[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ADDRESSING ROOT CAUSES OF MIGRATION FROM CENTRAL AMERICA THROUGH
PRIVATE INVESTMENT: PROGRESS IN VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS CALL TO ACTION
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
WESTERN HEMISPHERE, CIVILIAN SECURITY,
MIGRATION AND INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC POLICY,
ALONG WITH
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT,
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, AND GLOBAL CORPORATE SOCIAL IMPACT,
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JUNE 22, 2022
__________
Serial No. 117-130
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
48-399PDF
WASHINGTON : 2022
Available: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://docs.house.gov,
or http://www.govinfo.gov
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York, Chairman
BRAD SHERMAN, California MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas, Ranking
ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey Member
GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
KAREN BASS, California SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts DARRELL ISSA, California
DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
AMI BERA, California LEE ZELDIN, New York
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas ANN WAGNER, Missouri
DINA TITUS, Nevada BRIAN MAST, Florida
TED LIEU, California BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania KEN BUCK, Colorado
DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota MARK GREEN, Tennessee
COLIN ALLRED, Texas ANDY BARR, Kentucky
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan GREG STEUBE, Florida
ABIGAIL SPANBERGER, Virginia DAN MEUSER, Pennsylvania
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas
TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey PETER MEIJER, Michigan
ANDY KIM, New Jersey NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York
SARA JACOBS, California RONNY JACKSON, Texas
KATHY MANNING, North Carolina YOUNG KIM, California
JIM COSTA, California MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida
JUAN VARGAS, California JOE WILSON, South Carolina
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas
BRAD SCHNEIDER, Illinois
Jason Steinbaum, Staff Director
Brendan Shields, Republican Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Civilian Security, Migration and
International Economic Policy
ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey, Chairman
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas MARK GREEN, Tennessee, Ranking
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan Member
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas
JUAN VARGAS, California
AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas
MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida
------
Subcommittee on International Development, International Organizations
and Global Corporate Social Impact
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas, Chairman
SARA JACOBS, California NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York,
BRAD SHERMAN, California Ranking Member
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
ANDY KIM, New Jersey
CHRISTOPHER SMITH, New Jersey
DARRELL ISSA, California
LEE ZELDIN, New York
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
De Sola, Ms. Celina, Co-founder and President, Glasswing
International.................................................. 11
Fantini-Porter, Mr. Jonathan, Co-founder and Executive Director,
Partnership for Central America................................ 17
Farnsworth, Mr. Eric, Vice President, Washington Office, Council
of the Americas and the Americas............................... 23
APPENDIX
Hearing Notice................................................... 44
Hearing Minutes.................................................. 45
Hearing Attendance............................................... 46
OPENING STATEMENT
Opening statement submitted for the record from Chairman Sires... 48
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Responses to questions submitted for the record.................. 52
ADDRESSING ROOT CAUSES OF MIGRATION FROM CENTRAL AMERICA THROUGH
PRIVATE INVESTMENT: PROGRESS IN VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS CALL TO ACTION
Wednesday, June 22, 2022
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on International Development,
International Organizations, and Global Corporate
Social Impact,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC,
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m., in
room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Albio Sires
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Sires. Hello? I can proceed? Okay.
Good morning, everyone. Thank you to our witnesses for
being here today. This hearing entitled, ``Addressing Root
Causes of Migration Through Private Investments Progress in the
Vice President's Call to Action'' 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 materials, 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 mentioned address or contact
subcommittee staff.
As a reminder to members joining 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 H. Res. 8 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.
Good morning, everyone, and thank you to our witnesses for
testifying before our committee today. I would like to thank
Chairman Castro for his leadership on regional issues and for
joining me in holding this hearing. Just over a year ago, Vice
President Harris launched a call to action to support economic
development in the Northern Triangle. This initiative, which
leverages the strength of the private sector, is part of the
Biden Administration's strategy to address root causes of
migration from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.
This focuses on connecting business with U.S. Government
partners, such as the U.S. Agency for International Development
and the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, as
well as international organizations and government officials
from the region.
Through these public-private partnerships, the call to
action seeks to ensure sustainable and effective progress that
builds on past lessons to address focused areas that often
serve as push factors for migrations.
Today's hearing is timely. Earlier this month at the Ninth
Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles, stakeholders from
various sectors came together to discuss policy issues and
collaborate on new and continuing challenges facing the
Americas.
The focus of the summit was building a sustainable,
resilient, and equitable future, a topic that holds particular
importance in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which revealed
the weaknesses in our regional systems. Many conversations
centered on how to improve our hemispheric economy and invest
in ways that improve overall quality of life, while building
more resilient supply chains and confronting systemic
challenges that have far-reaching consequences.
As we have seen over the past few decades, issues that
originate in one part of our hemisphere rarely stay there. The
rise in irregular migration is a direct consequence of these
underlying issues. Throughout my time in Congress and my time
as chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, I have
worked with colleagues on both parties, as well as multiple
Administrations, foreign governments, and other stakeholders to
address the root causes of migration from Central America.
The hundreds of thousands of Salvadorians, Guatemalans, and
Hondurans who embark on the dangerous journey toward our
southern border are increasingly driven by desperation and
fear. Most of those making the journey know that the trip is
dangerous and being granted admission to the United States is
unlikely.
But it remains the better option compared to the risks
present in their home countries. El Salvador, Guatemala, and
Honduras are all struggling with the legacy of inequality and
widespread poverty, and economic reforms have not led to
drastically improved living conditions for many in the region.
Population projections for all three countries show an
expected growth of working aged individuals in the coming years
as 36 percent of Salvadorians, 42 percent of Hondurans, and 45
percent of Guatemalans are currently under the age of 20.
However, as these individuals enter the work force, the lack of
stable economic opportunities will contribute to economic
hardship and leave many individuals without a means to provide
for themselves or their families.
Climate change is deepening the precarious socioeconomic
situation as those in poverty are also the most vulnerable to
the impacts of climate crisis. These are complicated,
multifaceted challenges that push people to leave their homes.
We will not be able to solve them quickly or without
collaboration across various sectors. Long-term development
requires a sustained investment from more than just the U.S.
Government and other international bodies.
Businesses and nonprofits are and will continue to be
important partners. Private investment and business development
in the region will play a key role in increasing economic
opportunities and improving overall quality of life. I am
grateful that the Biden Administration's strategy not only
includes such collaboration, but seeks to mobilize private
sector and investment.
Vice President Harris' dedication in addressing the root
causes of migration is commendable and we have seen impressive
pledges in response to her call to action. Two weeks ago, Vice
President Harris announced more than $1.9 billion in new
private sector commitments to create economic opportunity in
the Northern Triangle. 40 companies and organizations have
announced major commitments since the launch bringing the total
amount to more than $3.2 billion.
It is important to emphasize that these commitments are not
charity. These are major corporate employers indicating that
they have faith in the future of Central America. We want to
create the conditions for sustainable, equitable economic
growth in the Northern Triangle. In order to do so, we must
ensure that these commitments are executed in a manner that
delivers capital, logistical coordination, and quality jobs for
these countries.
Additionally, we must ensure that there are mechanisms in
place to counter corruption while protecting and supporting
community economies, marginalized populations and workers so
that the short-term gains do not create new challenges and push
factors for migration.
Our witnesses today are uniquely qualified to testify on
public-private collaboration on development initiatives, the
opportunities as well as challenges in the region and how we
can best support efforts that raise up vulnerable populations
and reduce the push factors of migration.
Although we cannot expect any Administration or business
investment in the Northern Triangle to reap immediate gains, it
is important that we regularly review progress made. Today's
hearing presents us with the opportunity to work together
across party and sector to examine the advancements of the Vice
President's call to action and the role that private investment
can have as part of our response to the root causes of
migration from Central America.
Thank you, again, for coming and for what I hope will be an
extremely productive hearing.
I will now recognize Ranking Member Green for opening
remarks.
Mr. Green. Thank you, Chairman Sires and Chairman Castro
and Ranking Member Malliotakis for holding this joint hearing
and I want to thank our witnesses for being here today. First,
I would like to take a moment to highlight a matter that is
near and dear to my heart, the unlawful detention of Tennessee
resident Matthew Heath.
For almost 2 years, this U.S. marine veteran has been held
hostage in Venezuela. As a result of his mistreatment and
torture by the socialist Maduro regime, he actually attempted
to take his own life this weekend. I am praying for his health
and I urge President Biden to do all possible to bring Matthew
home.
Ever since the Biden Administration enacted its open
borders agenda, we have seen a surge in illegal migration at
our southern border. Under President Biden, border encounters
continue shattering records. Last month alone illegal border
crossings hit a record high of over 239,000 encounters and this
does not count the people who go around CBP.
Watering down the migrant protection protocols, threatening
to end Title 42 expulsions, and limiting border wall
construction amounts to increasing the pull factors leading to
skyrocketing illegal migration. We have seen heartbreaking
stories in the media of the real life consequences of these
reckless policies, border patrol agents rescuing drowning
children in the Rio ground, sexual assaults of women and
children by traffickers, and forcible recruitment of migrants
into crime to say nothing of the fentanyl crisis and the
hundreds, thousands of Americans who have died to overdose.
While the Biden Administration refuses to address illegal
immigrations full factors, such as our broken immigration
system, there is an opportunity for bipartisan solutions to
some of the push factors. One of these push factors is the lack
of economic opportunity in migrants' countries of origins.
