[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 58 (Tuesday, April 4, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H2686-H2691]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DON'T CUT INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS BUDGET
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 3, 2017, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Castro) for 30 minutes.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am here this evening joined by
colleagues from the Foreign Affairs Committee to discuss President
Trump's extreme, proposed cuts to the International Affairs Budget.
The President's budget proposal would reduce funding for the State
Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, what we
know as USAID, by nearly a third. The proposal would reduce overall
funding for the International Affairs Budget by $17.4 billion, or 31
percent.
This would be a devastating reduction. U.S. diplomats and development
experts work to shape a freer, more secure, and more prosperous world
while advancing U.S. interests abroad. They build relationships with
foreign counterparts and resolve disputes to preserve peace and reduce
the need for military action.
They also provide critical services to U.S. citizens living and
working overseas and screen people seeking visas to visit the United
States. This work would all be compromised by the administration's
funding cuts. These cuts could also undercut President Trump's
purported priorities.
For example, these reductions could interrupt the Bureau of
Counterterrorism and Countering Violent Extremism and U.S. efforts to
disrupt money laundering and terror financing. Funding could be slashed
for nonproliferation, counternarcotics, and consular affairs--efforts
specifically focused on protecting Americans from foreign threats.
This work overseas is always important, but it is especially
necessary now in this tumultuous time, when the United States faces
complex challenges around the world:
In Asia, we see increased tensions in the South China Sea and an
increasingly hostile North Korea.
In Africa, there is a devastating famine in East Africa, brutal civil
wars, as well as terrorist organizations like Boko Haram and al-
Shabaab.
The refugee crisis stemming from unrest in the Middle East continues,
and we have just seen reports of more gas attacks on the Syrian people.
In South America, the people of Colombia have experienced devastating
floods that claimed more than 270 lives, a breakdown in the rule of law
in the Northern Triangle, and a government in Venezuela that has become
an oppressive dictatorship.
Even in Western Europe, we continue to combat terrorist threats from
organizations like ISIS, who 2 weeks ago inspired the attack in London.
These are challenging times for our world that require a fully funded
International Affairs Budget. But America's unilateral diplomatic and
development work is just one piece of our engagement overseas.
Following World War II, the United States helped lead the creation of
several multilateral organizations to foster peace and stability in the
world like the United Nations, NATO, and the World Bank. With its
budget proposal and heated rhetoric, the Trump administration is
threatening that architecture of peace and stability.
For example, the President recommends cutting funding for
multilateral development banks by $650 million over 3 years and capping
United Nations peacekeeping contributions to 25 percent of total
funding. These decisions will have a significant destabilizing impact
on the global order. If America retreats from the international stage,
other powers, like China, will step in to fill that void and exert
their influence. We cannot afford for that to happen.
That is why my colleagues and I are here tonight, to speak out
against the shortsighted, dangerous budget proposal and emphasize the
importance of the United States' diplomatic and development work.
[[Page H2687]]
And with that, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Sires).
Mr. SIRES. Mr. Speaker, as the ranking member of the Western
Hemisphere Subcommittee, I am very concerned about these cuts. This
undermines our leadership around the world and makes Americans less
safe. When you consider that foreign aid is only 1 percent of our
entire budget and helps keep Americans safe, it is an investment in our
security.
Fully funding our State Department and ensuring our diplomats have
the resources they need prevents conflicts, diffuses crises, and works
to keep American soldiers out of harm's way.
U.S. foreign aid helps protect some of the world's poorest people
from disease, starvation, and death. President Trump's own Secretary of
Defense, General James Mattis, said: ``If you don't fund the State
Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition. . . .''
I signed onto a letter led by Ranking Member Engel, along with my
Democratic colleagues on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, urging
the Speaker to oppose these draconian cuts.
We are already hearing from our allies all over the Western
Hemisphere how dangerous these cuts could be to the stability of the
region. Countries like Colombia fought a 52-year-long war with the FARC
guerrillas, and now, when they need us the most to implement the peace
deal, the Trump administration has signaled it is ready to abandon one
of our strongest partners in the world. The President claims to care
about protecting our sovereign border, but this budget says otherwise.
Both Republican and Democrat administrations have pushed for a strong
security, economic, and trade relationship with Mexico. Pushing our
neighbors away could cost billions of dollars to our U.S. businesses.
{time} 1830
Instead of working with our partners in the Western Hemisphere,
President Trump is preventing us from maintaining a robust relationship
with our neighbors to pay for this unrealistic and ineffective wall.
