Foreign Aid Transparency and Accountability Act of 2012

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3159, as amended, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me start first by thanking my distinguished colleague from Texas (Mr. Poe) for his leadership on this legislation. He and his staff have worked tirelessly to address a range of technical issues so that this bill could be considered under suspension.

H.R. 3159 is an important first step in bringing greater rationality and oversight to the foreign aid process. It contains two fundamental reforms to make our programs more efficient, more effective, and better at serving our national interests.

The first is to strengthen monitoring and evaluation so that we can be sure our aid is performing as intended. Right now we make most of our aid decisions in the dark. We set budgets year after year without having any idea necessarily what the outcomes might be. This bill requires the President to establish a consistent set of guidelines so that all Federal agencies carrying out development assistance will set measurable goals, establish indicators, monitor results, and evaluate impact. We can make much better decisions about how and where to invest our scarce resources once we know which types of programs are the most cost-effective and produce the best results.

The second reform is to increase aid transparency so that everyone can see where we're spending the money and why. There are all too many misperceptions about the size of the foreign aid budget and exactly what it does. This bill will address that.

It also requires the President to establish and maintain an Internet Web site that makes comprehensive and timely information accessible to the public.

Similar reforms are included in comprehensive foreign aid reform legislation recently introduced by the current ranking member of our committee, Mr. Berman, and myself. They were also included in the State Department authorization bills passed by the full House under the leadership of our outgoing chairwoman, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, in 2009, and reported by the Foreign Affairs Committee in 2011. Both times, these provisions were adopted with strong bipartisan support.

The administration also recognizes the need for these types of changes. They've created the Foreign Assistance Dashboard, a Web site that provides accessible and easy-to-understand data about our aid programs. Both the Millennium Challenge Corporation and USAID have put into place their own rigorous evaluation policies.

This bill will ensure that all Federal agencies carrying out development programs will adhere to the same high standards, and at a time when there are so many issues that divide our parties and our Nation, I think this is one that we can come together on. Again, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

[From The Hill, Dec. 12, 2012]

Overhaul of U.S. Foreign Aid is Overdue

(By Reps. Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) and Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.))

At a time when competing government priorities face the

chopping block, advocates of effective foreign aid have a

responsibility to make the case that aid directly serves our

country's long-term national-security and economic interests,

and in a cost-effective way.

A key goal of foreign aid is to make the right investments

that reinforce America's priorities. Unfortunately, the

current foreign aid process and the underlying statute are

encrusted with legislative barnacles built up over half a

century that are messy, conflicting and outdated, and that

actually hinder our ability to deliver foreign aid

effectively and efficiently.

It is time for a complete overhaul. The 21st century

requires a foreign aid program that recognizes today's

priorities and streamlines the process in the post-Cold War

era. For instance, do we still need language in current law,

passed in 1961, that requires the president to assure

Congress that foreign aid recipients are not ``controlled by

the international Communist conspiracy''?

The many task forces and policy committees that have

examined U.S. foreign aid have cited the myriad goals,

objectives and priorities contained in the Foreign Assistance

Act of 1961. The Center for Global Development, for example,

identified more than 33 major objectives, 75 priorities and

247 directives relating to foreign aid in the act. And all of

this for a miniscule piece of the federal budget. Little

wonder, then, that we lack any central focus to our effort

and even less of an ability to measure its effectiveness.

The Global Partnerships Act of 2012 (H.R. 6644) replaces

this byzantine labyrinth of priorities by identifying eight

concise goals for development assistance. The legislation

simplifies the bureaucracy administering foreign aid by

restoring the U.S. Agency for International Development's

policy and budget functions and clarifies the roles and

relationships of key officials involved in its delivery.

In addition, the Global Partnerships Act tackles problems

like the lack of transparency, accountability and oversight

in the system. It requires the maintenance of an online

database of information, easily accessible by the public,

with complete information about all forms of U.S. foreign

assistance, including an unclassified database on security

assistance. This online database would provide detailed

information on overhead and administrative costs for overseas

projects, ensuring that U.S. taxpayers get the most out of

their investment.