This hearing on private investment provides an excellent
opportunity to address this critical issue and to jump start
our joint efforts with our western hemisphere counterparts to
create more jobs for their citizens and investment
opportunities for American companies.
However, there has been a growing sense of hostility by
Latin America governments toward the private sector, which is
the engine of job creation. We have seen Mexico discriminating
against the American private sector, Honduras passed a bill to
repeal its special economic zones, and others threaten to
nationalize key sectors like mining.
This has got to change. If countries want to create more
jobs, they must create business friendly environments. Through
U.S. leadership, I am hopeful that we can reverse some of these
unfortunate developments. I am willing to work with any
government in the western hemisphere that respects the rule of
law and market driven models of economic growth. These are the
nations that will attract private investment, create long-term
sustainable jobs for their citizens.
One of the best ways to help increase economic
opportunities for our southern neighbors is through near
shoring. According to estimates by the Inter-American
Development Bank, IDB, near shoring could add an annual 78
billion in additional exports of goods and services in Latin
America and the Caribbean in the near and midterm.
To put this into perspective, in 2020, Guatemala's GDP was
estimated to be roughly 77.6 billion. Such a huge influx of
capital from nearshoring would mean massive growth if
concentrated in smaller countries like Guatemala.
The IDB recommends countries focus on the three ``I''
strategy--investment, infrastructure, and integration.
Investment meaning creating a business friendly environment,
not scaring companies away with hostile rhetoric of
nationalization. Infrastructure means building and repairing
the roads, bridges, seaports, airports, and energy grids
necessary for business to flourish. And integration, of course,
involves increasing and harmonizing trade agreements to reduce
the regulatory patchwork that currently exists between
countries.
My bill, the Western Hemisphere Nearshoring Act, co-led by
Chairman Sires assisted in the writing by members of the State
Department, people from both sides of the aisle, addresses all
of the three I's. It addresses investment through ultra low
interest DFC loans while urging countries to reduce
bureaucratic red tape, streamline permitting, and embrace free
market principles.
It helps address infrastructure by providing technical
assistance for energy grids and streamlining the application
process for nuclear reactors. And it addresses integration by
directing U.S. trade representative to obtain trade agreements
with our western hemisphere allies with whom we do not
currently have trade agreements.
The bill is a win-win-win. It makes our supply chain less
vulnerable to Communist China, it will create more jobs and
economic growth for Latin America and the Caribbean, and as
opportunities increase in the western hemisphere, the
nearshoring of manufacturing will decrease migration to the
United States southern border.
I urge all of my colleagues to cosponsor this bipartisan,
common sense bill. And I hope Chairman Meeks will schedule it
for a full committee markup soon. Private investment is the key
to addressing the lack of economic opportunity in many Latin
America and Caribbean countries.
If governments embrace the rule of law, respect human
rights, and private property, and if Democrats and Republicans
can work together, we can tackle one of the most significant
push factors to the surging migration at our southern border.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield.
Mr. Sires. Thank you, Ranking Member. I will now recognize
Chair Castro for his opening remarks.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman Sires. And good morning,
everybody. I am glad to be co-chairing this important meeting
with Congressman and Chairman Sires. There is no sugar coating
that we are at a crucial moment in our hemisphere's history.
Migration in the Americas has risen dramatically over the
past decade due to deteriorating economic and humanitarian
conditions and increased violence, crime, and corruption. The
effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the two back-to-back
hurricanes in 2020 have only worsened already dire situations
in Central America.
U.S. Government agencies reported encountering more than 1
million migrants along the U.S.-Mexico border in 2021 with most
arrivals coming from Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, and El
Salvador. Data shows that conditions on the ground are not
improving and continue to drive the desire to migrate. The
World Justice Project reports that almost half of the Hondurans
who want--that almost half of Hondurans want to migrate to
another country with 18 percent having active plans to do so
within the next year.
This urgency to migrate is also high in El Salvador and
Guatemala. While one of the main motivations for migration
remains economic opportunity, the deterioration of the rule of
law has given many no choice but to flee with the number of
migrants encountered at the border from Venezuela, Nicaragua,
Haiti, and Cuba increasing in recent months.
These trends emphasize the important need to not only
increase economic opportunity as a key root cause, but to also
address the insufficient systems and institutions that have
failed to provide protection and prosperity to millions in the
region and have actively discriminated against the most
vulnerable.
Therefore, a holistic inclusive approach to migration is
needed. Before moving on to today's topic of conversation, the
Vice President's call to action, I want to quickly note that
the United States border policy must also work in complement
with our efforts to address root causes of migration. Harmful
immigration policies such as Title 42 and the remain in Mexico
program have failed in deterring migration flows and instead
have fueled greater violence and xenophobic rhetoric.
As we expand our international development work in Central
America, private sector partnership's could play a strong role
in expanding economic opportunities in the region. At the same
time, our relationship and the relationship of American
corporations to the people of these nations must also be fair,
just, and equitable.
In May 2021, Vice President Kamala Harris announced the
call to action which helped launch the public-private
partnership for Central America. This collaboration provides an
innovative approach with the potential to improve economic
conditions and contribute to overall stability in the region.
These commitments by 40 companies totaling $3.2 billion to
address root causes of migration are an important start, but we
must make sure that they result in sustainable impact and
inclusive economic growth.
In making these investments, I believe that we should not
only strive to bring more workers into the formal economy and
increase access to digital financing, but we must also ensure
that everyone, especially the vulnerable and often
disenfranchised, are able to benefit from such investments.
This is why I hope that any private investment is paired
with strong, anticorruption measures, increased wages, and
protections in labor and environmental rights.
Furthermore, to truly succeed, this partnership in our
government must engage with local actors. The Biden
Administration's focus on addressing root causes of migration
through humanitarian and foreign assistance is important piece
of the solution, but so is engaging with local and national
actors.
I worked with my colleagues on HFAC and appropriations to
secure funding for our foreign assistance programs and, most
importantly, for our locally led development efforts, including
Centroamerica Local, a new and important USAID initiative to
address root causes of migration.
I was also glad to attend the Summit of the Americas
earlier this month and to continue my work with civil society
to elevate local voices and include key provisions in the
Declaration of Migration and Protection.
We already know that partnering with local actors makes
assistance more effective, more sustainable, and more
equitable. The impact of the commitments by members of the Vice
President's call to action can and will be strengthened when
local actors, including civil society organizations,
entrepreneurs, indigenous communities and others, are included
in investment projects from the beginning.
Private sector investment alone will not stem migratory
flows. As I have always said, the United States international
development capabilities include a strong coordination between
entities like USAID, DFC, and the State Department, as well as
NGO's and the private sector. Therefore, coordination among
these entities is not only beneficial, but essential to make a
difference.
I look forward to hearing from the witnesses on their work
and how Congress and the U.S. Government can ensure our
investments are creating long-lasting change. My hope is that
this hearing serves not as a one-off conversation, but as a
starting point for continued engagement on the impact and
results of this public-private partnership.
And with that, I yield back to Chairman Sires.
Mr. Sires. Thank you. I will now recognize Ranking Member
Malliotakis for her opening remarks.
Ms. Malliotakis. Thank you. First, I want to comment on the
name of this hearing: Progress in Vice President Harris' call
to action. I think a better name for this hearing would be
regress, the failure, the utter incompetence.
People want to know why there is a problem at our border,
just look at the policies of this Administration. They stopped
the construction of the border wall. They stopped the Remain in
Mexico policy that helped stem the flow and bring some order to
the process. They attempted to end Title 42. And even with
court orders, I am not sure that they are even following the
law.
In April 2021, when our border Czar, Vice President Harris,
announced $310 million in increase assistance to the Northern
Triangle and Central America, what has happened since? It has
only gotten worse. In April 2021, when she made this
announcement, there were 178,622 crossings. This past month
May, 239,416. That is the highest ever recorded and about a 35
percent increase since when she became the Border Czar.
We are on pace to break 2 million people illegally entering
into our country this fiscal year. That is more than her home
city of San Francisco and the President's home State of
Delaware combined. This does not even include the gotaways,
which is estimated to be at least hundreds of thousands of
individuals.
What is happening at our border? Well, 15 individuals on
the terror watch list just in the month of May, in addition
to--that is a record-breaking number as well. That brings the
total to 50 since October at a time when we are facing threats
from Russia, from China, from Iran. You had an Iraqi man busted
by Federal agents who attempted to smuggle four ISIS-linked
individuals across our border to kill the former President of
the United States, George W. Bush.
Fentanyl is streaming over our border. The DEA, CBP, they
will tell you, tons of fentanyl streaming over our border and
it is that, not COVID, that is the No. 1 killer of Americans 18
to 45 years old. Look at these headlines from CBS News.
``Police find fentanyl pill press in Mexican town near U.S.
border.'' CBS, ``Border agents arrest woman smuggling fentanyl
to Texas.'' New York Post, ``Mexican cartels exploiting border
chaos to smuggle fentanyl into the U.S.'' ABC News, ``The
fentanyl trip: How the drug is coming to America,'' and CBP's
own press release, over a 48-hour period, ``San Diego U.S.
Border Patrol agents seized over 1.5 million worth of
narcotics.'' That was this month. On June 1st that press
release.
So I ask: Why is this Administration continue to put the
drug cartels ahead of the American people? That is the question
that we should be asking at this hearing.
In April, a Texas National Guardsmen Bishop Evans drowned
trying to save two migrants, who--guess what--turned out to be
drug traffickers. So I truly feel that that is what we should
be focusing on in this hearing. We could talk about root
causes, why people are coming.