In Central America, we risk seeing a repeat of the 2014 crisis when
nearly 70,000 children made the dangerous journeys from Guatemala,
Honduras, and El Salvador after being threatened with violence,
assault, and forced gang recruitment. Our engagement in Central America
is helping to bring calm to the region, and abandoning our friends in
their time of need puts America at risk. Retreating from the world will
allow other countries like China and Russia to take our place as a
global leader.
Instead of building a wall, the President should continue working
with our neighbors to enhance cooperation instead of alienating friends
who have stood by us for decades.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I should have mentioned, of course,
that Congressman Sires is the ranking member on the Western Hemisphere
Subcommittee on the Foreign Affairs Committee. His experience in that
region in particular is vast.
I am glad that you mentioned that this is really part of a larger
theme and a larger concern, because President Trump, in addition to
proposing to cut a lot of funds for diplomacy and development around
the world, has also shown a real hostility towards other nations,
including some of our best allies and friends around the world, and
that is of great concern.
For example, this issue with Mexico which you brought up, forcing
Mexico to pay for the wall and constructing this wall along the 2,000-
mile border that we have between the United States and Mexico and
cutting aid if necessary, which he has threatened to do if Mexico won't
pay for it, I have said very clearly that that creates an opportunity
for China to step in or the Chinese President Xi Jinping to go into
Latin America, go into Mexico and offer to give Mexico whatever Donald
Trump takes away. That would strengthen China's hand in yet another
region of the world.
Of course, China is a big economic competitor of the United States,
and I relate to my Texas folks because Texas does an incredible amount
of trade with Mexico, and we have been very fortunate over the years
that Mexico buys a lot of our stuff. They buy a lot of our goods. But
they don't have to just buy that stuff from Texas or the United States,
generally. They could go buy it from Brazil. They could buy it from
China or somewhere else.
So thank you for mentioning that.
Mr. SIRES. Mr. Speaker, I couldn't agree more. Already we are
starting to see the influence of China in most of the countries in
South America.
You know, I had a conversation with one of the presidents of the
colleges in Colombia on one of my trips. He was telling me how the
influence of China in Colombia is so strong. He was telling me that the
second most studied language in Colombia today is Mandarin. When you
think of that, that is a frightening thought.
You talk about the influence in Nicaragua of the Chinese. They even
think of building a canal, which many people think will never happen.
But to have China so close to our borders is not good for America. To
push away our neighbors is not good for America. We must work with our
neighbors. People don't realize the amount of economic activity between
the United States and the rest of Central America and Mexico.
I read something very funny the other day. Well, it is not funny, but
it is really sad. They were discussing this wall that the President
proposes. Some people say: Where are we going to put it? In the middle
of the river? Or are we going to put it on the American side and give
the river to Mexico? Or are we going to go invade Mexico and put the
wall on the Mexican side and keep the river to ourselves?
So I thought that was telling of the difficulty.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. It has been a very thorny issue, as you can
imagine, especially in Texas. Both Republicans and Democrats have
expressed deep concern about building a wall and spending $20 billion
to $30 billion to do it, and that concern, I think, has reached the
U.S. Congress. I think that is part of why you see a reluctance on the
part of the Senate, for example, to move forward with this in their
appropriations bill, in their budget.
I yield to our ranking member on the Foreign Affairs Committee, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, as the ranking member on the House Foreign
Affairs Committee, I join with my colleagues. I want to thank the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro), who is a valued member of our
committee, for his leadership on this critical issue, and also the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Sires). I agree with everything that
they have said heretofore about these draconian cuts.
I am here because I am rising to strongly reject the Trump
Administration's draconian cuts to the International Affairs Budget.
Now 2\1/2\ months into the Trump Administration, I find myself deeply
troubled by the direction American foreign policy is heading on many
fronts. I was particularly shocked when the White House released its
fiscal year 2018 budget calling for a 31 percent cut to American
diplomacy and development efforts.
In my view, cutting the International Affairs Budget by even a
fraction of that amount would be devastating. We haven't seen many
details, but a cut that drastic would surely mean that too many efforts
and initiatives that do so much good would wind up on the chopping
block.
Here is the bottom line: Slashing diplomacy and development puts
American lives at risk. If we no longer have diplomacy and development
tools to meet international challenges, what does that leave? It leaves
the military.
Now, don't get me wrong. I have always supported a strong national
defense, and I do support our military, and I do support giving them
more money. But I also support using military force only as a measure
of last resort. We should not send American servicemembers into harm's
way unless we have exhausted every other option. If we are not
investing in diplomacy and development, we aren't even giving these
other options a chance.
We rely on diplomacy to resolve conflicts across negotiating tables
at multilateral gatherings and in quiet corners so that we don't need
to resolve them down the line on the battlefield. Our diplomats work to
strengthen old alliances and build new bridges of friendship and shared
understanding.
