[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 115 (Tuesday, July 28, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8198-S8201]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Corker, 
        Mr. Risch, and Mr. Cardin):
  S. 1524. A bill to strengthen the capacity, transparency, and 
accountability of United States foreign assistance programs to 
effectively adapt and respond to new challenges of the 21st century, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, for the past 6 months, the administration 
has been busy laying the groundwork for a new development agenda.
  First, the President issued a bold 2010 international affairs budget 
that significantly increases funding for vital programs in Pakistan and 
Afghanistan, begins to rebuild our diplomatic and development capacity, 
and renews our commitment to essential programs from education to HIV/
AIDS and hunger.
  Then, earlier this month, President Obama and other G8 leaders 
announced a $20 billion food security partnership to provide small 
farmers in poor countries with the seeds, fertilizers, and equipment 
they need to break a decades-long cycle of hunger, malnutrition and 
dependency. Finally, the State Department unveiled plans for a 
``Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review,'' a comprehensive 
assessment designed to improve policy, strategy, and planning at the 
State Department.
  While we are still awaiting a nominee to head the U.S. Agency for 
International Development I am confident that a name will soon be 
forthcoming.
  These are welcome changes that demonstrate this Administration's 
commitment to a vigorous reform process and a bold development plan. 
Congress will be a strong partner in those efforts--providing the 
resources, legislation, and authorities to ensure that our development 
programs are funded and designed to meet our priorities.
  While there is some debate on what form foreign aid reform should 
take, there is a broad consensus in the development community about why 
reform matters.

[[Page S8199]]

  Experts agree that the strength of our development programs is 
directly linked to success or failure in front-line states like 
Afghanistan and Pakistan.
  They agree that USAID is more critical to achieving our foreign 
policy objectives than ever before--yet it lacks the tools, capacity 
and expertise to fulfill its mission.
  They agree that too often decision-makers lack basic information 
about the actual impact of our development programs.
  They also agree that excessive bureaucracy and regulations and 
fragmented coordination are hampering our efforts to swiftly and 
effectively deliver assistance.
  And they agree that even as we plan for broad, fundamental reform, 
there are many steps we can take in the interim to dramatically improve 
the effectiveness of our foreign aid efforts.
  We assembled a small bipartisan Senate working group to formulate 
legislation that makes short-term improvements while setting the stage 
for longer-term reform. Senators Lugar, Menendez, Corker and I have 
been developing initial reform legislation that we believe goes a long 
way towards improving our short-term capacity to deliver foreign aid in 
a more accountable, thoughtful and strategic manner.
  One provision in the bill that we believe is particularly important 
establishes an independent evaluation group, based in the executive 
branch, to measure and evaluate the impact and results of all U.S. 
foreign aid programs, across all departments and agencies. This new 
institution--the Council on Research and Evaluation of Foreign 
Assistance--can address a fundamental knowledge gap in our foreign aid 
programs--quite simply, it will help us understand which programs work, 
which do not, and why.
  I want to emphasize, this legislation only represents the first step 
in a longer reform process. But we believe it sends an important 
bipartisan signal that foreign aid reform will be a priority for this 
committee in the years ahead. I am pleased that Senators Risch and 
Cardin will join as original cosponsors to the bill.
  When John F. Kennedy spoke at the founding of USAID, in 1961, he 
articulated a basic truth about our foreign policy. We cannot escape 
our moral obligation to be a wise leader in the community of free 
nations. Kennedy warned that--``To fail to meet those obligations now 
would be disastrous; and, in the long run, more expensive. For 
widespread poverty and chaos lead to a collapse of existing political 
and social structures which would inevitably invite the advance of 
totalitarianism into every weak and unstable area. Thus our own 
security would be endangered and our prosperity imperiled.''
  Just substitute violent extremism for totalitarianism and the quote 
is as accurate today as it was then. Just as we did in Marshall's time 
and Kennedy's time, America today has a chance to return to a foreign 
policy that is not just seen by people everywhere, but felt and lived, 
one that translates our promises into real value and real progress on 
the ground--one that improves people's daily lives, inspires them, and 
earns their respect.
  The good news is that, as we rebuild our civilian institutions, there 