The question is, why do we allow drug trafficking, human
trafficking, child trafficking to be committed at our southern
border? I went to the border last year and if you see these
children, they are crying. They do not want to be separated
from their parents and come here alone. Who knows what their
future is here if it is into a sex trafficking ring? We know
what is occurring. Talk to law enforcement about the sex
trafficking, the child trafficking that is happening.
I do not know how you find that to be compassionate to the
people. It is not about just a better life like my parents came
here as immigrants. These children, these people, they are
being exploited. And the United States of America is allowing
it to happen, and it has to end. And that is what we should be
talking about today and I hope somebody actually address that
issue. Thank you.
And I yield back.
Mr. Sires. Thank you for your comments.
I will now introduce our witness Ms. Celina de Sola,
cofounder and President of Glasswing International. Ms. Celina
de Sola is cofounder and President of Glasswing International,
a Salvadoran organization that addresses the root causes and
consequences of poverty and violence through public education,
health, and community empowerment in ten countries in Latin
America and the Caribbean.
Ms. de Sola has over 25 years of experience in
international development and social change. Before Glasswing,
she was a crisis interventionist for Latino immigrants in the
U.S., worked as a consultant for international organizations
and subsequently spent 6 years leading responses to complex
humanitarian crises in countries such as Liberia, Sudan,
Afghanistan, Iraq, and Indonesia.
Ms. de Sola, we welcome you to the hearing. I ask the
witnesses to please limit your testimony to 5 minutes and
without objection, your prepared written statements will be
made part of the record. Ms. de Sola, you are recognized for
your testimony.
STATEMENT OF CELINA DE SOLA, CO-FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT,
GLASSWING INTERNATIONAL
Ms. de Sola. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to be
here today, Mr. Chairman. I will be summarizing my written
statement.
I am Celina de Sola, co-founder and President of Glasswing
and we specialize in positive youth development and leadership,
social/emotional learning, economic opportunities,
volunteering, and mental health. We work with young people
facing extreme adversity. Exposure to violence, trauma, stigma,
and a lack of opportunity, yet most of the young people we work
with want to be able to succeed and thrive in their communities
and countries.
For 15 years, we have been forging cross-sector
partnerships to achieve the sustained impact and our
partnerships have included both multi-national and Central
American corporations. USAID support through the global
development alliance has actually been key in engaging and
leveraging additional corporate funding.
For example, we have partnered with Hanes brands for 12
years to provide students with safe spaces and life skills
development in the community surrounding Hanes' operations, and
hundreds of their employees volunteer. We have worked with Citi
Foundation since 2011 developing students' life skills,
financial, entrepreneurial capabilities.
And we have worked with Dutch Brothers Coffee from Oregon,
which has supported our work with rural coffee producing
communities to improve access to healthcare, English learning,
violence prevention, and mental health.
Last year, the Howard G. Buffett Foundation and Glasswing
launched the Central American Youth Corps with an initial
investment of $13.2 million provided exclusively by the
foundation. This initiative is creating conditions for young
people to see opportunity and a desirable future in their home
communities.
This year, USAID is also supporting this service corps
initiative with funding that will enable Glasswing to lay the
ground work for sustainable, national use service corps in the
region. Together with the other technical assistance partners,
such as Peace Corps, YouthBuild, City Year, and the Inter-
American Foundation on the advisory council I am proud to
serve.
The IAF also actively collaborates with the private sector,
corporate and philanthropic, and joint funding initiatives.
Vice President Harris' call to action is a crucial step in
mobilizing the private sector to create more opportunities for
Central American youth as part of a broader strategy to address
root causes.
The key will be to turn these commitments into practical
and impactful actions that provide opportunities for those who
need it most. An ideal vehicle to do this is through the
Central American Service Corps Initiative, which builds on the
initiative that Glasswing launched with the Howard G. Buffett
Foundation last year. The partnership for Central America is
also critical in this collaborative effort, mobilizing dozens
of businesses from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and the
U.S. who have already pledged to support this initiative.
Working closely with local organizations and communities to
channel these investments will help ensure that opportunities
are provided for the young people that face the most adversity
and are thus most at risk.
At Glasswing we founded one of the most important aspects
of assessing the progress of any effort is understanding the
progress does take time. Vice President Harris' call to action
has undoubtedly generated momentum and much needed private
sector commitments. And I believe that if these commitments are
directly responsive to the needs and priorities of youth facing
adversity and if they are sustained over time, they will, in
general, hope and provide opportunities.
I also believe that civil society organizations can help
build those bridges between young people, education
employability program, and employers. At the end of the day,
more jobs do not necessarily mean more opportunities for
everyone, but Glasswing and local organizations can play
critical role in helping bridge the gaps between the
expectations and needs of both businesses and young people.
The following are our recommendations on how the U.S.
Government can capitalize on the current momentum from Vice
President Harris' call to action. The Central America Service
Corps presents an ideal opportunity to engage the private
sector in addressing the root causes by providing social and
economic inclusion opportunities that are tiered and
differentiated for different populations.
More inclusive hiring practices could also help avoid
discrimination based on educational level or where young people
live. Working with the whole ecosystem, including youth
themselves, we can provide or create the national architecture
of opportunities for young people that have historically been
excluded.
And finally, companies should be motivated and incentivized
to engage with local Central Americans civil society
organizations as partners. As USAID administrator Samantha
Powell recently said, shifting to a model of locally led
development means ceding power over decisionmaking to those who
know their problems best.
Thank you very much, and I look forward to any questions
you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. de Sola follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Sires. Jonathan Fantini-Porter is co-founder and
executive director of the Partnership for Central America. The
partnership is the coordinating party of the White House
public-private partnership launched by Vice President Harris in
Mayof 2021. Jonathan previously served as an associate partner
at McKinsey & Company, national security aide in the White
House, senior congressional aide in both chambers of the House,
and as chief of staff in the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security where he oversaw management of $6 billion budget and
22,000 personnel in 48 countries.
Jonathan serves on advisory bodies to the U.N. Refugee
Agency's U.S. entity and the World Economic Forum and Amnesty
International. He is a consulting fellow at the London-based
International Institute for Strategic Studies and graduate of
the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and Georgetown
University. Mr. Fantini-Porter, we welcome you to the hearing.
STATEMENT OF JONATHAN FANTINI-PORTER, CO-FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, PARTNERSHIP FOR CENTRAL AMERICA
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Chairman Castro, Chairman Sires,
Ranking Members Malliotakis and Green, and members of the
committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the role of
private sector investments in addressing the root causes of
migration from Central America and progress in Vice President
Harris' call to action.
I would like to begin by respectfully thanking both
subcommittees for your support of economic development efforts
around the world and in the context of this discussion, of
course, Central America. In particular, thank you, Chairman
Castro, for your leadership and Chairman Sires, Ranking Member
Green for your bipartisan action on nearshoring.
As the U.N. refugee agency has documented, the humanitarian
situation in Northern/Central America has worsened considerably
over the last 5 years. Refugees and asylum seekers from
Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador have left their homes for
a complex mix of factors. This is the region where nearly 30
percent live in extreme poverty, 50 percent of children suffer
from chronic malnutrition and widespread stunting, homicide
rates have been the highest in the world, and 2.1 million
individuals will be forced from their homes due to climate
disaster in coming years.
Partnership for Central America is an independent,
nongovernmental organization that was established in May 2021
to mobilize private and social sector investments to address
the structural factors contributing to these humanitarian
challenges. Central to our work, PCA is advancing the call to
action for Central America announced by Vice President Harris
in partnership with the U.S. Department of State and U.S.
Agency for International Development.
Since our launch 12 months ago, in support of the call to
action, PCA has helped secure commitments of more than $3.2
billion that we estimate will aid 21.2 million people across
the region through digital access, financial inclusion,
agricultural employment, and new manufacturing and textile
jobs. Commitments include banking nearly 12 million people,
digital inclusion for more than 4 million, manufacturing and
textile commitments to create a nearshore jobs, and support
small businesses in both Central America and the United States.
And to train 250,000 youth entrepreneurs and small business
owners in core skills to support labor productivity and work
force development.
In our first year, these commitments have served nearly 2.5
million people directly across Central America, including
internet access for 1.96 million families, banking 310,000
individuals, new agricultural and production sourcing from
Honduras and El Salvador, and nearly $100 million in new
investments across agricultural production.
In just one illustration of our impact, children from a
rural and indigenous community of more than 4,000 Comayagua,
Honduras are now able to access the internet which connects
these families to the global economy and creates immeasurable
potential for their lives.
Looking forward, we are conscious of the many challenges
that lay ahead in achieving our shared vision. Successful
requires sustained attention, adequate resources, political
will across governments, strong and inclusive economic growth
to go with strengthened governance and anticorruption and
robust metrics and evaluation practices.
As a son of a refugee who came to this country from Latin
America, I am grateful for this committee's commitment to the
protection of the most vulnerable families in our society,
including those in Central America. As an entirely nonpartisan
effort, we are focused on outcomes that grow economic
opportunities and improve lives.
I look forward to collaborating closely with this committee
going forward to deliver our shared vision and I look forward
to answering your questions this morning.
Thank you very much, Chairman, thank you, Ranking Members,
thank you members of the committee.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fantini-Porter follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Sires. Mr. Eric Farnsworth, Vice President of the
Washington office of the Council of the Americas and the
Americas Society. Mr. Eric Farnsworth is Vice President of the
Washington, DC. office of the Council of the Americas and the
America Society.