Just last week, the Foreign Affairs Committee held a hearing on the
[[Page H2688]]
Trump Administration's efforts to decimate our International Affairs
Budget. In his testimony at the hearing, former Under Secretary of
State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns said that morale at the
State Department is ``at its lowest point in my memory.''
It is deeply disturbing to hear that our diplomats, many of whom
serve in dangerous places at high risk to themselves and their
families, are so disheartened.
Of course it is not just former diplomats who reject these cuts. A
recent letter signed by more than 120 retired generals and admirals to
House and Senate leadership said: ``We urge you to ensure that
resources for the International Affairs Budget keep pace with the
growing global threats and opportunities we face. Now is not the time
to retreat.''
Mr. Speaker, I include their letter in the Record in its entirety.
February 27, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
House of Representatives.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Minority Leader,
House of Representatives.
Hon. Mitch McConnell,
Majority Leader,
U.S. Senate.
Hon. Chuck Schumer,
Minority Leader,
U.S. Senate.
Dear Speaker Ryan, Minority Leader Pelosi, Majority Leader
McConnell, and Minority Leader Schumer: As you and your
colleagues address the federal budget for Fiscal Year 2018.
we write as retired three and four star flag and general
officers from all branches of the armed services to share our
strong conviction that elevating and strengthening diplomacy
and development alongside defense are critical to keeping
America safe.
We know from our service in uniform that many of the crises
our nation faces do not have military solutions alone--from
confronting violent extremist groups like ISIS in the Middle
East and North Africa to preventing pandemics like Ebola and
stabilizing weak and fragile states that can lead to greater
instability. There are 65 million displaced people today. the
most since World War II, with consequences including refugee
flows that are threatening America's strategic allies in
Israel, Jordan, Turkey, and Europe.
The State Department. USAID, Millennium Challenge
Corporation, Peace Corps and other development agencies are
critical to preventing conflict and reducing the need to put
our men and women in uniform in harm's way. As Secretary
James Mattis said while Commander of U.S. Central Command,
``If you don't fully fund the State Department, then I need
to buy more ammunition.'' The military will lead the fight
against terrorism on the battlefield, but it needs strong
civilian partners in the battle against the drivers of
extremism--lack of opportunity, insecurity, injustice, and
hopelessness.
We recognize that America's strategic investments in
diplomacy and development--like all of U.S. investments--must
be effective and accountable. Significant reforms have been
undertaken since 9/11, many of which have been embodied in
recent legislation in Congress with strong bipartisan
support--on human trafficking, the rights of women and girls.
trade and energy in Africa, wildlife trafficking. water. food
security. and transparency and accountability.
We urge you to ensure that resources for the International
Affairs Budget keep pace with the growing global threats and
opportunities we face. Now is not the time to retreat.
Sincerely,
1. General Keith B. Alexander, USA (Ret.), Director.
National Security Agency ('05-'14), Commander, U.S. Cyber
Command ('10-'14)
2. General John R. Allen, USMC (Ret.), Commander, NATO
International Security Force ('11-'13), Commander, U.S.
Forces-Afghanistan ('11-'13)
3. Lt. General Edward G. Anderson III, USA (Ret.), Vice
Commander, U.S. Element, North American Aerospace Defense
Command/Deputy, Commander, U.S. Northern Command ('02-'04)
4. Lt. General Thomas L. Baptiste, USAF (Ret.), Deputy
Chairman, NATO Military Committee ('04-'07)
5. Lt. General Ronald R. Blanck, USA (Ret.), Surgeon
General of the United States Army ('96-'00)
6. Lt. General H. Steven Blum, USA (Ret.), Deputy
Commander, U.S. North American Aerospace Defense Command and
