[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]