In government, Mr. Farnsworth has served at the White
House, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the State
Department, working on both conflict reconstruction in Panama
and Central America, NAFTA, and related negotiations, and
hemispheric policy development, coordination, and
implementation during the Clinton Administration.
He also served at the U.S. consulate in Johannesburg, South
Africa. Prior to his current position, Mr. Farnsworth was
managing director of the Manatt Jones Global Strategies and
previously worked at Bristol-Myers Squibb and with U.S. Senator
Sam Nunn and Congressman John Edward Porter.
Mr. Farnsworth, we welcome you to the hearing.I ask the
witnesses to please limit your testimony to 5 minutes. Without
objection, your prepared statements written will be made part
of the record.
Mr. Farnsworth, you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF ERIC FARNSWORTH, VICE PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON
OFFICE, COUNCIL OF THE AMERICAS AND THE AMERICAS
Mr. Farnsworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman--Mr. Chairmen,
Ranking Members, members, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today.
Successive U.S. Administrations have understood for many
years that Central America requires investment, both domestic
and foreign, and lots of it to sustain a positive economic,
social, and democratic trajectory. An investment requires
expanded trade, contributing to job creation. Without the
promise of good jobs and the formal economy and the education
and training to prepare for such jobs, those with uncertain
prospects might be tempted by unpalatable options including
criminal actions, drug trafficking, and gang activities or,
alternatively, they might choose to migrate seeking a better
life in the United States or elsewhere.
Congress recognized this connection and passed the CAFTA-DR
trade agreement in 2005, but, unfortunately, many in Central
America believed that CAFTA-DR was the finish line. Rather,
CAFTA-DR was a starting line, a concrete means to compete in
the global economy without guaranteeing success.
The regional business climate required attention and focus
which was not always in evidence, neither did assistance
programs effectively address these issues, development
accordingly suffered.
Exogenous factors have also contributed to regional under
development, of course. Natural disasters, including hurricanes
and the manmade devastation of drug trafficking, which is
facilitated by the regime in Venezuela, and exacerbated by
weapons trafficking from the United States, have weakened
regional economies and social conditions.
Crime and criminal behavior have ballooned and threatened
to overwhelm State institutions and security in country after
country. Corruption is pervasive. COVID hit the region hard.
Conversely, the U.S. economy has been a job creating machine
over the past 2 years and we are now at full employment with
many employers reporting difficulties in hiring qualified
workers.
Coupled with stagnant regional economies, uncertain job
prospects, and high crime and social deterioration in Central
America, it should be no surprise that a vibrant U.S. labor
market and also perceptions of a more permissive U.S. migration
provisions and border enforcement would draw new flows of
migrants north, which is exactly what we have witnessed.
The Biden Administration recognizes these persistent long
running trends and seeks to address irregular migrations in the
United States by focusing on the root causes of migration,
including economic stagnation, lack of jobs in the formal
economy that come with State protections and benefits, disaster
recovery, lawlessness, and criminal abuse, and social
challenges.
The Vice President has brought high level attention to
these issues having traveled twice to Central America in the
past year seeking to encourage international investment in the
region. She has also announced several initiatives most
recently at the Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles where I
also attended, highlighting impressive private sector
commitments to the Northern Triangle. That is all to the good
in my view.
But as Chairman Sires has indicated in this hearing
already, full implementation of commitments is critical as is
the sustainability of investments over time, particularly given
the mixed messages that the private sector has otherwise been
receiving about the suitability of investing in the Northern
Triangle.
The expressed reluctance to work with governments and
private sector representatives in the Northern Triangle, which
are the countries, of course, of El Salvador, Guatemala, and
Honduras resulting from allegations of gross corruption and
antidemocratic behavior has been widely acknowledged.
These are complex issues, no doubt, but the signals to
investors are muddled. So I would propose that we need a
paradigm shift. To change behavior, we should change the
incentives. We should change the game.
We need to onboard local constituencies as allies using
trade as the action force and element of the conversation. The
key which is consistent with the Administration's broader
policy approach toward Latin America and the Caribbean is to
integrate Northern Triangle and Caribbean base of nations fully
within the North American supply chains as Mr. Ranking Member
Green has already indicated.
Here is how to do it. With our USMCA partners, we should
invite CAFTA-DR countries to join the USMCA, which is a
cutting-edge agreement which was passed overwhelming on a
bipartisan and bicameral basis, but negotiate the terms of a
cession on a country by country basis rather than seeking to
merge CAFTA-DR as a block into USMCA.
Countries that are ready to go early, such as Costa Rica
and the Dominican Republic can join quickly. Others such as
those in the Northern Triangle would be welcomed to join once
they proved the ability to meet the obligations of membership.
Nicaragua, of course, would not be welcome until returning to
the democratic path.
Immediately, this would create a race to the top across the
region. Countries facing exclusion from the agreement would be
motivated to take on necessary reforms and meet existing
obligations, including improved rule of law. These would be
demanded by internal constituencies including the domestic
private sector which is now reluctant to participate in some
ways because of the impression that everybodyis corrupt.
But they would then become allies in the fight against
corruption, which, because they would otherwise be meaningfully
disadvantaged by becoming less competitive with regional peers.
Meantime, separate and apart from the United States, to
make themselves more attractive to investors, there is a lot
that the Northern Triangle nations really can be doing on their
own to take steps to make themselves more competitive in a
global economy and, frankly, the United States can help in this
effort, including our assistance programs toward business
facilitation and business climate reforms which, in my view, we
should be doing.
So Mr. Chairman, Ranking Members, I want to thank you again
for the opportunity to testify before you and I look forward to
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Farnsworth follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Sires. Thank you very much. We will now go into
questions. I will start with asking questions to our witnesses
today. My first question is to all the witnesses today. You
know, we see some programs that are successful, we see others
that are not successful, and the biggest problem that I find
over the years serving on this committee is sustaining progress
and momentum with some of these programs in the future because
it seems that one Administration takes over and they decide to
go a different way.
I am not just talking about the Administration in this
country, but I am also talking about Administrations in some of
these countries. And part of the problem is, how do we sustain
the most successful programs that we have when people want to
go in a different direction? Can anybody respond to that?
I guess I'll have to call. Celina, please.
Ms. de Sola. Thank you for your question. I think this
underscores the need for partnerships and I think that needs to
involve local businesses as well and local actors, because that
way you also create a demand for these programs and support for
these programs at a local level and that way that can--I mean,
we have worked across multiple Administrations from different
parties in a lot of these--most of these countries, all three
of them actually.
So I do think that is critical and it is also critical to
really involve communities, because they can keep asking their
local government to continue or the partners to continue, the
businesses to continue. So I really want to underscore the
importance for cross-sector partnerships in assuring
sustainability and also just measurement of impact so we know
that things are working as well.
Thank you.
Mr. Sires. Mr. Fantini-Porter, can you please help us out
with this?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Certainly, Chairman. I would echo
Celina's point on local partnerships. It is critical and there
is no question about that. I would add to that that as we think
about this model, for example, of the partnerships for Central
America, this is an independent organization which serves
solely the purpose of social impact in the region and
mobilization of investments, coordination of that impact.
So I think your question is so key, Chairman, and that is,
how do we sustain this impact across parties, across
governments, across Administrations. And I think that is why
this partnership, which is so aptly named, serves such a
valuable, I would offer, purpose in this effort and that is an
independent organization that is helping to coordinate private,
public, and social sector organizations to support this social
impact effort.
Thank you.
Mr. Sires. Thank you. Mr. Farnsworth, can you help me with
that?
Mr. Farnsworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a really
tough question not just because, as you have indicated, U.S.
Administrations change, but local Administrations change, and
we go back and forth whether or not we want to cooperate with
them and, frankly, whether they want to cooperate with us. And
it is a two-way street for sure and sometimes we find that we
have so-called partners in the region that really do not want
to partner with us.
So it is a complication, but it takes me back to my points
in terms of institutionalizing the economic relationship
through trade.
Look we have a terrible relationship with Nicaragua right
now because Nicaragua has gone from democracy to dictatorship.
It is a brutal dictatorship, which, you know, all the human
rights abuses and various things that are going on there right
now and yet Nicaragua maintains membership in the CAFTA-DR. So
there is still an institutionality involved in the U.S.
relationship with even a brutal dictatorship like Nicaragua. If
we want to sustain these relationships with the Northern
Triangle over time, my point is that we need to create the
incentive structure so that companies will be determined to
remain there on a sustainable basis no matter who the
government in power is. And unless that government is taking
affirmative actions, you know, against those companies that
they find it actually in their commercial interests to remain
there. I do not think we can do that without a greater
institutionalization of the relationship and linking those
companies and investments fully within the North America supply
chains.
I know that is only a partial answer, but I hope it is at
least part of the answer.
Mr. Sires. Well, as far as Nicaragua goes, there just seems
to be pulling away more and more from democracy and not dealing
with any of the Northern countries. I mean, they have--60
Minutes did a piece over the weekend, I think, on Nicaragua and
the people that are still in jail and some of the people do not
even know.
So how do you work with these people? How do you try to,
you know, assist the community in those places? And that is a
big problem because it is not that they--that we do not want to
work with them; it is that they do not want to work with us in
many instances like you just said, Mr. Farnsworth. So I
appreciate that.
