets its funding from the Development
Assistance Fund and the Economic Support Fund. You are also
probably aware the President's budget requests ask that those
two accounts be combined into one account, the Economic Support
and Development Fund. Is that correct?
Mr. Barsa. Yes.
Mr. Phillips. Okay. So I need to know, how can we ensure
that such a valuable program on which we both agree is still
fully funded and an important part of our development
assistance when the core accounts that it funds are being
collapsed into one and, unfortunately, significantly reduced,
how can we reconcile that?
Mr. Barsa. Again, as I mentioned, Congressman, in my time,
in my decades of service inside and outside of government, I
have never been in a government agency or known of a government
agency that had enough money as they would certainly like.
Certainly, these are challenging times, scarce resources, so we
stand by the budget before you. But you have my commitment that
I and the rest of the USAID team will be doing our best with
these precious taxpayer dollars to further these programs.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. Levin? Okay,
we move to Ms. Spanberger.
Ms. Spanberger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
holding this hearing.
Thank you very much to the witness for being here. It is
good to see you virtually like this. Thank you very much for
testifying. USAID global health programs have been monitoring
zoonotic diseases, so the diseases that spill over from animals
to people, for more than a decade, and these programs have
collectively been known as the PREDICT program. They leverage
the expertise of health officials to respond quickly to disease
outbreaks and prevent future outbreaks.
This lifesaving work has helped identify hundreds of
viruses and enhanced the resilience of healthcare systems
around the world. This Administration decided to shutter
PREDICT ahead of having a replacement ready to go. Personally,
this does not make sense to me given the proven effectiveness
of this program, especially as experts have been warning for
years about the very real threat of a pandemic.
Now I understand that there has been a short-term extension
of the PREDICT program and a call for proposals for follow-on
programs, but that is the basis of my question today. What is
the status of extending PREDICT and/or setting up a successor
program?
Mr. Barsa. Thank you for your question, Congressman.
PREDICT was always planned on having a full life cycle and an
end date. It is not that the PREDICT program is being shut
prematurely. This is a natural evolution of the program and our
follow-on program, STOP Spillover, was always planned to----
Ms. Spanberger. Mr. Barsa.
Mr. Barsa. Yes.
Ms. Spanberger. Mr. Barsa, how can you say it is a full
life cycle when we always have known that the future threats of
pandemics existed? Why would the Administration choose to end a
program that so far had proven successful without a replacement
ready?
Mr. Barsa. Well, we----
Ms. Spanberger. So what is that successor?
Mr. Barsa. The successor is called STOP Spillover. It is
building upon all the lessons learned from the PREDICT program
and improving it, improving our ability to monitor zoonotic
diseases. Instead of continuing something which may be
outdated, again we are learning from the PREDICT programming,
and our follow-on program which we hope to have an award by it
in September, just a few months from now, is building upon all
the successes of the PREDICT program to have a more robust,
analytical----
Ms. Spanberger. What are these successes upon which STOP
Spillover will be building upon?
Mr. Barsa. I do not have the exact data before me, but
would be happy to get back to you and your staff on questions
for the record or a separate briefing.
Ms. Spanberger. Thank you. And what are the weaknesses of
the PREDICT program that would require a new generation program
and request for proposals?
Mr. Barsa. And again, happy to provide a briefing and more
information to you, but it is not so much that there are
weaknesses in the program, but just a natural evolution that
you are going to have a followup program. But again, happy to
get back to you with more details.
Ms. Spanberger. But Mr. Barsa, typically, within an
evolution and evolution is continuous, here we have had a
stoppage of a program that has been known to help our country
and the world as it relates to the threat of zoonotic diseases
and pandemics, and now we are in a process where we are
receiving proposals for the next step in the middle of a
pandemic? Do you understand the concern that many of us have
that the timing is just inappropriate and hurting our ability
to respond?
Mr. Barsa. I do not know if it is hurting our ability to
respond. Again, our response--we can go back and have a more
detailed discussion after the hearing. But again, this is
always planned, I mean so we are no longer receiving proposals.
That window closed on June 1st, and we are on the cusp of
making an award and moving forward with the follow-on program.