Opponents of foreign aid say that aid programs amount to

little more than handouts. But the purpose of foreign

assistance, as President Obama has insisted, must be to

create the conditions where it's no longer needed. To do

this, our programs should aim to build indigenous capacity in

various sectors, with the ultimate goals of country ownership

and self-reliance. The Global Partnerships Act emphasizes the

importance of country ownership by transforming the donor-

recipient relationship to one of partners working toward

mutually agreed-upon and beneficial goals.

Many believe that foreign assistance is a luxury we can no

longer afford in an era of tight budgets and fiscal

challenges. They perpetuate the misconception that foreign

aid encompasses a massive portion of the federal budget. In

reality, this assistance amounts to only about 1 percent of

federal spending.

Moreover, foreign aid is a critical component of our

national-security strategy, which includes three key pillars:

defense, diplomacy and development. National-security experts

and military leaders frequently extol the importance of

foreign aid, recognizing, as former Defense Secretary Robert

Gates once said, that ``economic development is a lot cheaper

than sending soldiers.''

It is critical that the United States modernize its foreign

aid policies and maintain its foreign aid investments. It is

also critical that we establish metrics to gauge the efficacy

of those investments. There are other countries ready and

willing to fill the vacuum that we will leave behind.

Foreign assistance is a critical tool in the diplomatic

toolkit. A great power must have the tools to act--beyond

simply intervening militarily. A streamlined, effective

foreign aid template can enhance U.S. values and influence in

a dangerous world and help avoid the enormous costs in blood

and treasure that inevitably result from military

intervention.

While admittedly some of our foreign aid investments have

been ineffectively deployed in the field over the years, it

is beyond dispute that foreign assistance has dramatically

lowered infant mortality rates, raised hundreds of millions

of people from poverty, extended longevity, created

employment and fostered democratic institutions in every

corner of the world. Its return is well worth the investment.

I have no other speakers. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

I thank the gentleman from Utah for yielding and for his support on this legislation. I also thank the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.

Madam Speaker, they said that World War I would be ``the war to end all wars.'' But it wasn't. It was a world war and encompassed the entire globe and most of the countries in the world.

The war started in 1914, and the United States entered in April of 1917. The United States entered the war for three main reasons: one, the sinking of the British liner Lusitania and 128 Americans being killed in that submarine attack; and then seven U.S. Merchant Marine ships were sunk by German submarines when they had unconditional rights to sink any ship on the high seas, according to the German Government; and the third thing was when the Germans sent the Zimmerman telegram to Mexico.

Madam Speaker, a lot of Americans don't know what that was, but basically the Germans were telling the country of Mexico if they would enter the war on the side of Germany, the central powers, that they would help Mexico invade the United States and take the States of Texas, New Mexico and Arizona and give them to the country of Mexico. So the United States entered the war in April 1917.

H.R. 3159 would create a commission to commemorate the 100th anniversary of World War I. Over 116,000 Americans died in World War I. That's more than in Korea, Vietnam, and both Iraq wars and Afghanistan combined.

Madam Speaker, to my left is a photograph of American doughboys, as they were called because of the color of their uniform, going over out of a trench, ``over the top'' as it was called in World War I. They were primarily teenagers. Like in most of our wars, the teenagers go to fight those wars. And they are leaving the trench going into what is called ``no man's land.'' And those Americans served, along with their allies in World War I.

Two U.S. Presidents served in World War I, Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower. And if World War II veterans were known as the Greatest Generation, then World War I veterans should be known as the Selfless Generation. After all, these World War I veterans--the ones that survived--were the fathers of the Greatest Generation.

America's last doughboy was Frank Buckles. He died on February 26, 2011. He was 110 years of age. I got to know Frank Buckles when he came to the United States Capitol on some legislation that I will talk about momentarily. Frank Buckles in World War I was too young to join. Nobody would let him in. He went from recruiter to recruiter. He was 16--he might have been 15--but he lied about his age, and he finally convinced an Army recruiter to take him in. He joined the doughboys, and he went ``Over There,'' that song that George Cohan wrote talking about the Americans that wouldn't ``come back 'till it's over, over there.''

