[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 27 (Friday, February 18, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E293-E294]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             FULL-YEAR CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2011

                                 ______
                                 

                                speech of

                          HON. DONALD M. PAYNE

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, February 15, 2011

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1) making 
     appropriations for the Department of Defense and the other 
     departments and agencies of the Government for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes:

  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to the FY 2011 
Continuing Resolution, which severely cuts critical funding for State 
and USAID and, if enacted would severely undermine U.S. development 
programs in Africa, U.S. National Security, and our domestic economy. 
The House bill provides State and USAID $43.2 billion.
  Development and diplomacy are the United States' first line of 
defense. Stable democracies and prosperous communities are less likely 
to pose a threat to their neighbors or to the United States.
  State and USAID work to help countries and communities in Africa and 
across the world to become more stable, democratic, and prosperous. 
When conflicts do arise, State and USAID work to transition countries 
from violence to stability to long-term development and to prevent 
struggling states from becoming failed states. Doing so reduces the 
burden on our military and enhances our diplomacy.
  The House bill would cut humanitarian assistance accounts by more 
than 40 percent below 2010 levels, devastating our ability to help 
victims of natural disasters and undermining U.S. leadership around the 
world.
  The International Disaster Assistance account allows us to respond to 
international disasters like the earthquake in Haiti and the flood in 
Pakistan. The House bill provides $429 million, taking this account 
back to 2008 levels--a 50 percent reduction to the 2010 level. This 
significant reduction will severely limit our ability to respond to 
natural disasters; we will simply be unable to respond to earthquakes 
and other disasters the way we did in Haiti.
  In Sudan, more than 1.6 million Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) 
in Darfur would not receive critical health care, access to water, or 
support with livelihood activities. Instead of reintegrating 
approximately 300,000 returnees to South Sudan in the wake of the 
referendum, USAID would be able to assist fewer than 150,000.
  In West Africa, proposed budget cuts would significantly hamper 
efforts to reduce and maintain acute malnutrition rates below emergency 
levels in drought-affected areas of Burkina Faso and Niger.
  The House mark will also end a cost-effective local and regional 
purchase program which enables the U.S. to feed hungry people by 
purchasing food locally at a significantly lower cost to the U.S. 
taxpayer.
  U.S. food aid continues to plays a critical role by helping people in 
need and supporting broader U.S. national security objectives by 
demonstrating the goodwill of the United States, especially in 
Afghanistan and Pakistan. U.S. food aid also supports domestic 
interests by the purchase of agricultural commodities from American 
farmers and the shipping of commodities abroad on U.S. ships.
  Reducing Title II food aid from the FY 2011 request of $1.690 billion 
to $1.003 billion forces dramatic cuts in food aid programs around the 
world, as well as decreasing purchases from U.S. farmers and the use of 
U.S. ships.
  This cut would require reductions in the largest emergency food aid 
programs, to include Sudan, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Given 
the average cost of emergency food aid of $44 per beneficiary, this 
would mean up to 15 million people might not receive such life-saving 
assistance due to the proposed reduction.
  The bill reduces funding for refugee relief by $670 million or 40 
percent below 2010 levels, representing a shift in U.S. policy of 
historical, unprecedented and devastating proportions. This reduction 
will drastically reduce the U.S. ability to protect and assist refugees 
in places of critical national security, such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, 
Iraq and the Horn of Africa.
  For example, a reduction of this magnitude jeopardizes U.S. support 
for 1.6 million Afghan refugees living in Pakistan and another 100,000 
Afghan refugees returning to Afghanistan this year alone. Also, some 
230,000 Burmese refugees in Thailand, Malaysia, Bangladesh and India 
would be at risk. And, security in the Horn of Africa and supporting 
peace in Sudan would also be at risk as some 3,000-5,000 Somalis are 
fleeing into Kenya each month and 270,000 Darfuris in Sudan and Chad 
will go largely unassisted.
  The House proposal also makes deep cuts in Global Health programs and 
Development Assistance. Disease knows no borders. As such, USAID's 
programs to prevent and treat infectious diseases not only benefit the 
most vulnerable overseas, but also protect American citizens at home. 
Moreover, this Continuing Resolution would disproportionately cut 
programs that help the neediest people around the world by 25 percent 
versus an 11 percent reduction overall.
  The proposed CR level cuts the Global Health Initiative by $834 
million from 2010 levels. While these cuts would have miniscule value 
in the goal of balancing the budget, they will have real, immediate, 
and devastating impact on the poorest.
  I am deeply disappointed by the Appropriators' choice to step away 
from America's long-term humanitarian interests in improving and 
preserving lives around the world by helping people lift themselves out 
of poverty. There is living proof across the world that less than 1 
percent of the total federal budget has helped poor farmers learn to 
grow more food more efficiently, provided a lifeline to millions with 
HIV--including pregnant women whose babies can now be born HIV-free--
put millions of children under malaria-fighting bed nets by night and 
into schools by day, and strengthened America's friendships with 
millions of people, thus strengthening our own national security.
  The cut to the PEPFAR program is $513 million below 2010, a 10 
percent reduction. At this level, the U.S. will be unable to provide 
treatment to more than 700,000 people in desperate need of life-saving 
HIV/AIDS treatment.
  The House bill cuts USAID health programs by $320 million (-13 
percent) from 2010 levels and nearly 30 percent below the 2011 request. 
Reducing the USAID Global Health and Child Survival by this magnitude 
will have devastating effects on men, women, and children worldwide.
  Under the proposed CR levels, 5 million children and family members 
will be denied treatment or preventative interventions for malaria, 
leaving millions to die. Moreover, 43,000 children and family members 
with tuberculosis will be denied treatment, of which 12,000 will likely 
die.
  More than 16 million persons will be denied treatment for such 
debilitating conditions as blinding trachoma and onchocerciasisis. 
Efforts would be scaled back in at least 10 countries where we were on 
track to interrupt transmission within five years of up to four of the 
NTDs. USAID will be forced to sever agreements with four major 
pharmaceutical companies that donate hundreds of millions worth of 
drugs for NTD treatment programs.
  The bill would force USAID to scale back efforts in the 24 countries 
which collectively account for approximately one-half of all maternal 
and child deaths. 3,500 mothers will die, and more than 40,000 children 
under five--of which 16,000 are newborns--will perish in the absence of 
highly effective child survival interventions.
  More than 500 thousand undernourished children will be deprived of 
highly effective nutrition interventions (e.g., community management of 
acute malnutrition, micronutrient supplementation, and nutrition 
education leading to dietary diversity).
  Placing an all-account ceiling of $440 million on family planning and 
reproductive health in 2011 amounts to a 32 percent cut from FY 2010 
levels. This would result in 1.2 million