I now recognize Ranking Member Green.
Mr. Green. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank you
for your bipartisanship. I really appreciate how you have
worked with me on particularly the Nearshoring Act. I was a
little disappointed that none of the Republicans got invited,
particularly myself, as the Western Hemisphere Ranking Member
invited to the Summit of the Americas. That was a little bit
disappointing.
You know, bipartisanship is something that is important. It
is what our country expects. We are not seeing it right now.
That is not what happened on the Nearshoring Act. We brought
that and you helped me work with us on that, and I really
appreciate you. But, you know, Speaker Pelosi's codel to the
summit was 100 percent Democrats and that is just, quite
frankly, unacceptable.
Question for Mr. Fantini-Porter. Recently the Vice
President, the U.S. State Department in partnership for Central
America announced private sector commitments of slightly more
than 3.2 billion.
Can you break that down? How much of that is actually
commitments that were already on the book and how much of that
3.2 billion is new since the announcement was made by the Vice
President? Thanks.
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Certainly, Ranking Member. I will say
that each and every one of the commitments that are made and
announced and have been since May 2021 are new commitments. So
these are new investments, new social impactful programs that
are being planned and deployed on the ground in Central
America. I will just say new programs focus on impact.
Mr. Green. So things like the--and Microsoft commitments,
those are all new since the announcement in May 2021?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. New commitments.
Mr. Green. Okay, Good. Thank you. Another question for you.
On pledger investments, can you kind of share with us how you
think they are going to alleviate U.S. border migration flows?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. I will say, Ranking Member Green, it
is--I very much respect the question. I will note that as we
think about this as an international development effort, which
this committee, of course, knows too well from all of the
efforts that have been deployed and led throughout the world as
an international development effort, it is a long-term effort.
And so as we are assessing metrics, we are assessing
metrics that align with the long-term international development
and economic development effort. I came from Homeland Security;
I spent many years there. I understand and very much respect
the metrics that are used when we think about enforcement, but
I focus as we think about this as an international development
effort on questions like how many families are being brought
into digital inclusion, how many families have been brought
into the formal economy through banking and our partners at
MasterCard and others.
So I would just offer, if I may, sir, that we are very much
focused on those long-term economic development efforts and
metrics as we are assessing this effort.
Mr. Green. I mean, I hear that, but the American people, a
good chunk of them, are losing patience on the flows and, you
know, if you look at--I know my colleague mentioned 2 million
measurable, if you do the other people that are sort of going
around, they call them getaways, whatever, it is about 3.3
million this year, right?
So if you look at the States in the United States, 21
States have fewer people in the populations than 3.3 million.
That means we are bringing in every year of this
Administration, another entire State, a moderate sized State.
And so saying, well, this is long-term, we are going to develop
metrics over time, the American people are losing their
patience with that, and just one caveat to you there.
Mr. Farnsworth, how should the U.S. leverage our U.S.-
Mexico relationship to promote investments in economic
opportunity in Central America?
Mr. Farnsworth. I think it is a great question and it is an
important question. By definition, the U.S. relationship with
Central America is going to touch on the U.S. relationship with
Mexico and Mexico is in Central America, just look at the map.
So you have got it.
But, you know, it is interesting here because this is one
area where the President of Mexico, with whom we have
differences, has nonetheless expressed a real desire for
partnership with the United States, which is to say development
not just in southern Mexico, but also development in Central
America, and it is his--one of his priorities. It is also an
area where we have expressed real interest for the migration
issue and others, and so there is a natural partnership here.
And, in fact, you have heard U.S. officials talk about it,
you have heard Mexican officials talk about it. I would like to
see a lot more concrete done on it, you know. Let's get beyond
the rhetoric and let's move to concrete action.
Mr. Green. Would you do me a favor and sort of share your
top five ideas on that with me in writing? I am running out of
time today. Because if you look at the press, the relations
with the U.S.--I mean, the President of Mexico are just--it
does not look good and I would love your top five ideas. So
send them to me in writing.
Mr. Farnsworth. I would be delighted. Thank you.
Mr. Green. Thank you. I yield.
Mr. Sires. [inaudible]--for 5 minutes.
Mr. Castro. I assume you called on me. I think you got
cutoff there a bit. Thank you, Chairman. It is great to host
this hearing. Thank you to our witnesses for being here, for
all of your work for being engaged so strongly on this issue.
I think that no matter where we fall on the political
spectrum in this country, I think we have a desire that people
in their own countries be able to live there safely, be able to
live there and prosper, hopefully be able to live there in a
Democratic nation that respects their rights. I also think,
conversely, that for the most part, people around the world
want to stay in their homes.
I do not think they want to trek a thousand miles with a
kid or two in tow and a dangerous path to try to come to the
United States really or any other country in the world. And so
I start from those two bases.
And so thank you for that work. I also think that it does
not do us any good to think of these people only as dangerous
people who are coming here to hurt people. When we do that,
first of all, we dehumanize them, but it is also not realistic.
All the numbers that we have seen show that immigrants in this
country actually commit crime at a lower rate than native-born
Americans.
And so it is dangerous for us to constantly paint these
people as just dangerous people who are coming here to hurt us.
For example, in 2019 I was in a Border Patrol facility in
Texas with 20 Cuban women who had migrated from Cuba to the
United States fleeing an oppressive situation in Cuba. I think
that those women and their stories, the reasons they were
leaving were similar to what you would have found of people
fleeing 40 years ago from Cuba or 50 years ago from Cuba,
except 40 years ago, the United States would have welcomed them
in and what changed in the intervening time is that wet foot,
dry foot ended. So the policy ended.
So now you had instead of these 20 women being welcomed to
the United States, they were being held in a small cell with
one toilet for 20 people, right?
And so I want to ask you about your work and how it is
going. Can you provide some examples in more detail on how the
partnership for Central America is coordinating with the State
Department, USAID, DFC, MCC, and other government entities? In
other words, we want this work to be well coordinated. I know
Representative Green expressed that there is a frustration. We
want our government agencies to work together to be
coordinated, for this effort to be successful. How is that work
coming?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Chairman, I think it is coming very
well, along very well. This sort of change does not happen as
we know without a systemic approach. There is just no question
about it. It requires a full coordination across sectors--
private, public, and social sector. And the public sector
inevitably, both in host countries as well as the U.S.
Government, is just a critical, critical partner to this.
So the relationship that we have with the State Department
and USAID is as lock step I would say in terms of our efforts
and we are, I will note, very sincerely an independent
organization, of course, but our relationship and our
coordination with the State Department/USAID on this effort has
been one I think of a role model for how efforts like this
could potentially be deployed. And that is an MOU with both of
those organizations, those entities, ongoing coordination when
it comes to the communications and the structuring of this
effort and how we build this effort and as we think about this
at the end of the day, the very focused impact of this effort
and that is where I think that coordination has been so key.
It is identifying how we--how we identify the individuals
that we are hoping to help in the region most effectively
across sectors. I will say that the relationship has been--I
will note, again, a model in many ways, I think, for how a
public, private, and social sector partnership can play out.
Mr. Castro. Well, thank you. I have one more question, but
just wanted to answer. I know my ranking member on my
subcommittee, Representative Malliotakis, asked an important
question about why we are focusing on this and not on some of
the other issues. And remember this is the Foreign Affairs
Committee. The Foreign Affairs Committee focuses on our
relations with other countries and how we can solve problems,
hopefully, together.
We have a whole Committee on Homeland Security that handles
our threats to our homeland and to the border. So as you know,
those hearings are quite frequent over in the Homeland Security
Committee on the issues that you discussed.
So let me ask one more question: How are PCA members
consulting with and including civil society organizations and
local communities to ensure these investments are effectively
addressing the issues being faced? And I only got about 15
seconds, so I will have to take most of it for the record.
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Absolutely. I will just say, this is
very much a public, private, and social sector effort,
Chairman, so social sector is fully involved. Whether it is
Accion or Care USA, two of the largest NGO's in this space,
they are integrated in this partnership just as much as any
public and private partner. We are a public, private, and
social sector effort, sir.
Mr. Castro. Thank you.
I yield back, Chairman.
Oh, I am fine. Thanks.
Mr. Sires. I recognize now Congresswoman Malliotakis.
Ms. Malliotakis. Thank you very much. And just to respond
to my chairman's comments, look there is no doubt that there
are very good people who are trying to enter this country to
achieve the American Dream, and there is a broken system.
But there is also people who are being exploited. They are
being taken advantage of. We went to the border. We saw a young
girl crying because she had been gang-raped along the journey.
That is the stuff that we cannot be turning a blind eye on,
and unfortunately this Administration, with their open border
policy, has incentivized that type of illegal activity that is
leading to horrific things happening to people along the
journey, as well as the amount, as I said, of illegal activity
taking place, entering our country with drugs and so on.
But to turn to--the question I wanted to ask was for Mr.
Farnsworth. I am curious what your opinion is of the fact that
Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, they have all
boycotted the Summit of Americas.
So not only were Republicans not invited but these
countries that we are, you know, giving billions of dollars to,
to try to work with us to resolve this issue, decided that they
did not want to come to meet with our President.
What does that say to you and people who are saying that
this is a good idea to give them billions more?
Mr. Farnsworth. I think it is an important question. And it
was a disappointment that those four leaders chose not to come
to the Summit of the Americas. They were invited.
In fact, as I understand it, the Biden Administration bent
over backward to try to encourage each one to come to Los
Angeles for the meetings.