Ms. Spanberger. But when the global pandemic struck, was
there ever discussions that you were a part of or led or were
aware of saying perhaps during a global pandemic where we are
having massive closures, the U.S. economy is coming to a
crushing end, and we frankly need our public health expertise,
was there ever a discussion of maybe this is not the right time
to pursue the shift?
Mr. Barsa. Well but again, certainly on how looking at how
zoonotic diseases spill over and get into the human
populations, that is on the front end. So, certainly, with the
response to the pandemic, I mean a response comes from, you
know, PPE, ventilators, access to clean water.
Ms. Spanberger. Yes.
Mr. Barsa. So again, the PREDICT program was extended, and
this is the natural follow-on in STOP Spillover. In terms of
the response to the pandemic, of course, we have been
absolutely focused on that.
Ms. Spanberger. Okay. Well, certainly, given the death
rates across the United States, I hope that while we are in a
position we should focus on what has been working. We should
focus on saving lives. And I continue to think that repeated
attempts to cut public health programs, including those that
catch diseases before they become the outbreaks and the
pandemic such as COVID-19 that has now killed thousands upon
thousands of Americans, I really cannot help but wonder about
the role that PREDICT could have played in the lead-up to
COVID-19 had it been able to halt the virus's ability to come
to our country. And we are currently experiencing the costs of
underinvesting in public health domestically and in
coordination with our international partners.
And Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you for being here,
Mr. Barsa.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. The gentlewoman yields back. Let's go
back to Mr. Phillips because I cut him off prematurely.
Mr. Phillips. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Barsa, we had
been speaking about the Local Works program. I appreciate your
support of it. I encourage incremental investment because I do
think it is one of the most compelling programs that we offer.
I also want to talk about kids, youth. And the House
Appropriations Committee included my request in their recent
report that would ``encourage the inclusive and meaningful
participation of youth in peace building and conflict
prevention, management, and resolution as well as post-conflict
relief and recovery efforts.`` We can all celebrate the fact
that kids, youth are the majority population in many conflict-
affected countries.
So my question to you, Mr. Barsa, is how will the
Administration, how will you prioritize the role of youth in
conflict prevention, resolution, and recovery, because I do
believe they have a unique role to play. I would love your
comments on that.
Mr. Barsa. Well thank you, Congressman. I think the old
saying holds true, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of
cure. So investments----
Mr. Phillips. It is.
Mr. Barsa. So investments in education and making sure
youth have access to education not just helps with economic
integration and a country's economic development, but also in a
societal and political integration as well. And this is
especially true in women by the way. We are always pushing for
that.
So as part of our reorganization, we recently stood up the
Bureau for Conflict, Prevention, and Stabilization to do just
that, to put a focus to our efforts on investments to prevent
conflict on the front end. So just like all the other things we
have mentioned that are affected by the pandemic, I am also
concerned about the challenges in education systems throughout
the world and people not having access to education, so we are
very attuned to the challenges and we are looking at our
program to see what we can do in any number of countries to
ensure that youth do have access to education because the
consequences of youth in different countries not getting a full
education are certainly negative and we would like to avoid
that.
Mr. Phillips. I appreciate it. I also want to talk about
the GFA, Global Fragility Act. This week I passed an amendment
in the NDAA that will expand upon the GFA to require that USAID
ensures that the State Department's atrocity prevention
framework is incorporated into the Country Development
Cooperation Strategy in countries at risk of mass atrocities.
So my question to you, Mr. Barsa, is, does USAID have
sufficient staffing with the right skills and training to
successfully implement the GFA? And if not, what do you need?
Mr. Barsa. Congressman, first I want to thank you and your
colleagues for your prescience in working on the Global
Fragility Act. Certainly, again, an ounce of prevention is
worth a pound of cure. So in these fragile societies what the
Global Fragility Act has done, what you did is you put a focus.
So there are so many activities that USAID has involved with
over the decades which go to support the concept and challenges
of fragility.
In terms of the actual implementation of the act, as you
know, certainly the act has tasked not just USAID but other
elements of the interagency, so we are currently in discussions
on the technical details of the implementation of the Global
Fragility Act, and once those discussions are done I look
forward to following up with you and your staff on the
technical details of how we are going to implement the Global
Fragility Act. But basically what we are doing is we are
focusing many longstanding USAID activities to rise to the
challenge of fragility.
Mr. Engel. Thank you.
Mr. Phillips. All right.