[[Page E294]]

more abortions, 28,000 additional newborn deaths, and 4,000 additional 
maternal deaths--all stemming from denying 8.5 million women access to 
family planning services and by extension, 2.5 million additional 
unintended pregnancies.
  The House FY 2011 Continuing Resolution would reduce the Development 
Assistance account by nearly $750 million from 2010 levels, a 30 
percent reduction, and $1.2 billion from the 2011 request (-40 
percent).
  Absent deep cuts to other ongoing programs, in areas such as 
education, microfinance, and water, the House bill would virtually 
eliminate funding for the Feed the Future Initiative and the Global 
Climate Change Initiative.
  With world food prices at their highest since the 2007/2008 global 
food riots, and in view of the political volatility that food prices 
recently helped spark in the Middle East, it is more important than 
ever that the U.S. engage to improve long-term food security, and 
assist countries to avert short-term food crises. The recent events in 
Egypt that continue throughout the Middle East are a stark example of 
food insecurity's effect on stability.
  Decimating the President's Feed the Future (FtF) Initiative will mean 
that more than 4 million women, children, and family members--most 
small farmers--will go hungry this year, remaining desperately mired in 
poverty. More than 18 million will be at risk of chronic hunger over a 
five-year period. Ending funding for research and development under FtF 
will expose wheat crops--including here in the United States, and in 
Afghanistan and Pakistan--to the threats of U.G. 99 wheat stem rust 
strain.
  In just five out of our 20 focus countries, nearly 6.5 million small 
farmers, mostly poor and mostly women, will remain in the grips of 
hunger and poverty, unable to grow enough food to feed themselves and 
their families.
  Alternatively, spreading the 30 percent reduction across the 
Development Assistance Account would have significant negative effects 
on many congressional priorities including interventions in basic and 
higher education, microfinance, rule of law and governance, trade, and 
financial sector reform.
  Microfinance institutions in nearly 30 countries around the world 
will be forced to significantly scale back operations or shut their 
doors as funding dries up, resulting in 600,000 fewer women accessing 
financial services to sustain their businesses and contribute to the 
economic livelihoods of their families and communities.
  Over 20,000 Afghans will no longer have the tools they need to begin 
or sustain a microenterprise in the midst of the conflict, increasing 
the risk that they will turn to other, illicit economic livelihoods, 
like poppy production, to feed their families.
  As many as 300,000 rural microenterprises and over 600,000 
smallholder farmers will no longer be able to access the vital services 
and growing markets they need to generate cash income, break the cycle 
of subsistence agriculture, and chart a pathway out of poverty.
  A 30 percent cut in Development Assistance for water would mean that 
than 700,000 persons will be deprived access to clean drinking water 
and sanitation which, according to WHO, is one of the largest causes of 
mortality in the world--diarrhea-related disease kills nearly 2 million 
every year, 90 percent of whom are children under 5.
  Out of the approximately 64 million children benefitting from our 
education assistance worldwide, over 19 million will lose access to 
schooling opportunities. 10 million girls will be deprived access to 
basic education, causing further social and financial marginalization.
  I urge my colleagues to vote NO on the Continuing Resolution and any 
amendments that would strip critical and life saving programs in Africa 
and the developing world.

                          ____________________