Each one is a sovereign leader. They made decisions based
on different reasons and different rationales.
I was particularly disappointed that the President of
Honduras did not come, in part, because the Vice President of
the United States went to her inauguration, which is something
you do not see a lot in terms of Latin America, a U.S. Vice
President going to a Presidential inauguration in the region.
It just does not happen that often. It was a signal of real
interest in Honduras. It was not reciprocated, and that was a
real disappointment. And we still do not really know why.
El Salvador, Guatemala had their own reasons.
The President of Mexico expressed his support for having
Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua, three brutal dictatorships, at
the summit, which was contrary to the Inter-American Democratic
Charter which all the countries of the hemisphere have signed,
except for Cuba, indicating, indeed, that the Summits of the
Americas are reserved only for democratically elected leaders.
So this was also a bit of a disappointment and one that,
you know, I think it just shows that we have a lot of work to
do to continue to build that relationship over time.
Ms. Malliotakis. And you mentioned Cuba, Venezuela, and
Nicaragua as the reason why some of those countries decided to
boycott. I will say that, you know, we saw what happened in
Colombia now, a leftist government there for the first time.
Venezuela and Cuba are continuing to spread their influence
of Communism throughout the entire region of Central America
and South America. Very concerning. It is a very concerning
thing.
So the next question is, corporations, private companies, I
mean, when they see this spread of Communism taking place in
Central and South America, is that going to deter them from
wanting to invest?
I mean, you want stability, right? You want to make sure
you have a fair judicial system. You want to make sure they are
not packing the court, like Venezuela did, right, where they
went from 20 to 32 justices, and 45,000 cases all of a sudden
went in Maduro and then--I mean, Chavez and Maduro's favor. And
they destroyed the richest country in South America and all its
economic opportunity.
How does that play into the thought process of trying to
attract private investment into that area?
Mr. Farnsworth. I can tell you it is a disincentive, you
know, in a very real way. Look, there are a lot of reasons why
companies will invest in individual countries, based on their
own dynamics, based on global markets, based on whatever
metrics they are using.
But the overriding political environment is also key, and
to the extent that that is unstable, or to the extent that it
may be stable but it is going in a direction where the private
sector is getting squeezed or, you know, the State presence in
the economy is increasing in a significant manner, companies
very much take that into account in terms of whether they
invest, not just new investment, but whether they continue to
invest in the country.
And so what we have seen across Latin America is a real lag
compared to global economies, right? I mean, Latin America
should be doing so much better comparatively on a global basis,
and in many ways, it just has lagged.
Obviously the comparison is Asia, the comparison is western
Europe, et cetera, et cetera.
But we are not dealing anymore with local, geographic areas
in terms of investment. We are dealing in a global economy. And
one of the thing that countries in the region still have not
fully internalized necessarily is that they are competing for
marginal dollars of investment in a very competitive global
environment.
And so if you have a government that comes in and the first
thing is to talk about expropriations or to talk about, you
know, changing the tax code in a very arbitrary manner, or
rewriting constitutions in a way that might be arbitrary and
disadvantageous to companies who made billions of dollars of
investment, you know, on an expectation that that would be
sustainable over time, that is going to have real world
implications, and indeed, that is what we have seen in the
region over time.
Ms. Malliotakis. Thank you.
Mr. Sires. Thank you. I now recognize Congressman Levin for
5 minutes.
Mr. Levin. Thanks so much to you, Chair Sires and to Chair
Castro, and to both ranking members for holding this hearing
today. I really appreciate the opportunity to discuss Vice
President Harris' call to action to increase private investment
in the Northern Triangle.
I believe that while this region has suffered from
misguided U.S. foreign policy in the past, we have an
opportunity to shift our approach, particularly under Vice
President Harris' and Special Envoy John Kerry's leadership.
Specifically with the Northern Triangle becoming ground
zero for the impacts of climate change in the Americas and a
major driver of out-migration, I believe the U.S. should pilot
a big, bold, zero to net zero, green energy strategy in the
region that brings together governments, industry, labor
unions, and workers.
My questions will focus on some of the challenges and
opportunities for getting such a strategy off the ground.
Mr. Fantini-Porter, with the participation of major,
multinational corporations, the partnership for Central America
has helped enable significant investment across Northern
Triangle countries, commendable in the face of low FDI rates in
the region generally.
With that in mind, how do labor standards and human rights
protections play into your decisions to partner with companies?
Mr. Fantini-Porter, I can't hear you.
Mr. Chairman, can you hear him?
Mr. Sires. [Inaudible.]
Voice. Congressman Levin, can you hear me?
Mr. Levin. Yes, now I can.
Now I am not hearing anything.
Can anyone hear? No.
Voice. We can hear you, Congressman. We are having some
issues on our side with the microphone.
Mr. Levin. Thanks, Max.
They are having technical issues.
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Congressman, I am being advised to try
the microphone again. I am not sure if you are able to hear,
sir.
Mr. Levin. I hear you. Can you hear me?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. I can hear you very well, sir. Thank
you. I think our technical issues are resolved. I will proceed
to answer your question if I may.
Mr. Levin. Thank you.
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Congressman, your question is a
critical one, and it is one that we are fully aligned with in
the sense of how we are prioritizing this effort.
I will start by saying that this effort begins with a
foundation of core values centered on human dignity, economic
empowerment, environmental protection, worker rights, and
anticorruption.
We achieve the impact we have laid out through corporate
social responsibility and responsible corporate social--
citizenship.
It is why, for example, we have created the first rule of
law pledge that creates a good governance club for responsible
corporate partners in the region.
To your question specifically, Congressman, labor and
worker rights is key for our organization as well. And I will
say, you know, at a personal level and at an organizational
level, as the son of a refugee who left Latin America to escape
the violence that my father was facing, the realities of that
environment, protecting the most vulnerable is core to our
organization's belief system.
Our COO is also a former Peace Corps volunteer. The values
that I think are at the root of your question are critical to
what we aspire to deploy and to build in Central America, and
that is a region in which, empowered by economic empowerment,
job creation, digital inclusion, financial inclusion, workers
are able to have a decent life with their families and are able
to avoid the unnecessary and tragic circumstances that often
come with migration north.
So our intention is to create an environment in northern
Central America with our corporate and social partners that
reflects the dignity, I think, at the root of your question.
Mr. Levin. Great. Well, I will look forward to following
along and hearing more as we go forward.
Ms. De Sola, your nonprofit operates across the Northern
Triangle. I have no doubt that each country has its own
challenges. Can you illuminate any themes across the three
countries that prevent Glasswing International from seeing
longer term gains from the programs that you established there?
And your testimony also advocates for incentivizing
companies to engage with local civil society organizations to
better address local priorities.
I am glad to see USAID is focusing on that, so I would like
to address that as well. Can you share some of the best
practices you have seen from your work about how companies have
adopted locally led models for development and investing?
Ms. De Sola. Thank you, Congressman Levin. That is actually
exactly righted. I think when companies have really committed
to this long term and engaged their employees, many of whom are
from these communities, I think that tends to improve not just
the impact but the sustainability.
And it also integrates these companies, whether they are
multinational or local, more into communities, and that creates
a more sustained partnership because it is--everybody wins,
right, when all These different stakeholders are involved.
I think the more localized these strategies can be the
better because even--you know, there is central government that
can change, local government can change, but there are people
who work within these institutions that work across different
Administrations.
So when you get at the operational level, the involvement
of different stakeholders, it is also a powerful tool for
sustaining these long term.
Mr. Levin. All right. Thanks, Mr. Chairman, I think my time
is expired. I appreciate your patience, and I yield back.
Ms. De Sola. Thank you.
Mr. Sires [continuing]. Recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Issa. Thank you. Did you say Congressman Issa?
Mr. Sires. No. I said Teeny--Tenney?
Ms. Tenney. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Castro and
Chairman Sires. I thought you said Issa. I apologize.
I just want to say thank you to the witnesses. I just have
a question I want to first address to Mr. Farnsworth.
Mexico's President, Lopez Obrador, is pursuing a foreign
policy that is confrontational, obviously to the United States,
to democracy, to free markets.
We see the rising trade tensions, record levels of
Americans are overdosing, border encounters continuing to rise
at historic levels.
How can the Vice President achieve progress in Central
America considering the deteriorating U.S.-Mexico relationship?
And I know you have addressed the border, but if you could just
do it again in relation to that issue because I got a quick
followup for you on that.
Mr. Farnsworth. Thanks for the question. This was the basis
of Ranking Member Green's question as well, how can the U.S.
and Mexico cooperate on Central America, and I think the short
answer is, this is a real priority of the President of Mexico.
So we have some real disagreements with the President of
Mexico, no doubt, environment, economy, you know, border
issues, migration, all these things. But one of the priorities
that he, himself, has expressed is to work together with the
United States for development in southern Mexico but also
Central America.
And my view is, we should take him up on it. And there are
ways to really bring together the economies of Mexico and
Central America to promote integration into the North American
supply chains, and in so doing, what we will do is not just be
cooperating with Mexico, but we will also be helping to develop
Central America in the way that we have been trying to talk
about today that will hopefully limit some of the impulse to
migrate.
Ms. Tenney. One of my concerns--and I lived in the former
Yugoslavia, so people think of it as a benevolent dictatorship,
Communism light, a lot of those things. But many people do not
talk about the barren island called Goli Otok which was a
Gulag, a prison for dissidents, that people were sent there,
even under the beloved Tito leadership, who is, you know, a
self-proclaimed communist.