Mr. Engel. We move on to----
Mr. Phillips. Thank you, Mr. Barsa. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. The gentleman yields. Ms. Houlahan?
Ms. Houlahan [continuing]. Today. It was a pleasure to talk
to you on the phone recently as well, and my questions will
basically surround the same conversation that we had on the
phone. I will take you up on your word that an ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure, and when we are talking
specifically about the UNFPA, United--U.N. Population Fund--
there was $32.5 million that were appropriated for the Agency
that I understand now will be transferred over to the
International Organizations Bureau to USAID.
And while I think it is absolutely clear that no one can
replace the work of UNFPA in places like Yemen and Venezuela
and even in New York City, I want to make sure that we are
going to continue to support the programs with the same mission
that the funds were originally intended for. So I have not yet
seen where Fiscal Year 2019 and Fiscal Year 2020 moneys
appropriated for UNFPA will be reprogrammed. To where has the
funding been relocated and specifically what programming is
being supported, sir?
Mr. Barsa. So in terms of the details of how each, every
dollar of those reprogrammed went to, I do not have that
information before me, but happy to get back to you on
questions for the record or a separate briefing for you and
your staff.
Ms. Houlahan. I would really appreciate that. And I would
also like to know, has the full scope and scale of the previous
UNFPA activities continued with any new partners that you are
aware of? Specifically, do the beneficiaries support the UNFPA
mission in what was originally intended, the essence of the
intent of that money?
Mr. Barsa. Again, ma'am, to get to that level of
granularity, I am afraid I have to give you a separate briefing
or a question for the record. But I am absolutely happy to do
so.
Ms. Houlahan. And I would very much appreciate that too.
What I would also like to know here in this audience is: can
you ensure us that any transferred funds that will be going to
our existing international family planning will be going to
international family planning and evidence-based reproductive
health programs that support access to contraceptives, ending
maternal death, ending child marriage, gender-based violence,
and female genitalia mutilation?
Mr. Barsa. Absolutely, yes.
Ms. Houlahan. So you can guarantee us that that will be the
case that those moneys will go toward that?
Mr. Barsa. Yes.
Ms. Houlahan. That is excellent. And thank you for that
assurance because I would definitely like to emphasize that
there are many organizations out there, of course, UNFPA is an
irreplaceable partner, but we really need to make sure that we
are clearly directing those resources toward their original
intent. And thanks for that and I would love to followup with
you on a subsequent conversation about that.
My next question has to do with access to comprehensive
health services. And I think that we can both agree that
gender-based violence is a critical impediment to personal
safety, to the economic empowerment, and to the long-term well-
being of women globally. Is that something we can agree on?
Mr. Barsa. Yes. Of course, yes.
Ms. Houlahan. In 2016, the global cost of violence against
women was estimated to be 1.5 trillion, or basically 2 percent
of the global GDP, or roughly the size of the Canadian economy.
It is sometimes referred to as the shadow pandemic. So clearly
Congress has made addressing GBV globally a priority by
appropriating at least $150 million annually. The
Administration did not request any specific funding for this
issue. Can you explain to me why not?
Mr. Barsa. Certainly, our efforts to address gender-based
violence, USAID efforts, have reached approximately 8 million
people in Fiscal Year 2019; 62 USAID operating units reported
activities to provide critical support and care to prevent and
respond to gender-based violence and child early and forced
marriages.
We know in conflict settings, and right now we are
especially concerned in this COVID-affected world, that there
is a potential rise in gender-based violence, so as part of all
of our programs and all of our missions being on the lookout,
looking for ways to prevent gender-based violence is part of
our programming.
Ms. Houlahan. So why has not the Administration
specifically carved out that in their resources and what they
have asked for?
Mr. Barsa. And again, as mentioned before, the budget you
see before you is a product of tradeoffs and difficult
decisions in terms of resource allocations.
Ms. Houlahan. So I understand that budgets are a process of
tradeoffs, but they are also a reflection of our values. And it
seems to me not only should our values be in combating gender-
based violence, but the economics of it would compel us to be
putting resources toward that because an ounce of prevention is
worth a pound of cure.