will so many chances to lead in the process. We are living in a moment 
of volatility, but also--emphatically--a moment of possibility.
  Infant mortality rates dropped by 27 percent worldwide since 1990. By 
2015, let us cut under-five mortality by 2/3. Life expectancy is eight 
years higher than it was in 1990--but we can do better by cutting 
hunger and poverty in half and reversing the spread of HIV/AIDs, 
malaria and other major diseases. Primary school enrollment has 
increased by 10 percent--it is time we made it universal. While we are 
at it, let us eliminate gender disparity in education once and for all.
  History teaches us that America is safest and strongest when we 
understand that our security will not be protected by military means 
alone. It must be protected as well by our generosity, by our example, 
by powerful outreach, and by instilling a palpable sense in the people 
of the world that we understand--and share their destiny. That has 
always inspired people, and it always will. It undercuts our enemies, 
it empowers our friends--and it keeps us safer.
  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, Senator 
John Kerry, in introducing the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and 
Accountability Act of 2009. Our colleagues, Senators Corker, Menendez, 
Risch, and Cardin, join us in this effort as original cosponsors.
  The role of foreign assistance in achieving U.S. foreign policy 
objectives has come into sharper focus since 2001. President Bush 
elevated development as a third pillar of the U.S. National Security 
Strategy. President Obama pledged to double foreign assistance, and 
announced new initiatives on global food security and health. Secretary 
Clinton announced a quadrennial review of diplomacy and development. 
These initiatives are likely to have far reaching implications for 
foreign assistance policy and organization.
  For development to play its full role in our national security 
structure, the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID, must 
be a strong agency with the resources to accomplish the missions we 
give it. Earlier this month, Secretary Clinton stated: ``I want USAID 
to be seen as the premier development agency in the world, both 
governmental and NGO. I want people coming here to consult with us 
about the best way to do anything having to do with development.'' I 
share the sentiments expressed by Secretary Clinton, and I have 
confidence in the extraordinary development expertise housed at USAID.
  But during the last two decades, decision-makers have not made it 
easy for USAID to perform its vital function. Even as we have 
rediscovered the importance of foreign assistance, we find ourselves 
with a frail foundation to support a robust development strategy. We 
have increased funds for development and elevated its priority, while 
allowing USAID to atrophy. Many new programs have been located outside 
USAID with roughly two dozen departments and agencies having taken over 
some aspects of foreign assistance, including the Department of 
Defense. Each of these agencies naturally considers itself the lead 
agency in its sector, provoking competition among agencies rather than 
coordination and coherence. We do not really know whether these 
programs are complementary or working at cross-purposes.
  USAID's staffing and expertise have declined markedly since the 
1980s. There are only five engineers left; 23 education officers are 
tasked with overseeing different programs in 84 countries. Decisions to 
reorganize in pursuit of better coordination between the Department of 
State and USAID resulted in the latter's loss of evaluation, budget, 
and policy capacity. Much of the work of running America's development 
programs is now farmed out to private contractors.
  I believe the starting point for any future design of our assistance 
programs and organization should not be the status quo, but rather the 
period in which we had a well-functioning and well-resourced aid 
agency. To be a full partner in support of foreign policy objectives, 
USAID must have the capacity to participate in policy, planning, and 
budgeting. The migration of these functions to the State Department has 
fed the impression that an independent aid agency no longer exists.
  It the administration pursues the goal of doubling foreign assistance 
over time, it is crucial that Congress has confidence that these funds 
will be used efficiently. USAID must have the capacity to evaluate 
programs and disseminate information about best practices and methods 
and it must have a central role in development policy decisions.
  The legislation that we introduce today promotes capacity, 
accountability, and transparency in U.S. foreign assistance programs. 
It has received strong initial support from outside groups led by the 
Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network. There are three deficiencies we 
are trying to address.
  First, the evaluation of assistance programs and the dissemination of 
knowledge have deteriorated in the last couple of decades. While USAID 
was a respected voice in this regard during the 1980s, its evaluation 
capacity has been allowed to wither. The bill strengthens USAID's 
monitoring and