But the Mexican President recently boycotted the Summit of
the Americas because the Cuban, Venezuelan, Nicaraguan
communists weren't invited. How do we deal with this, again,
once again, this communist threat that is pervasive now, and
then the influence of communist regimes like China and other
authoritarian-type regimes with their ability economically to
move into South America and other countries in the world?
Mr. Farnsworth. That is a real challenge, and, yes, you are
right, that was his stated reason for not attending the Summit
of the Americas. I think many of us were disappointed by that.
The Summit of the Americas is specifically a body or a
group of democratically elected leaders that has been
institutionalized in the Inter-American Democratic Charter,
which is ratified by all countries in the region except for
Cuba.
And so, look if we want to engage with these countries,
there are ways to do it, but not in the Summit of the Americas.
I think that was probably the wrong target to shoot at, and it
was unfortunate that he chose--in my view--that it was
unfortunate he chose to do it.
The larger issue here, though, is one that we have seen
across the region--and we just saw elections in Colombia on
Sunday--you have a scenario where the established political
parties are just simply not being perceived to be meeting the
needs of the people.
And it is not necessarily a shift to the right or the left
or the this or the that. It is anti-incumbency. People are just
tossing the bums out. They are saying, look you did not provide
for my needs, I need something different.
And so there is a willingness to take a risk, in country
after country of noninstitutional leaders and leaders who are
promising things that in many, you know, many aspects may never
be able to be realized. But the promises sound good, and it is
what the people are looking to hear.
How can the United States respond to that?
I think, you know, one of the things that I was hoping to
come out of the Summit of the Americas was a robust, ambitious,
economic engagement agenda, led by the United States, with
willing partners in the region.
Ms. Tenney. Let me ask, so we have had decades of foreign
assistance, demonstrating that aid alone is not what is doing
it. They are obviously being influenced by other forces, other
economic strengths, and authoritarianism.
What can we do, in terms of our foreign aid, what reforms
are necessary? For example, in Central America, how can we
promote better business investment that encourages individual
rights and freedom and entrepreneurship as opposed to
supplanting or propping up these authoritarian sort of
communist-like socialist regimes?
Mr. Farnsworth. I would very much like our assistance
programs to be focused on business development in the context
of creating the conditions that will sustain the investments
over time.
Let me just give you a couple, you know, very quick
examples, you know, things that businesses look at--tax
policies, permitting policies, appropriateness of
infrastructure, regulatory convergence.
I mean, in the Northern Triangle countries, we have three
small economies individually trying to compete in the global
economy.
Why haven't we seen a greater convergence among those three
countries themselves on regulatory convergence, on harmonizing
their own economies, to make the investor not just look at El
Salvador, which is really not a very large economy, but the
larger economy of an integrated Northern Triangle?
Once we start talking in those terms and integrate with
southern Mexico and North American supply chains, you begin to
have economies of scale that is, on its face, much more
attractive to potential investors as opposed to each country
competing for that investment on its own.
Ms. Tenney. I appreciate that. And having an intern from
Venezuela who is a freedom lover was really an insight for me
last year, but I want to thank you. My time's expired. I
appreciate the comments, and I yield my time back. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Sires. Thank you. I now recognize Congresswoman Omar
for 5 minutes.
Ms. Omar. Thank you, Chairman. In March, I led several of
my colleagues on a delegation to Honduras and Guatemala. We met
with government officials in both countries, and we spent
several days meeting with indigenous and campesino communities.
As you might expect the root causes of migration were a
recurring theme of our meetings.
I have to tell you all what I heard in those communities
was completely different than what we are hearing from you
today. What we heard was a lot of stories about transnational
private investments being a root cause of migration.
It was mining companies in Guatemala, a silver mining
company in La Puya, where communities would get 2 to 3 hours'
access to water in every 48 hours because of this mining
company.
It was energy companies in Honduras, cryptocurrency in El
Salvador, sweatshops and agricultural companies in all three
countries.
This is obviously very complex, but we heard about mega
projects displacing communities, about labor exploitation,
about corporations making promises of community development
that were never kept.
So you will have to forgive me, Mr. Fantini-Porter, if I am
a little skeptical about this round of corporate promises. Help
me understand how this is different than previous efforts to
increase private sector investment in Central America, and how
you are factoring in a history of corruption and labor
exploitation. And if you could be brief, please.
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Certainly. Congresswoman, thank you for
the question. I think it is a critical one, and it is
understanding what the values are of these organizations that
are involved here.
I will say, at a personal and organizational level,
Partnership for Central America is a values first organization,
right? So it is about environmental protections, it is about
worker rights, it is about dignity of life, it is about how we
partner in a systemic way to bring our private sector partners,
who are focused in a socially responsible way, on having impact
in a region of the world where you have 30 percent of families
living in extreme poverty, 50 percent of children suffering
from malnutrition and stunting and the like.
There is a desperate--as you know and I know you saw in
Honduras, in Guatemala--a desperate need for aid and support.
And so in any way that we can identify partners that are
willing to support in achieving the social impact goals that
you, I know, if I may say, have for that region and that we
share very much, we are focused on that.
So, you know, I will say, the organizations that we have
partnered with are carefully selected. We have a vetting
process in place----
Ms. Omar. Okay. So let me maybe ask you, what are the
metrics that you are using to determine what investments have
been successful, and is it only about reducing out migration,
or is it more than that?
Because in La Puya, in Guatemala, you know, many of the
mothers that we talked to, talked about how their young
children left because life is not sustainable there. And you
have a trans-Atlantic corporation that is investing in silver
mining there, but the community in itself is devastated because
of it.
Mr. Fantini-Porter. I think it is important, if I may,
Congresswoman, to just note the distinction between
organizations, right? I would just offer, if I may, that we
can't generalize, with all due respect, generalize an entire
sector.
There are different organizations that have different
intentions and different business practices. So, for example,
as I think about Microsoft, Microsoft has invested to support
bringing digital inclusion to 4 million families in the region.
In the last 12 months, Congresswoman, we have brought 1.69
million people into the digital access that previously hadn't.
With Mastercard and other partners, 310,000 individuals now
have access to the formal economy. Twelve months ago they did
not. That means access to credit, that means formal bank
accounts--12 months. That is quick, it is significant, and it
delivers real impact to families there.
So what I will say is, I think the root of your question,
if I may, Congresswoman, is, what are the values that we are
driving in this organization? And the values are human dignity,
social impact. So we are carefully--carefully--selecting the
partners that we work with in that effort.
And I will note, the partners that we have brought on have
delivered now, in the last 12 months, $3.2 billion in foreign
direct investment and support for the region.
Ms. Omar. I appreciate your answer, and I would love to
followup in the future, but I really wanted to quickly get in
this one question.
To Ms. De Sola, one of the concerns I have heard from El
Salvadoran civil society is that some USAID partners are too
close to Bukele government and to Bukele himself. What is
Glasswing's relationship with Bukele?
Ms. De Sola. Thank you, Congresswoman Omar. We are an
independent organization and always have been for 15 years. So
we have been working across every Administration since we
started the organization in collaboration with maintaining our
independence.
So in order to reach, just like you said before, in order
to reach as many of these women, young people, and children, we
do collaborate with ministries of education, ministries of
health, and those people who form part of these teams.
So we work independently, in collaboration with both
private sector and government stakeholders.
Mr. Sires. Thank you.
Ms. De Sola. Thank you.
Ms. Omar. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Sires. Congressman Issa, are you there?
Mr. Issa. I sure am.
Mr. Sires. All right. Good. You are on for 5-minutes.
Mr. Issa. Thank you.
Mr. Farnsworth, in the last 6 months, have you met with the
Vice President?
Mr. Farnsworth. Have I? No, sir.
Mr. Issa. Mr. Fantini-Porter, have you met with the Vice
President in the last 6 months?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. I have, Congressman, yes.
Mr. Issa. Does it surprise you that you are here and she
has not, and no one from the Administration is here?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Congressman, I can't speak to who was
invited to a congressional hearing, but I can certainly say
that from the partnership's----
Mr. Issa. Well, you have been saying all day we, we, we,
but the ``we'' is the Federal Government, correct? Your program
is sponsored by the U.S. Government?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. That is not correct, sir. The
Partnership for Central America is an independent,
nongovernmental organization.
Mr. Issa. You receive grants?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. We do not. We are an independent,
nongovernmental organization.
Mr. Issa. Okay. So you are talking about private sector
investment that does not have any Federal backing?
Mr. Fantini-Porter. What we are, sir, if I may, with all
due respect, sir--and I know you come from a significant
private sector background and I respect that very much--we are
an organization, Congressman Issa, that is focused on
mobilizing and coordinating foreign direct investment into the
region. Full stop.
So if I may, sir, what we are trying to do is bring
together private sector organizations, large private sector
multinational organizations, and make investments in the
region.
Last 12 months, $3.2 billion mobilized in that region,
where, if I may, with all due respect, sir, say, that is a
significant difference from past efforts.
But to your point----
Mr. Issa. And I appreciate that your nature of always
thinking something is significant.
Mr. Farnsworth, would you invest in the Triangle right now?
Mr. Farnsworth. I would like to have something to invest in
terms of my personal--that is just a joke, sir, and not a very
good one.
Look people have different reasons for investing in
different areas. It is a complicated region.
Mr. Issa. Okay. But currently it is not on a high list of
good return on investment, particularly Nicaragua where you do
not know whether you are going to get to keep what you invest.