U.S. Northern Command ('09-'10)
7. Lt. General Steven W. Boutelle, USA (Ret.), Chief
Information Officer and G6, United States Army ('03-'07)
8. Admiral Frank L. Bowman, USN (Ret.), Director, Naval
Nuclear Propulsion ('96-'04)
9. General Charles G. Boyd, USAF (Ret.), Deputy Commander
in Chief, U.S. European Command ('92-'95)
10. General Bryan Doug Brown, LISA (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Special Operations Command ('03-'07)
11. General Arthur E. Brown, Jr., USA (Ret.), Vice Chief of
Staff of the United States Amy ('87-'89)
12. Vice Admiral Michael Bucchi, USN (Ret.), Commander of
the United States Third Fleet ('00-'03)
13. Lt. General John H. Campbell, USAF (Ret.), Associate
Director of Central Intelligence for Military Support,
Central Intelligence Agency ('00-'03)
14. General Bruce Carlson, USAF (Ret.), Director, National
Reconnaissance Office ('09-'12)
15. General George W. Casey, Jr., USA (Ret.), Chief of
Staff of the United States Army ('07-'11)
16. Lt. General John G. Castellaw, USMC (Ret.), Deputy
Commandant for Programs and Resources ('07-'08)
17. Lt. General Dennis D. Cavin, USA (Ret.), Commander,
U.S. Army Accessions Command ('02-'04)
18. General Peter W. Chiarelli, USA (Ret.), Vice Chief of
Staff, U.S. Army ('08-'12)
19. Lt. General Daniel W. Christman, USA (Ret.),
Superintendent, United States Military Academy ('96-'01)
20. Lt. General George R. Christmas. USMC (Ret.), Deputy
Chief of Staff for Manpower and Reserve Affairs ('94-'96)
21. Admiral Vern Clark, USN (Ret.), Chief of Naval
Operations ('00-'05)
22. Admiral Archie R. Clemins, USN (Ret.), Commander in
Chief, U.S. Pacific Fleet ('96-'99)
23. General Richard A. ``Dick'' Cody, USA (Ret.), Vice
Chief of Staff, United States Army ('04-'08)
24. Lt. General John B. Conaway, USAF (Ret.), Chief,
National Guard Bureau ('90-'93)
25. General James T. Conway, USMC (Ret.), Commandant, U.S.
Marine Corps ('06-'10)
26. General John D.W. Corley, USAF (Ret.), Commander, Air
Combat Command ('07-'09)
27. General Bantz J. Craddock, USA (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
European Command and NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe
('06-'09)
28. Vice Admiral Lewis W. Crenshaw, Jr., USN (Ret.), Deputy
Chief of Naval Operations for Resources, Requirements, and
Assessments ('04-'07)
29. Lt. General John ``Mark'' M. Curran, USA (Ret.), Deputy
Commanding General Futures, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine
Command ('03-'07)
30. General Terrence R. Dake, USMC (Ret.), Assistant
Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps ('98-'00)
31. Lt. General Robert R. Dierker, USAF (Ret.), Deputy
Commander, U.S. Pacific Command ('02-'04)
32. Admiral Kirkland H. Donald, USN (Ret.), Director, Naval
Nuclear Propulsion ('04-'12)
33. Lt. General James M. Dubik, USA (Ret.), Commander,
Multi National Security Transition Command and NATO Training
Mission-Iraq ('07-'08)
34. Lt. General Kenneth E. Eickmann, USAF (Ret.),
Commander, Aeronautical Systems Center, U.S. Air Force ('96-
'98)
35. Admiral William J. Fallon, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Central Command ('07-'08)
36. Admiral Thomas B. Fargo, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Pacific Command ('02-'05)
37. Admiral Mark P. Fitzgerald, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Naval Forces Europe ('07-'10) and U.S. Naval Forces Africa
('09-'10)
38. General Ronald R. Fogleman, USAF (Ret.), Chief of Staff
of the United States Air Force ('94-'97)
39. Lt. General Benjamin C. Freakley, USA (Ret.),
Commander, U.S. Army Accessions Command ('07-'12)
40. Lt. General Robert G. Gard, Jr., USA (Ret.), President,
National Defense University ('77-'81)
41. Admiral Jonathan W. Greenert, USN (Ret.), Chief of
Naval Operations ('11-'15)
42. Lt. General Arthur J. Gregg, USA (Ret.), Army Deputy
Chief of Staff ('79-'81)
43. Lt. General Wallace C. Gregson, USMC (Ret.), Commanding
General, Marine Corps Forces Pacific and Marine Corps Forces
Central Command ('03-'05)
44. Vice Admiral Lee F. Gunn, USN (Ret.), Inspector
General, U.S. Navy ('97-'00)