He drove an ambulance in World War I helping rescue other doughboys that were wounded out here in no man's land and some that had died bringing them back behind the lines. After the Great War was over with, he was in the Philippines when World War II started. And, sure enough, he's captured by the Japanese. Frank Buckles was held in a prisoner-of- war camp by the Japanese for 3\1/2\ years, and he was finally released when rescued by Americans who liberated the Philippines.

After the war, he moved to West Virginia and he worked on the farm until he was 106 driving the tractor. Frank Buckles, the last surviving doughboy, lived half of our Nation's history. So, today, we have an opportunity to remember Frank Buckles, these doughboys, other doughboys, and all those great Americans who fought for America 100 years ago.

The bill establishes a commission to commemorate the centennial of World War I. The commission will plan programs and activities to commemorate the 100th anniversary of that Great War. Time is short. The centennial for the start of World War I is in 2014, and many of our allies have already started planning different events. It must be noted that no Federal funds will be spent for this commission--they have to raise their own money from private funds.

Madam Speaker, in the last century, there were four great wars where Americans participated, and we have built memorials on the Mall for all of them, except one. We built a memorial for the Vietnam veterans, the Korean veterans and the World War II veterans; but there is no memorial on the Mall for all of those doughboys that served in World War I. There is a D.C. memorial that recognizes and honors the D.C. soldiers and sailors that served in World War I, but there is no great memorial for all that served throughout the United States.

It is my hope and the intent of the original legislation that passed the House that there one day will be a national World War I memorial on the Mall.

And that's where I met Frank Buckles. He came to Washington, D.C., as the guest of many of our Senators. And it was his hope, and really it was one of his dying wishes, that we would build, that Congress would authorize the building of a memorial on the Mall for all of those that served in the great World War I. The original bill that passed this House by unanimous vote had that memorial in the bill. It went to the Senate, and now we have only the commission.

So it is my intent to reauthorize, or reoffer, that bill in our next session of Congress, and I'd encourage the commission to consider this building of a memorial on the Mall in their commemoration. There would be no better way to commemorate these brave Americans than to honor them with a memorial on the Mall.

When one of our warriors dies, Madam Speaker, for our country, they become a casualty of war; but the worst casualty of war is to be forgotten. So I hope we would build that memorial on the Mall. But now let's pass this bill to commemorate them and honor them with this commission.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this important legislation. H.R. 6364 establishes a commission to ensure that there is suitable observation of the centennial of World War I. This bill is a fitting tribute to all servicemembers who valiantly fought in all theaters of World War I.

The commission the bill establishes leaves ample time for appropriate commemorative works, events, and a tribute before the 100th anniversary of the war in 2014.

I would like to thank my colleagues, but especially Representative Ted Poe, who has been singularly focused on this bill and who has worked with me and with others until this day, and I certainly pledge to work with him next year as he continues on this very laudable mission. I thank also my friend, Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri, Rob Bishop of Utah, and Raul Grijalva of Arizona for working with me to preserve the District of Columbia World War I memorial in particular.

Earlier this year, in his search for a suitable memorial for World War I, Representative Ted Poe introduced H.R. 938, which would have nationalized the D.C. memorial by redesignating it as the District of Columbia and National World War I Memorial. He made clear, however, that he was not necessarily focused on the D.C. memorial, but that his goal was a World War I memorial here.

While I very much support commemorating all the servicemen and -women who fought in World War I, I had to oppose altering the integrity of the D.C. memorial. The D.C. memorial was built with the blood and treasure of D.C. residents only, including funds from schoolchildren. Of the more than 26,000 D.C. residents who served in World War I, the 499 who died, more than the number from three States, have their names engraved on the memorial. Our memorial is deeply symbolic of the historic and continuing concerns of District residents, particularly our veterans who continue to serve without equal congressional representation, equal rights as citizens, and equal local government control.

