Testimony of the Hon. Dan Glickman and Amb. Mark Green (Ret.)

Testimony of the Hon. Dan Glickman and Amb. Mark Green (Ret.)

Page 1 of 5

1360 words

Introduction

Chairwoman Granger, Ranking Member Lowey, and members

of the Subcommittee, it is an honor to appear before you today

to discuss the FY 2012 International Affairs Budget. We are here

today representing the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, a

―strange bedfellows coalition‖ comprised of businesses like

Boeing, Caterpillar, and Walmart, and leading humanitarian

NGOs like CARE, Catholic Relief Services and World Vision.

USGLC brings together Republicans and Democrats, national

security and foreign policy experts, and business, faith-based

and community leaders all across the country who are united in

their support of a strong International Affairs Budget smart power

funding.

In recent months, the Obama Administration has used the

phrase ―Winning the Future‖ to describe its governing

platform.


Page 2 of 5

Republican lawmakers have coined the phrase ―Path to

Prosperity‖ to describe their vision and plan. Regardless of

which term you prefer, we strongly believe that the

International Affairs Budget should be viewed as an essential

part of a brighter future for Americans.

USGLC We certainly recognizes the fiscal challenges our nation

is facing and, as former lawmakers ourselves, we know that you

have difficult choices ahead of you. Every agency will need to

tighten its belt. However, for the reasons we’ll discuss, we urge

you to do everything you can to oppose deep and

disproportionate cuts to the International Affairs Budget and

ensure that our these tools of diplomacy and development so

they can remain strong and productive.

International Affairs Budget is a Critical Tool to Our National

Security


Page 3 of 5

We believe that the International Affairs Budget requires strong

funding because quite simply, it is an essential part of our

national security. First, in the immediate sense, we must have

adequate diplomacy and development robust smart power

resources to hasten the day when our military men and women

can return home from conflict zones where they are serving so

courageously.

This summer, as you know, we will begin the transfer of our

mission in Iraq from military to civilian leadership. Deep cuts

in our civilian funding at this time could jeopardize the fragile

gains we’ve made.

On this count, you don’t need to take our word for it. General

David Petraeus recently testified that he needs strong civilian

partners in our Afghanistan mission because it ―is a


Page 4 of 5

comprehensive civil-military counterinsurgency campaign.‖

General Petraeus is hardly alone in his conclusion.

Last year, Joint Chiefs Chairman Mullen sent a letter to

Congress in support of international affairs funding with a

handwritten note saying starkly, ―the more significant the cuts,

the longer military operations will take, and the more and more

lives are at risk!‖

Maintaining robust ―smart power‖ tools of diplomacy and

development alongside a not only complements strong defense or

hand power, it enhances our national security by preventing

conflicts before they require costly military action. As fmr-Sec.

of State Condoleezza Rice has said, ―we must now use our

foreign assistance to help prevent future Afghanistans—and to

make America and the world safer.‖

But, It’s not just in the frontline states where these programs do

so much to keep America safe. Around the world, well-designed


Page 5 of 5

development and diplomacy programs are critical in helping

partner nations build stronger institutions & greater capacity to

address the conditions that can lead to despair and instability.

As our first Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge has

noted, ―The programs supported by the International Affairs

Budget are as essential to our national security as defense

programs. Development and diplomacy protect our nation by

addressing the root causes of terrorism and conflict.‖

It’s interesting to note that those who serve on the front lines of

our national defense are often the most vocal supporters of

these civilian tools. For example, 70 retired U.S. military

leaders – 3- and 4-star Generals and Admirals -- recently sent a

letter to Congress cautioning against cuts to these programs.

It was for all of the foregoing reasons that, beginning in In 2007, the

Bush Adminsistration began including the International Affairs

Budget as part of national security funding in all of its annual


Page 6 of 5

budget requests. The Obama Administration has continued

this practice, as have your colleagues in the Senate and even the

bipartisan deficit reduction commission.

We urge the House to continue this bipartisan legacy because

America’s strength is maximized when all of its foreign policy

tools – military and civilian – are strong.

International Affairs Budget Critical to U.S. Economy

Another reason to oppose deep cuts is that the International

Affairs Budget is ―essential to creating jobs and spurring

economic growth here in the U.S.‖ These are not our words.

They are what the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in its recent

letter to Congress urging opposition to deep budget cuts.

Trade and economic development programs funded through

the International Affairs Budget help foster conditions that


Page 7 of 5

create more stable markets and new opportunities for American

businesses and entrepreneurs.

They build stronger political, legal, and economic policy

regimes in developing countries that foster innovation and

market development and are often much more conducive to

American investment and products.

Ask any business leader and she will tell you that central to

spurring U.S. economic growth is tapping into emerging export

markets overseas. Already nearly half of America’s exports are

to developing countries – and this will continue to grow.

For example, for the State of Texas, three of the five largest

export markets are now Brazil, Mexico, and China.

And growing our exports is a critical part of job creation. More

than 1 out of 5 American jobs are tied to international trade, and

this share is also growing.


Page 8 of 5

When it comes to the impact of international affairs programs

on our economy here at home, the question is not whether we

can afford to continue them but whether we can possibly afford

not to.

Reform of Smart Power Programs is Underway

During these very difficult fiscal times, it’s obviously imperative

that We believe International Affairs programs are must be

accountable, transparent and results-driven. The good news is

that diplomacy and development leaders have been taking

concrete steps in that direction for the last several years.

President Bush’s establishment of the Millennium Challenge

Corporation in 2003 and Secretary of State Rice’s

―Transformational Diplomacy‖ initiative enhanced the

strategic focus of our development assistance programs.


Page 9 of 5

Secretary Clinton has expanded upon these efforts, in part

through the recently completed Quadrennial Diplomacy and

Development Review. At USAID, they are beginning a

monumental effort to better monitor and evaluate all of

USAID’s programs and to even allow the American people to

see exactly where federal dollars are going With the new online

with a foreign assistance ―dashboard,” USAID development

projects now can be tracked and measured online for everyone to see.

As part of these new reforms, the Administration is also

focusing on greater selectivity in where and how the United

States invests its aid resources.

The Administration’s FY In the 2012 budget plan, there are puts

this into practice through various proposals to redeploy resources

from existing programs and places to where they will be most

effective.


Page 10 of 5

At a time when reform in our diplomacy and development

framework is With these reforms well underway, it’s critical to

provide the resources and personnel necessary to support these

reforms steps so that they can bear fruit.

Conclusion

As former members of this body, we know that Americans often

mistake how much our nation actually spends on our

international programs. Poll after poll shows that most people

think we spend about twenty-five times more on foreign

assistance programs than we actually do. In those same polls,

however, when asked how much our nation should be spending

on these programs, most say we should be spending about ten

times more than we actually do.


Page 11 of 5

And how many Americans know that today USAID is operating

with less than half of the personnel it had forty years ago? I

dare say many policymakers aren’t aware of this either.

There is not a doubt in our minds that the International Affairs

Budget is profoundly in the best interest of our nation. For

literally a penny on the dollar, this is a cost-effective way to

advance our security and prosperity -- and to open hearts and

minds to America’s message of liberty, fairness, and free

markets.

Madame Chair, the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition urges the

Subcommittee and all of your colleagues to oppose deep and

disproportionate cuts to these investments in a safer, more

prosperous world.

Thank you again for this opportunity to testify.

Documents

Testimony of the Hon. Dan Glickman and Amb. Mark Green (Ret.)