45. General Michael W. Hagee, USMC (Ret.), Commandant, U.S.
Marine Corps ('O3-'06)
46. Lt. General Michael A. Hamel, USAF (Ret.), Commander,
Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center ('05-'08)
47. General John W. Handy, USAF (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Transportation Command and Commander, Air Mobility Command
('01-'05)
48. Admiral John C. Harvey, Jr., USN (Ret.), Commander,
U.S. Fleet Forces Command ('09-'12)
49. General Richard E. Hawley, USAF (Ret.), Commander, Air
Combat Command ('96-'99)
50. General Michael V. Hayden, USAF (Ret.), Director,
Central Intelligence Agency ('06-'09)
51. General Paul V. Hester, USAF (Ret.), Commander, Pacific
Air Forces. Air Component Commander for the U.S. Pacific
Command Commander ('04-'07)
52. General James T. Hill, USA (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Southern Command ('02-'04)
53. Admiral James R. Hogg. USN (Ret.), U.S. Military
Representative, NATO Military Committee ('88-'91)
54. Lt. General Walter S. Hogle Jr., USAF (Ret.),
Commander, 15th Air Force ('00-'01)
55. Lt. General Steven A. Hummer, USMC (Ret.), Deputy
Commander for Military Operations, U.S. Africa Command ('13-
'15)
56. Lt. General William E. Ingram, Jr.. USA (Ret.),
Director, U.S. Army National Guard ('11-'14)
[[Page H2689]]
57. General James L. Jamerson, USAF (Ret.), Deputy
Commander in Chief, U.S. European Command ('95-'98)
58. Lt. General Arlen D. Jameson, USAF (Ret.), Deputy
Commander in Chief, U.S. Strategic Command ('93-'96)
59. Admiral Gregory G. Johnson, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Naval Forces Europe/Commander in Chief, Allied Forces
Southern Europe ('01-'04)
60. Admiral Jerome L. Johnson, USN (Ret.), Vice Chief of
Naval Operations ('90-'92)
61. Lt. General P. K. ``Ken'' Keen, USA (Ret.), Chief,
Office of the U.S. Defense Representative to Pakistan ('11-
'13)
62. Lt. General Richard L. Kelly, USMC (Ret.), Deputy
Commandant, Installations and Logistics ('02-'05)
63. Lt. General Claudia J. Kennedy, USA (Ret.), Deputy
Chief of Staff for Army Intelligence ('97-'00)
64. General Paul J. Kem, USA (Ret.), Commanding General,
U.S. Army Materiel Command ('01-'04)
65. General William F. Kernan, USA (Ret.), Supreme Allied
Commander, Atlantic/Commander in Chief. U.S. Joint Forces
Command ('00-'02)
66. Lt. General Donald L. Kerrick, USA (Ret.), Deputy
National Security Advisor to The President of the United
States ('00-'01)
67. Lt. General Bruce B. Knutson, USMC (Ret.), Commanding
General, Marine Corp Combat Command ('00-'01)
68. Vice Admiral Albert H. Konetzni, Jr., USN (Ret.),
Deputy Conunander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command and U.S.
Atlantic Fleet ('01-'04)
69. General Charles Chandler Krulak, USMC (Ret.),
Commandant of the Marine Corps ('95-'99)
70. (Ret.), Lt. General William J. Lennox, Jr., USA
(Ret.), Superintendent, United States Military Academy ('01-
'06)
71. Vice Admiral Stephen F. Loftus, USN (Ret.), Deputy
Chief of Naval Operations for Logistics ('90-'94)
72. General Lance W. Lord, USAF (Ret.), Commander, U.S. Air
Force Space Command ('02-'06)
73. Admiral James M. Loy, USCG (Ret.), Commandant, U.S.
Coast Guard ('98-'02)
74. Vice Admiral Joseph Maguire, USN (Ret.), Deputy
Director for Strategic Operational Planning, National
Counterterrorism Center ('07-'10)
75. Admiral Henry H. Mauz, Jr., USN (Ret.), Commander in
Chief, U.S. Atlantic Fleet ('92-'94)
76. Vice Admiral Justin D. McCarthy, SC, USN (Ret.), Deputy
Chief of Naval Operations, Fleet Readiness, and Logistics
('04-'07)
77. Lt. General Dennis McCarthy, USMC (Ret.), Commander,
Marine Forces Reserve ('01-'05)
78. Vice Admiral John ``Mike'' M. McConnell, USN (Ret.),
Director of the National Security Agency ('92-'96)
79. General David D. McKiernan, USA (Ret.), Commander,
International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan ('08-
'09)
80. General Dan K. McNeill, USA, (Ret.), Commander,
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan
('07-'08)
81. General Merrill A. McPeak, USAF (Ret.), Chief of Staff,
U.S. Air Force ('90-'94)
82. Lt. General Paul T. Mikolashek, USA (Ret.), Inspector
General, U.S. Army/Commanding General of the Third U.S. Army
Forces Central Command ('00-'02)
83. Vice Admiral Joseph S. Mobley, USN (Ret.), Commander,
Naval Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet ('98-'01)
84. General Thomas R. Morgan, USMC (Ret.), Assistant
Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps ('86-'88)
85. Lt. General Carol A. Mutter, USMC (Ret.), Deputy Chief
of Staff, Manpower and Reserve Affairs, Marine Corps ('96-
'98)
86. Admiral Robert J. Natter, USN (Ret.), Commander, Fleet
Forces Command/Commander, U.S. Atlantic Fleet ('00-'03)