In the spirit of cooperation among Members of both parties, the House-passed version of H.R. 6364 would have protected the D.C. War Memorial, and H.R. 6364 as amended by the Senate similarly will have no effect on the D.C. War Memorial. In fact, all of the provisions regarding memorials have been removed from the bill. Instead, it establishes a commission to observe World War I across the country as we approach the centennial of the start of the war. I believe that the reason that this has been done reflects nothing more than the fact that the commission's approach to two important commemorations has been the usual approach almost always to important commemorations, and World War I had enormous effects on those who fought, on the Nation and on the world.

More than 4 million men and women from the United States served in uniform during World War I. Among them, two future Presidents: Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower. Two million men and women from the United States served overseas during World War I. The United States suffered 375,000 casualties during that war, including 116,516 deaths.

The national commission will plan, develop, and execute programs, projects, and activities to commemorate the centennial of World War I throughout the United States. Importantly, not only here, but throughout the United States, people are anxious to learn more about the history of this war, to become involved in its commemoration, especially considering the effects of this war on the 20th century until today. We very much look forward to the commission's efforts to honor the participation and sacrifices of the United States and its citizens in the war effort.

And once again, I want to thank Representative Poe for the extraordinary effort and energy he has put into this bill and the way he has worked cooperatively with all of us on both sides of the aisle.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

I thank the gentlewoman and appreciate her yielding me this time. I want to thank Chairwoman Ros-Lehtinen, Ranking Member Berman, and House leadership for getting this bill to the House floor, and also Mr. Connolly from Virginia for his support of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3159, the Foreign Aid Transparency and Accountability Act, is a simple, bipartisan bill. We have, in fact, equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats as cosponsors of this legislation.

Last year, the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed this bill unanimously as an amendment to the state authorization bill. This bill does two things: it increases monitoring and evaluation of our foreign aid programs, and it also increases transparency of foreign aid.

Our foreign aid can do some good to other countries, but there are also problems with American foreign aid. Unfortunately, we do not keep track of what we're spending, and we don't ask for real results.

Since the passage of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, foreign aid programs have spread across 12 departments, 25 agencies, and almost 60 Federal offices. There are so many Federal Government programs that they often don't know what each other is doing, and many Federal Government programs don't even keep track of what they're doing.

According to an independent study commissioned by USAID in 2009, agencies don't assess the impact their aid is having on foreign countries:

Do we know if our money actually helps people?

Is our money helping people become more self-sufficient or more reliant on U.S. dollars?

And does American aid leave people better off?

We don't know the answers to these questions. This bill addresses this problem by requiring the President to set up tough monitoring and evaluation guidelines for development programs.

These guidelines will be used for monitoring and evaluation of every foreign aid development program from agriculture to AIDS to democracy promotion. Monitoring will allow us to cut programs that simply do not work.

We also need transparency. Americans don't know what we spend our aid on, and so that is why many Americans are frustrated when the word or phrase ``foreign aid'' is mentioned. We need to be honest with American taxpayers.

Until November of 2011, the United States ranked 22nd out of 31 countries when it came to transparency in foreign aid programs. That's according to the Brookings Institute and the Center for Global Development.

We should have nothing to hide when it comes to foreign aid. Let's tell the American taxpayers what they're getting for their buck. This bill requires more information about foreign aid to be posted online so Americans can know what we are doing.

We can't continue down the path of the same-old same-old regarding foreign aid. We need to restore trust with the American people. Lack of transparency and accountability invites corruption, waste, and incompetence.

The losers are those who the programs aim to help and also Americans who pay for foreign aid. Regardless of whether a Member believes we need more foreign aid, less foreign aid, or no foreign aid at all, we should all agree that accountability and transparency are an absolute must.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3159) to direct the President, in consultation with the Department of State, United States Agency for International Development, Millennium Challenge Corporation, and the Department of Defense, to establish guidelines for United States foreign assistance programs, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in strong support of H.R. 3159 introduced by my good friend from Texas, Judge Poe.

This bill stands for the simple proposition that consistent evaluation and transparency will improve the effectiveness of U.S. development assistance around the world. H.R. 3159 will require the President to establish guidelines for measurable goals, monitoring, and evaluation plans that can be applied with reasonable consistency to all overseas development assistance.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3159, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas, Judge Poe, an esteemed member of our Foreign Affairs Committee and the author of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I also yield back the balance of my time.