[[Page S8200]]

evaluation capacity with the creation of an internal evaluation and 
knowledge center. The bill also re-establishes a policy and planning 
bureau. It is crucial that USAID be able to fully partner with the 
State Department in decisions relating to development.
  Second, U.S. foreign assistance programs are littered among some two 
dozen agencies with little or no coordination. We do not have adequate 
knowledge of whether programs are complementary or working at cross-
purposes. The bill requires all government agencies with a foreign 
assistance role to make information about its activities publicly 
available in a timely fashion. It designates the USAID Mission Director 
as responsible for coordinating all development and humanitarian 
assistance in-country. It creates an independent evaluation and 
research organization that can analyze and evaluate foreign assistance 
programs across government.
  Third, staffing and expertise at USAID have declined since the early 
1990s, even as funding for foreign assistance programs has increased. 
This decline in capacity has resulted in other agencies stepping in to 
fill the gap. While Congress has begun to provide the necessary 
resources to rebuild this capacity, the agency does not have a human 
resources strategy to guide hiring and deployment decisions. The bill 
would require such a strategy and a high-level task force to advise on 
critical personnel issues. The bill also encourages increased training 
and inter-agency rotations to build expertise and effectiveness.
  It is especially important that Congress weigh in on this issue 
because the Administration has yet to appoint a USAID Administrator or 
fill any confirmable positions in the agency. Without an Administrator 
in place, USAID is likely to have less of a role in the current State 
Department review than it should have. The State Department review 
process should include strong voices advocating for an independent aid 
agency.
  Both Congress and the State Department should be offering proposals 
on how to improve development assistance. Our legislation does not rule 
out any options that the State Department may propose as a result of 
its review. But ultimately, Congress will have to make decisions on 
resources for development programs. Given budget constraints, it is 
essential that Congress has confidence in how development resources are 
spent. Building capacity at USAID will be an important part of this 
calculation.
  The issues that we face today--from chronic poverty and hunger to 
violent acts of terrorism--require that we work seamlessly toward 
identifiable goals. I look forward to working with colleagues to 
improve and support the development mission that benefits our long-term 
security.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today, with my 
colleagues Senators Kerry, Lugar, and Corker, legislation that will 
help strengthen the foreign assistance efforts of the United States. We 
have put together a piece of legislation that helps move our collective 
foreign assistance efforts in the right direction.
  I am pleased that we have worked very closely and in a bipartisan 
fashion on this legislation and I want to thank my colleagues for their 
work. Foreign assistance is something that is of great interest to many 
members of the Foreign Relations Committee. While we may disagree on 
the overall resources that should be devoted to development assistance, 
I think we all agree that the resources we do provide should be used in 
the best way possible.
  I also want to thank the broader community of people who have been 
supportive of these efforts for years. I cannot tell you how many 
letters from people in New Jersey and from around the country I have 
received on these issues. These individuals, and the groups who help 
advocate for these issues are an important voice in the process.
  President Obama has pledged to double foreign assistance by 2012. In 
this context, it is now more important than ever for the Congress to 
know which U.S. Government programs are the best investments. Right 
now, we have too little evidence that is objective and independent 
about which U.S. Government Agencies should have their budgets 
increased and which should be held constant or decreased. This 
legislation will help provide a more objective basis for this kind of 
decisionmaking. It will help both the Congress and the administration 
to make smarter, more analytical decisions about which agencies should 
carry out what programs, and help build more rigorous analysis across 
U.S. Government programs that may be working on similar issues.
  Foreign assistance is not just an issue of morality or an issue that 
is driven by a sense of doing what is right for the most 
disenfranchised around the world--these issues are directly in our 
national interests and our national security interests. Every time we 
provide credit to a farmer who is displaced or training to a woman who 
wants to run a business out of her home, we are making inroads to the 
bread and butter issues that people care about. When we provide an 
effective alternative to illicit economic activity, we are dealing a 
blow against drugs coming to the streets of New Jersey, and helping to 
build the institutions around the world that will provide the framework 
for stable and prosperous societies. We all want to live in a community 
where we can walk freely without fear of persecution, and without fear 
of our personal safety. No matter where you come from, these are a 
basic set of principles that resonate with all of us.

  Congress needs to see results, the American people need to see 
results, and so do the millions of people around the world whose lives 
literally depend on our ability to carry out these programs in the 
smartest way possible. This is why we have included an independent 
monitoring mechanism to evaluate the impact of our foreign assistance 
programs. It's one thing to say that we handed out 500 textbooks or 
trained 200 teachers, but it's far different to say that we improved 
the aptitude of school children and that these improvements help 
connect them to meaningful employment, which raised their household 
income, which allowed them to eat better, access medical services, and 
so on . . . it's the difference between outputs and outcomes that we 
are trying to get at with the independent evaluation unit, as outlined 
in the legislation we are introducing today.
  I have long believed that foreign assistance is a critical part of 
our overall engagement overseas and I have been a consistent advocate 
of stepping up our efforts in this area. In recent years, I have 
focused on building up the United States Agency for International 
Development, USAID, from the inside out--I have called for building-up 
the staff of USAID in a coherent and strategic manner--this bill will 
help do that.
  Now that USAID is working alongside the Department of Defense in 
places like Iraq and Afghanistan, and immersed in complex situations 
like those in Pakistan, Sudan, or Sri Lanka, we need an agency that is 
nimble, responsive, and ahead of the curve. From staffing, resources, 
and training, our development tools need to be, at the very least at 
par, if not ahead of our diplomatic and defense efforts.
  One way to start us along this path is to focus on USAID's 
leadership. It needs credible and high-profile leadership that can work 
in partnership with the Congress, the Department of State, the 
Department of Defense, and the National Security Council. The 
``development voice'' in our Government needs to be a ``heavyweight 
voice'' that commands respect both in Washington and around the world.
  I believe USAID needs to take back resources and programs that have 
slowly been moved over to the Department of Defense. Having the 
Department of State or the Department of Defense control development 
strategy and resources, with USAID simply serving as an implementing 
agency, has caused confusion and ambiguity. We ask our military to plan 
and execute a lot of missions; development should not be one of them. 
Civilian resources should be appropriated to civilian agencies.
  Staff at USAID needs to be rebuilt--not just with more people, but we 
need to make sure we have the right people and make sure we are 
attracting and retaining the best possible candidates. This bill will 
help us get there with the comprehensive human resource strategy that 
is mandated for human resources. We need to build up our foreign 
assistance programs not just where they used to be, but to where they 
need to be.

[[Page S8201]]

  I look forward to continuing our work on these programs. This 
legislation is a start, but there is much more work to be done. Let me 
be clear--this bill, combined with additional resources is not going to 
fix everything--foreign assistance has its limits. However, I believe 
we have not yet approached this limit. More resources, and better-spent 
resources, combined with active diplomatic and economic engagement will 
help build the institutions that will create more stable political, 
social, and economic systems.
  Only until we recognize that the success of those systems is deeply 
connected to the success of our own, will we begin to adequately 
address the joint challenges that threaten our national security, our 
economy, our way of life.
                                 ______