87. General William L. Nyland, USMC (Ret.), Assistant
Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps ('02-'05)
88. Lt. General Tad J. Oelstrom, USAF (Ret.),
Superintendent, U.S. Air Force Academy ('97-'00)
89. Admiral Eric T. Olson, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Special Operation Command ('07-'11)
90. Lt. General H. P. ``Pete'' Osman, USMC (Ret.),
Commanding General II MEF ('02-'04)
91. Lt. General Jeffrey W. Oster. USMC (Ret.), Deputy
Administrator and Chief Operating Officer, Coalition
Provisional Authority, Iraq '04), Deputy Commandant for
Programs and Resources, Headquarters Marine Corps ('98)
92. Admiral William A. Owens, USN (Ret.), Vice Chairman,
Joint Chiefs of Staff ('94-'96)
93. Lt. General Frank A. Panter, Jr., USMC (Ret.), Deputy
Commandant for Installations and Logistics ('09-'12)
94. Vice Admiral David Pekoske, USCG (Ret.), Vice
Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard ('09-'10)
95. General David H. Petraeus, USA (Ret.), Director,
Central Intelligence Agency ('11-'12); Commander, Coalition
Forces in Afghanistan ('10-'11) and Iraq ('07-'08)
96. Vice Admiral Carol M. Pottenger, USN (Ret.), Deputy
Chief of Staff for Capability Development, NATO Allied
Command Transformation ('10-'13)
97. Admiral Joseph W. Prueher, USN (Ret.), Commander in
Chief, U.S. Pacific Command ('96-'99)
98. Lt. General Harry D. Raduege, Jr., USAF (Ret.),
Director, Defense Information Systems Agency/Commander, Joint
Task Force for Global Network Operations/Deputy Commander,
Global Network Operations and Defense, U.S. Strategic Command
Joint Forces Headquarters, Information Operations ('00-'05)
99. Vice Admiral Norman W. Ray, USN (Ret.), Deputy
Chairman, NATO Military Committee ('92-'95)
100. Lt. General John F. Regni, USAF (Ret.),
Superintendent, United States Air Force Academy ('05-'09)
101. General Victor ``Gene'' E. Renuart, USAF (Ret.),
Commander, North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S.
Northern Command ('07-'10)
102. General Robert W. RisCassi, USA (Ret.), Commander in
Chief, United Nations Command/Commander in Chief, Republic of
Korea/U.S. Combined Forces Command ('90-'93)
103. Lt. General Norman R. Seip, USAF (Ret.), Commander,
12th Air Force/Air Forces Southern ('06-'09)
104. General Henry H. Shelton, USA (Ret.), Chairman, Joint
Chiefs of Staff ('97-'01)
105. Admiral William D. Smith, USN (Ret.), U.S. Military
Representative, NATO Military Committee ('91-'93)
106. Admiral Leighton W. Smith, Jr., USN (Ret.), Commander
in Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe/Commander in Chief, Allied
Forces Southern Europe ('94-'96)
107. Lt. General James N. Soligan, USAF (Ret.), Deputy
Chief of Staff for Transformation, Allied Command
Transformation ('06-'10)
108. Admiral James G. Stavridis, USN (Ret.), Commander,
U.S. European Command and NATO Supreme Allied Commander,
Europe ('09-'13)
109. Lt. General Martin R. Steele, USMC (Ret.), Deputy
Chief of Staff for Plans, Policies and Operations, U.S.
Marine Corps ('97-'99)
110. General Carl W. Stiner, USA (Ret.), Commander in
Chief, U.S. Special Operations Command ('90-'93)
111. Vice Admiral Edward M. Straw, USN (Ret.), Director,
Defense Logistics Agency ('92-'96)
112. Vice Admiral William D. Sullivan, USN (Ret.), U.S.
Military Representative to NATO Military Committee ('06-'09)
113. Lt. General William J. Troy, USA (Ret.), Director,
Army Staff ('10-'13)
114. Admiral Henry G. Ulrich, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Naval Forces Europe/Commander, Joint Forces Command Naples
('05-'08)
115. General Charles F. Wald, USAF (Ret.), Deputy
Commander, U.S. European Command ('02-'06)
116. General William S. Wallace, USA (Ret.), Commanding
General, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command ('05-'08)
117. Lt. General William ``Kip'' E. Ward, USA (Ret.),
Commander, U.S. Africa Command ('07-'11)
118. General Charles E. Wilhelm, USMC (Ret.), Commander,
U.S. Southern Command ('97-'00)
119. General Michael J. Williams, USMC (Ret.), Assistant
Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps ('00-'02)
120. General Ronald W. Yates, USAF (Ret.), Commander. Air
Force Materiel Command ('92-'95)
121. General Anthony C. Zinni, USMC (Ret.), Commander in
Chief, U.S. Central Command ('97-'00)
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, in 2013, Secretary of Defense Mattis
similarly said: ``If you don't fund the State Department fully, then I
need to buy more ammunition ultimately. So I think it's a cost benefit
ratio. The more that we put into the State Department's diplomacy,
hopefully the less we have to put into a military budget as we deal
with the outcome of an apparent American withdrawal from the
international scene.''