And I appreciate your time and I look forward to followup
conversations with you. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Barsa. Thank you.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. We will now go to Mr. Malinowski.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Mr. Barsa. Would you agree that when an effective vaccine or
vaccines for COVID-19 are developed that it will be in the U.S.
national interest for everybody in the world to have access to
that vaccine, or at least in every affected country?
Mr. Barsa. Well certainly pandemics know no borders, so
certainly it would be beneficial to have wide distribution of a
vaccine, of course.
Mr. Malinowski. Okay. Beneficial to us, not just from a
humanitarian point of view.
Mr. Barsa. Pandemics respect no borders.
Mr. Malinowski. Okay. And so should the United States do
our share with our allies and partners to ensure that everybody
who needs a vaccine gets one, given that many of the affected
countries are developing countries that may not be able to do
it on their own?
Mr. Barsa. Well again, as mentioned before, we are
certainly proud of the work we have done with vaccines for any
number of diseases.
Mr. Malinowski. I am not asking what we have done. Should
the United States play its role with our partners, with our
allies, our fair share in ensuring that a vaccine is
distributed to everybody who needs one?
Mr. Barsa. I believe we should. Yes.
Mr. Malinowski. Okay. What have we pledged thus far to that
global effort? I mean as you know a number of our allies and
partners have made specific pledges to aid in the distribution
and development of a vaccine.
Mr. Barsa. I do not have any fixed pledges to report to you
today, but we are concerned. We are waiting on certainly the
production of a vaccine. And we will certainly----
Mr. Malinowski. So the answer is nothing. We have pledged
nothing.
Mr. Barsa. I have nothing to----
Mr. Malinowski. Well you would know if we had pledged
something, presumably.
Mr. Barsa. No, sir. Yes.
Mr. Malinowski. So the answer is nothing.
Mr. Barsa. Yes.
Mr. Malinowski. I think Canada has pledged about $800
million. I think Norway has pledged, if I recall correctly, $1
billion. You know, you were asked about U.S. attendance at
conferences and you said we have other ways of coordinating
with our allies and that is fine. But at the end of the day, as
we were discussing, money talks and so far we have not made
such a pledge.
This is something I think we are committed to in a
bipartisan basis here. As you know, the Senate is now working
up their answer to our opening bid on the next coronavirus
relief package. I have spoken to a number of Republican
senators about this, and my understanding from press reporting
is that the Republican proposal in the Senate put forward a
very generous number for U.S. contributions to eventual
distribution of a global vaccine, but that the White House is
pushing back on this.
So again, I want to press you. What is the Administration
policy? Does the Administration believe that we should do our
share as a large and wealthy country to fund the distribution
of a global vaccine?
Mr. Barsa. I am afraid I cannot opine on negotiations
between the White House, OMB, and the appropriators.
Mr. Malinowski. But you know what the U.S. policy is, the
Administration policy?
Mr. Barsa. I know that the United States people, the U.S.
Government has been, we are the most generous people in the
history of the world and our investments in global health
infrastructure are unprecedented and----
Mr. Malinowski. I know, but that is a talking point. And
what we are trying----
Mr. Barsa. It is also reality.
Mr. Malinowski. I understand. Look, I have sat where you
sit, sir, and I have been through the murder boards and read
the briefing books, and I know there are all kinds of ways they
teach you how not to answer the question. But what we need here
is a clear commitment from the Administration. You have it from
Democrats. You have it from Republicans, including strong
supporters of President Trump on Capitol Hill. We want to do
our share and right now my sense is that we are getting
resistance. Not from USAID, but from the White House to
ensuring that we do that share.
When a vaccine is developed that is a critical moment, and
there will be a tendency by some to say let's keep it. Let's
not give it to anybody else. We did it. We developed it. We
invented it. You know that sentiment is out there. So I want to
hear, and if I cannot hear it from you, I hope you go back and
urge the Secretary and others to be very clear about this, the
United States will do its share.
Mr. Barsa. It is not a talking point, but it is a sincere
belief. It is a sincere statement of fact that I am proud in
the men and women and the investments USAID has made in global
health infrastructure, our ability to respond to pandemics.
Mr. Malinowski. Has made, past tense. We are interested in
what happens----
Mr. Barsa. Well and we are still responding. Our generosity
is ongoing and continuing.
Mr. Malinowski. Okay. And we have pledged nothing. Thank
you. I yield back.