Mr. Farnsworth. I wouldn't invest in Nicaragua, no. That is
a brutal dictatorship.
Mr. Issa. Okay. So we have at least taken care of part of
that. You know, obviously I am deeply disappointed that the
Vice President has not addressed this group or any of the
members, at least on my side of the aisle. You know, she is the
czar for This, what we are talking about today and that
development, I guess according to Mr. Fantini-Porter, you know,
she is responsible for.
I just would like to see somebody from the Administration
just once come here to answer our questions.
You talked about the situation at the border. Let me go
through a couple of quick questions, primarily for Mr.
Farnsworth, but I will take other answers.
Is there anyone here today that believes that the 7
billion--6 and a half to 7 billion people who live in
comparative poverty, that any of our programs are overnight
going to eliminate that 6, 6 and a half billion people who live
at a dramatically different economic level to the United
States?
Mr. Farnsworth. Overnight, no.
Mr. Issa. Okay. In a year?
Mr. Farnsworth. I do not believe so.
Mr. Issa. In 5 years?
Mr. Farnsworth. I can't say, but I do not think----
Mr. Issa. Okay. Well, since the beginning of the New
Testament, has there ever been a time in which there were not
areas of poverty and areas of comparative wealth, in which the
world all was equalized, so there would be no reason for a
migratory change for economic opportunity?
Mr. Farnsworth. Probably not since the----
Mr. Issa. Okay. So if we have 2,000 years that we have not
had that perfect equality, I am going to predict that in the
next 6 months, 2 years, 5 years, or at least as long as this
Administration is in power, we are not going to have that.
So I am going to go back to something that you concentrated
on, that this committee does not seem to want to deal with.
Can we sustain an economic border--a policy at our border
that promotes out-migration of motivated people from
countries--every country of the world practically at this
point, but particularly the region we are talking about of
South and Central America?
Mr. Farnsworth. I think you are pointing to a very
important issue which we have only touched on in this hearing,
and that is the disparity between the strong U.S. and North
American economy and the relatively weak economies to our
south. And there is a very real pull factor in the context of
migration incentives.
Look if you do not have a job or you want a better job,
your community circumstances may not be great, all the
circumstances we have been talking about already, but you have
the United States with a booming economy, we can't find
enough----
Mr. Issa. Right. But I want to just focus on one question
for you in the remaining time.
Out-migration--and we will assume for a moment that the
best and the brightest, the most motivated are who is coming
here from these countries--out-migration, isn't that adverse to
the very nature of investing in a country?
If I am going to invest in a country in South or Central
America, do not I want a work force that inherently I can count
on their being there rather than the continued out-migration
that our open border policy provides?
Mr. Farnsworth. I think it is a really interesting point.
And one of the things we say all the time is that, you know,
the worst resource to lose from your country is your
population. That is your seed core. Those are the--that is how
you grow your economy, is with talented, educated individuals.
And, absolutely, if you are losing those folks, that is a
gain to the U.S., but it is a loss for the sending economies.
Mr. Issa. Mr. Fantini-Porter, you seem to want to answer
also.
Mr. Fantini-Porter. Certainly, sir, if you would like. You
know, I think that the root of the question ends up perhaps, if
I may, just blending two different topics, and that is a short-
term question of border enforcement and a long-term effort of
international development, sir.
And as I sit here before the subcommittee of the House
Foreign Affairs Committee, I reflect on the fact that this
long-term effort is focused on metrics that align with that.
So how do we focus on an effort that, in the end of the
day, is intended to achieve impact in the long term,
acknowledging, sir, with absolute respect, that there are
short-term fluctuations in migration which will continue with
absolutely certainty, sir, but that as we think about this as a
long-term effort----
Mr. Sires. Thank you.
Mr. Fantini-Porter [continuing]. We are putting our best
foot forward to try to try to bring this forward.
Mr. Issa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your indulgence.
Yield back.
Mr. Sires. Congresswoman Spanberger, you are recognized for
5 minutes.
Ms. Spanberger. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Certainly when I travel across our district, I hear from
constituents who are frustrated by the ongoing crisis at the
southern border. You know, my constituents, like so many
Americans, expect a secure border. They expect--and they are
right to expect lawful immigration system that works.
Protecting our borders is really a matter of national
security, and we must have lawful and orderly channels within
our immigration system. I have long supported hiring more
Custom and Border Patrol officers, commonsense improvements, to
address the immigration backlog.
But I come at this question as a former intelligence
officer and for a time worked transnational criminal
organizations throughout Central and South America. And I know
that we just can't wait for the problems to turn into a crisis
at the border, that some of the root challenges that, you know,
are the topic of this hearing, we can't just wait for that to
mean people fleeing from natural disasters, people look ng for
economic opportunity, people fleeing rampant lawlessness and
trying to create a better life for their families.
And so addressing these root causes really has to be a
central part of the strategy that we, the United States,
employs, so I appreciate this hearing. I had a couple followup
questions on some of the topics that have been brought up.
Mr. Farnsworth, I believe it was you who talked about USMCA
and the comments about bringing in Central American countries I
found to be pretty interesting. Could you comment little bit,
because I am curious whether or not such a proposal as you
mentioned, bringing Central American countries in on a,
country-by-country, negotiation basis, what would be the impact
be, potentially for wealthier more stable countries like Panama
versus far more economically or unstable countries like some of
the others? Could you comment on that?
Mr. Farnsworth. Thanks for the question. First of all, a
clarification. Panama is not part of the CAFTA-DR. They have a
separate bilateral trade----
Ms. Spanberger. So you are speaking specifically as CAFTA-
DR countries?
Mr. Farnsworth. Yes. But having said that, would be open to
a broader approach as well, including Panama and other U.S.
free trade partners in the Americas for sure.
But in the context of divergence in the region itself, it
is a reality. I mean, Costa Rica, for example, is the
wealthiest country in Central America as you know, and probably
one of the most ready, along with Dominican Republic, of the
CAFTA-DR partners to move early into the space.
And they would get a first mover benefit, absolutely,
because investors will take that as, if I can use the cliche,
good housekeeping seal of approval and to say, look the United
States, there is rule of law, there is institutionality, there
is recourse to, you know, for adjudication for disputes----
Ms. Spanberger. And in doing it that way, as you propose,
as you are thinking about it, does that create a disadvantage
for other countries, or does that create----
Mr. Farnsworth. My view, and the argument, is that it
actually creates an incentive for the other countries to get
their act together, because if they do not, they fall further
and further behind.
So let's play this out. Let's say you have, I do not know,
just pick two countries, CR, you know, Costa Rica, and the
Dominican Republic. Let's say they move first. They then get
the early mover advantage of investors.
But you have the Guatemalas, El Salvadors, and Hondurases
of the world who would say, look we need to be at the same
level, otherwise our investments are going to suffer by
definition.
And so you build those internal constituencies,
particularly in the private sector, which gets in the face of
its own government and says, get your act together, we need to
have that access to the North American supply chains because we
are falling behind.
They are doing it for commercial and parochial reasons, no
doubt, but at the same time, it has public policy implications.
And one of the things we have not done, in my view, in
Central America very well is to get the local constituencies
onboard with our agenda. In fact, in many cases we have ignored
the local constituencies, tried to work around them, called
them names, called them corrupt, et cetera. We need to change
our----
Ms. Spanberger. And when you are--can you define a little
bit further for the sake of this discussion, who are the local
constituencies that you are talking about?
Mr. Farnsworth. Local, private sector entities. In some
cases, governments, for sure, even some of the NGO community.
There is a lot of really good work happening right now in the
Northern Triangle that is created by the countries in question
and the communities in question that simply is not be
incorporated because we have a different approach. Okay. Fair
enough.
But I can tell you, because I have had personal
conversations with multiple folks in this regard, it has also
causing resentment in the region, and it is causing
defensiveness in saying, why aren't you working with us, we are
the local community, right? You are disavowing us, you are
calling us names, we want to be part of the solution, and we
can be part of the solution.
And frankly there is no solution apart from the local
private sector and the local constituencies, so we have find a
way to change that dynamic.
Ms. Spanberger. And specific to the USMCA example that you
brought--that you mentioned of bringing in the CAFTA-DR
countries, have you spOkay.n with people on the ground who are
specifically interested in USMCA? What have those conversations
been like?
Mr. Farnsworth. There is real enthusiam for the idea of
finding a way to link judicially and legally into North
American supply chains for a sustainable long-term approach.
There is some concern among some parties, in terms of some
of the provisions of USMCA, right, labor and environment and
enforceability and all those things. Fair enough. That is what
negotiations are for.
But it is also the way, if I can say, for the United States
to now promote with positive incentives, rather than sanctions
and, you know, name-calling, the agenda and the values that we
are seeking to promote. So we have changed the incentive
structure, and we have built a new constituency to align with
what we are actually trying to achieve----
Ms. Spanberger. Because we have changed the framework of
the conversation. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I yield
back. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Sires. All right. Thank you again to our witnesses and
the members for joining us in this important hearing.
Stemming the flow of irregular migration from Central
America will require long-term commitment from the United
States to deepen our diplomatic and foreign assistance efforts.
I look forward to working closely with my colleagues and
the Biden Administration to help foster the necessary political
and economic conditions whereby citizens through the region can
imagine a future in their own home countries.
With that, the committee is adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:43 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
OPENING STATEMENT SIRES
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]