That is from Secretary of Defense Mattis. I couldn't agree with him
more.
Now, I believe that development helps to lift countries and
communities up today so they can become strong partners on the global
stage tomorrow. A lot of us think we have a moral obligation to help
cure disease, improve access to education, and advance human rights.
But even if it were not the right thing to do, it would be the smart
thing to do because those efforts lead to greater stability, more
responsive governments, and stronger rule of law--populations that
share our values and priorities. Poverty and lack of opportunity, on
the other hand, provide fertile ground for those who mean us harm.
All these efforts, by the way, cost cents on the dollar compared to
military engagement. People think international affairs and foreign aid
are a massive chunk of the Federal budget, but the chart right over
here next to me shows how it actually stacks up: 1.4 percent. And we
make that sliver of the pie even smaller. It will come back on us in
spades. 1.4 percent of our Federal budget goes to all these programs.
The diseases we don't combat will reach our shores; the communities
on which we turn or backs may be the next generation of people who mean
us
[[Page H2690]]
harm; and the conflicts we fail to defuse may well grow into the wars
we need to fight later at a much higher cost in terms of American blood
and treasure. Just imagine having to tell the parents of a young
American soldier that their son or daughter was killed in battle
because we weren't willing to spend the tiny sums needed to prevent the
conflict.
Finally, let me say that the American people don't want to see us
slash diplomacy and development. In fact, recent data shows that 72
percent of Americans believe the country should play a leading global
role. Nearly 6 in 10 believe funding levels at the State Department
should stay the same or increase.
Fortunately, the Congress is a coequal branch of government. I want
to the remind the executive branch of that. We in Congress decide how
much to invest in our international affairs, not the White House.
For example, regardless of how this administration is playing footsie
with Vladimir Putin, Congress will devote resources to push back
against the Kremlin's efforts to spread disinformation and destabilize
our allies, just like they did to the United States during last year's
election campaign.
I am hopeful that, as we move forward with next year's spending
bills, we continue to provide our diplomatic and development efforts
the support they need and the support they have received under
Republican and Democratic Presidents alike.
With the President's proposed cuts, I fear what message we are
sending to the world. The United States is the global standard bearer
for freedom, justice, and democracy. If we cede our role as a global
leader, make no mistake, someone will step into the void. It could very
well be another power that doesn't share our values or our interests.
Think Russia or some country like that.
We cannot allow that to happen. I am committed to ensuring it
doesn't, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides
of the aisle to firmly reject President Trump's cuts.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Engel for all
of his years of work on behalf of the Nation on the Foreign Affairs
Committee.
I know you may have a busy schedule this evening. We have got about
12 minutes left, so I thought we would just have a discussion on some
of these issues. Stick with us if you can.
Mr. ENGEL. You are doing a fine job.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Speaker, Congressman Engel mentioned
maintaining the United States' position as a leader in the world and
not ceding that to another country, whether it is China or Russia, who
has been very aggressive, and it is not just maintaining a strong
defense.
I represent what is known as Military City, USA: San Antonio, Texas.
Once upon a time we had five military bases in San Antonio. We still
have Joint Base San Antonio, which is a large operation. So it is not
just about a strong defense, which we all support, but also about the
hard work of diplomacy and development.
The United States, who has been a leader for so long, if we back away
from our commitments, then we not only cede it to somebody else, but
there is a good chance that a lot of that work is not going to get
done, that the peoples in many nations around the world are going to
become poorer, more desperate; and from that, only bad things can
happen both for those peoples, but also for the neighboring countries,
for the United States, and for the world.
Thank you for lending your strong voice to support for the diplomatic
budget.
I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I couldn't agree with him more. And, you
know, it is especially interesting since, during the campaign,
President Trump attacked the previous administration for not being
strong enough, for not showing American presence. And now with this
cut, with this proposed 31 percent cut, I couldn't think of anything
that would make us weaker or make us unable to do what we need to do.