Mr. Engel. Okay. Mr. Trone.
Mr. Trone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding
this hearing today. Mr. Barsa, we have all seen reports of the
authoritarian leaders taking advantage of the pandemic to
increase their crackdowns on free speech and independent press.
Why are outlets like--this is why outlets like Radio Free
Europe are so critical, but the Trump Administration has
slashed the budget to the Agency for global media, and this
undermines our efforts to help our allies and our own self-
interests to slow the spread of these far-right, anti-
democratic ideologies that threaten our basic freedoms.
How would USAID, how are you going to continue to support
these independent media in countries like Hungary, Poland,
Turkey, if you are deprioritizing tools that are proven to be
effective for decades?
Mr. Barsa. Well certainly one of the things I am very proud
of at USAID is our efforts on countering malign, criminal
influence, for example, which basically rests on four pillars
to focus on democracy and rule of law, independent media,
energy independence, and economic diversification. Through our
efforts, we have been able to turn the tide on Russian
disinformation, for example.
For example, in Georgia, in April, Facebook credited
USAID's local implementing partner for the removal of over 500
pages, 100 Facebook accounts, and 120 groups which were created
maliciously by the Kremlin to, you know, to sow false
narratives. In Serbia, we built partners' skills in fact-
checking and debunking false narratives to expose Kremlin
information, and I keep going on with other examples.
So we are very proud of our efforts to bring light to
efforts not just by the Kremlin, but by the Chinese Communist
Party as well.
Mr. Trone. Well if we do not use things like Radio Free
Europe, we cannot get out the true facts and we do not have to
spend all of our time debunking the bad facts.
Let's talk a second about highlighting the importance of
countering malign Kremlin influences throughout Europe and
Eurasia, yet your budget request seriously reduces the capacity
building and anti-corruption programs. So how is USAID going to
counter these Russian maligned influences, and how would
programming be impacted if these reductions are all enacted?
Mr. Barsa. Certainly Congressman, as stated before, the
budget you see before you is the product of a long process of
difficult decisions about how to allocate scarce resources. So
certainly our work in fighting corruption, not just in Europe
but throughout the world, remains a critical part of all of our
programming.
Mr. Trone. Syria, Iraq, enormous amount of disruption in
infrastructure and population displacement. The Trump
Administration is trying to encourage increased foreign
governments to put investment in these areas to help them
recover. But the question is: will the U.S. continue to invest
more, and what foreign donors have actually stepped up and been
forthcoming?
Mr. Barsa. In terms of actual dollar figures by other
donors, I have to get back with you the questions for the
record or later on to brief you as to who has contributed what.
But certainly, just most recently on June 30th, Ambassador
Jeffrey, the Special Representative for Syria, announced nearly
$700 million in U.S. Government humanitarian funding. And
certainly this included $368 million in USAID funding for food
and non-food aid inside Syria to meet the needs of the region.
But in terms of actual dollar amounts contributed by other
partners, I will have to get back with you and your staff later
on for that--with that information.
Mr. Trone. What other partners have contributed? Forget the
dollar amounts.
Mr. Barsa. I am sorry, sir. You broke up. Could you repeat
the question?
Mr. Trone. Name what other partners have contributed and
skip the dollar amounts.
Mr. Barsa. I would have to get back with you. I think I
know the answer here, but I do not have those in front of me. I
certainly do not want to give you incorrect information, but I
would like to followup with you on that one.
Mr. Trone. That would be great. And what risks do you see
of underinvesting? What is going to happen if we do not get
this right?
Mr. Barsa. Well the short answer is human suffering is
going to continue. So that is why we are so desirous in Syria
and certainly inside Venezuela, when we see human suffering we
certainly hope for our ability to get humanitarian assistance
into needy populations in a free, equitable manner. So that is
why, you know, we value every taxpayer dollar appropriated to
us, and we want to ensure that it is spent wisely getting to
the people in need. And we are proud to say we have those
structures in place to do just that.
Mr. Trone. Well thank you, Mr. Barsa. I yield back.
Mr. Engel. The gentleman yields back. As you can hear,
there is a vote going on, on the floor. We want to thank all
the members for their questions.
Mr. Barsa, thank you for being here today. And the
Committee on Foreign Affairs stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD FROM REPRESENTATIVE CONNOLLY
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]