{time} 1845
So I hope the President remembers what he said during the campaign
and acts accordingly so that these massive cuts can be taken away.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. No, absolutely. And Congressman Sires, you
recall that during those months, then-Candidate Trump talked about
backing away from NATO; about allowing Germany, for example, to handle
the issues between Russia and the Baltic States; about allowing or
really forcing Japan and South Korea to go it alone or to develop even
their own nuclear weapons to combat the threat of North Korea, to deal
with China's aggressiveness in the South China Sea.
So the more we go down that road, not only do we abandon those
nations who have been friends for so long and allies and supporters for
so long in keeping the peace, but we also, in the long run, threaten
our own security.
I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. SIRES. If I might, I couldn't agree with the gentleman more. Just
to bring it even closer to home, we recently met with the attorneys
general from the Northern Triangle. These attorneys general have been
fighting corruption, have been fighting the cartel. We have assisted
them with a small amount of money. These people put their lives every
day in peril fighting the cartel, fighting this corruption.
In our conversation, they said to me: We need America's support to
continue our work. If we stop now, all that we have accomplished until
now is going to go for naught.
When you are talking about a small amount of money, the strong impact
that it has on countries that, for decades, have experienced a great
deal of corruption, and we finally have people that have stepped
forward and want to fight this corruption and put their lives in peril
every single day, I think we should support those people. Cutting and
running away from these people can only hurt us.
This is just one small example of the impact that this 30 percent cut
would have on this region.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. The gentleman mentioned the Northern Triangle
countries of Central America. Especially over the last few years,
thousands of women and children who are fleeing very desperate
situations there, not only extreme poverty, but the threats of violence
by drug gangs, for example, have come to the Texas-Mexico border
seeking asylum.
Congress did, over the last few years, essentially, pass assistance
for these nations. And we understood that, look, if you allocate $600
million to three countries, that is not going to solve all of their
problems. Nobody is under that illusion. But it can go a long way in
being the seed funds to start to turn these things around and these
nations around.
Mr. ENGEL. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. ENGEL. I would add that we give foreign aid, and it is good for
those countries, but it is also good for us. It also helps us. If there
is a drug problem in Central America, it inevitably comes up to our
border.
If there is some problem with some developing country, say, we have a
disease that could--Ebola or something like that, and we give money to
help eradicate it, well, that will prevent Ebola from coming into the
United States. So it is really a win-win situation.
Again, if we are going to be the leaders of the world, certainly of
the free world, and we want other countries to follow our lead, well,
if you are a leader, you have to lead. What we are doing is in our own
best interests, not only just in the other countries' best interests.
I think it is important to say that. And it is important to, again,
say, 1 percent--1.4 percent of our total budget is all the foreign aid
and all the money that we give in terms of eradicating diseases, in
terms of crime, in terms of everything that is actually very important
to us as well. The American people think it is much higher, but it is
not.
So if you take the President's slashing of it, it would virtually
make all of this impossible to do. So it is a program that is a win-win
situation.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Congressman Engel, you mentioned Ebola, for
example. Dallas, Texas, was the first American city to confront the
challenge and
[[Page H2691]]
the problem of Ebola. So I couldn't agree with you more.
It should also be said that if you take away this aid and you have
people becoming more desperate in nations around the world, they do
become more susceptible to being employed by, for example, drug
cartels, or being lured by terrorist organizations because these folks
are desperate and need to survive. So these rogue alternatives become
more attractive to them.
So it is important to point out that a lot of this development and a
lot of this aid also prevents some of these things from happening.
I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. ENGEL. Absolutely. Again, I want to reiterate that we are not the
leaders of the world because we anointed ourselves. We are the leaders
of the world because we provided leadership for all of these years,
particularly after World War II, and it is important to engage with the
world.
One of the gentlemen mentioned some of the things that the President
said. You know, one of the things he did was he called NATO obsolete.
That kind of talk worries me because it is our alliances that are the
pillar of our foreign policy and the strength of the United States and
our alliances which have worked so well since World War II.
So if we denigrate our alliances, and then we cut funding for all
these programs that help various countries so we can be a leader by
about a third, that doesn't say much for a robust foreign policy. You
get to be a leader by acting like a leader, not by pulling away from
the world.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Absolutely. I will give Mr. Sires the last word.
I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. SIRES. Well, before we finish, I just want to compliment Chairman
Royce and Ranking Member Engel on the recent resolution that we worked
on together in encouraging Argentina to continue on the path under new
President Macri. Former President de Kirchner decided that she was
going to be an isolationist.
Argentina is too big. It is a country that could be a player in
assisting us in any crisis that we have in South America. So this
resolution did not cost any money, but it shows our friendship, it
shows our support, and it shows that they are moving in the right
direction.
So my compliments to the gentleman, my compliments to the people that
signed this resolution.
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
____________________