blog logo image

Posts Tagged ‘President Obama’

MFAN Co-Chairs on the Facts on Foreign Aid

Wednesday, February 9th, 2011
Bookmark and Share

See below for an op-ed  that ran in POLITICO today from MFAN’s Co-Chairs Rev. David Beckmann, George Ingram, and Jim Kolbe.

David Beckmann1George Ingram1Jim Kolbe

POLITICO

The facts on foreign aid

Rev. Beckmann and George Ingram and Jim Kolbe

February 9, 2011

With Egypt leading the news and congressional budget discussions coming to a head, there is an energetic debate now about U.S. foreign assistance.

There are many competing arguments, but one thing is certain: This is too important to get caught up in the usual political back and forth. The American people deserve honest facts about foreign assistance before policymakers rush to judgment.

To start, we must correct a widely held misconception: U.S. foreign assistance is less than 1 percent of the federal budget. Despite repeated efforts to correct this, many Americans still believe we spend as much as 25 percent of the budget on it.

More important, we must stop using foreign assistance as a budget piñata. Development is now a key component of U.S. foreign policy — with defense and diplomacy. Our modest investment in strategic and effective foreign assistance programs pays outsize dividends in terms of our security, prosperity and global leadership.

  • On security: The United States Agency for International Development is a crucial partner of the U.S. military and the State Department in frontline states — including Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. Civilian development professionals support training of security forces; bolster governance and the rule of law, and improve quality of life for people in areas vulnerable to extremism. As Defense Secretary Robert Gates said recently, “Development is a lot cheaper than sending soldiers.”
  • On economic prosperity: Our development programs improve public health, strengthen agricultural output and promote private economic growth, all of which help stabilize communities and open export opportunities for U.S. businesses in the world’s fastest growing markets. One historical example: U.S. support for the “green revolution” in agriculture helped accelerate South Korea’s agricultural development, setting it on a path to becoming the strong U.S. ally and trading partner.
  • On our global leadership: In the last decade, the generosity of U.S. taxpayers and advocacy of policymakers, community leaders and citizens have been responsible for saving and improving millions of lives in Africa and elsewhere. One vaccination program alone has saved five million children.

Even with these facts, foreign assistance still deserves the same scrutiny as other government programs at this challenging economic time. Our foreign assistance must be effective and accountable — so people know where the money is going and what results are being achieved.

Luckily, we are not starting from square one. Over the last two years, the Obama administration has built on the efforts of the Bush administration to change our development business model through a top-to-bottom reform effort.

President Barack Obama has made economic growth, the strongest engine for social progress, the stated goal of U.S. development efforts. He has promised to be more selective about who gets assistance — particularly when it comes to countries not committed to reform. USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah has announced a plan to better measure and evaluate programs; “graduate” recipients who no longer need help, and streamline bureaucracy for millions of dollars in.

Most important, a guiding vision has taken hold across the spectrum of public and private players on development. Many developing countries have been able to achieve rapid economic growth and progress against poverty, mainly through their own efforts. For assistance to be effective, it needs to be responsive to local initiative and priorities.

Though a sliver of our overall budget, U.S. foreign assistance delivers a real return-on-investment. The Obama administration and Congress need to support these programs and work together to make them more effective and accountable. And the American public deserves an honest debate about the importance of our foreign assistance.

Rev. Beckmann, a 2010 World Food Prize laureate, is the president of Bread for the World. George Ingram is co-chairman of the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition. Jim. Kolbe, a former Republican congressman from Arizona, is a Senior Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States and a senior advisor at McLarty Associates. They are co-chairman of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network.

Wilson Center’s Sewell weighs in on QDDR

Wednesday, February 9th, 2011
Bookmark and Share

sewell

In a recent post on the Wilson Center’s “The New Security Beat” blog, senior scholar John Sewell offers his perspective on the State Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), which was released in December.

Sewell applauds the QDDR’s effort to empower the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), particularly around giving leadership of President Obama’s signature initiatives on food security and global health to USAID.  He also highlights the internal reform agenda undertaken by the Agency, called “USAID Forward,” which places a premium on evaluation and results.

The key question for Sewell is how well will the QDDR be implemented.  He lists several challenges to effective implementation, including:

  • support from Congress (“New legislation undoubtedly will be needed. Without congressional support, it will be hard to effect all the reforms called for in both documents.”);
  • culture change at State and USAID;
  • defining the process for selecting which countries receive U.S. assistance (“So, will the choices be driven by focus areas and need? Or will immediate political issues continue to drive country choice?”);
  • budget authority (“But in the real world, there will be strong differences of opinion between State and USAID, and how they are reconciled is never mentioned.”); and
  • timeline (“Some can be put in place quickly and many are underway; others will take much longer, and some, presumably, will require new legislation…If everything is a priority, overload will result.”).

Sewell provides a recipe for achieving the impact the QDDR hopes to achieve: “If the QDDR is to succeed it must have strong administration support, a congressional group (preferably bipartisan) to craft needed legislation, and strong support from civil society organizations and business.”

What do you think of his analysis?

To read the entire piece, click here.

MFAN Partner CGD Asks How Would You Reorganize Foreign Assistance?

Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011
Bookmark and Share

caseydunning.thumbnailIn the State of Union speech last week, President Obama called for the reorganization of the federal government. MFAN Principal Connie Veillette, director of CGD’s Rethinking U.S. Foreign Assistance, responded by posting a blog in which she asked her readers to comment on how they would reorganize the government agencies that manage foreign assistance. To follow up on this idea, in a new blog post CGD’s Casey Dunning highlights the drastic difference in the number of agencies involved in the delivery of foreign assistance between 1996 and 2009. Dunning presents the table1decrease of Official Development Assistance (ODA) delivered by each agency in the table below, comparing the percentages of total ODA from 1996 to 2009. According to the table, USAID is still in the lead for foreign assistance delivery.

Dunning writes, “If you look at the list of agencies with a hand in foreign aid just 15 years ago, the number of agencies involved is chopped in half.  Not only does the number of agencies decrease from 21 to 10 but the percent of official development assistance (ODA) delivered by each agency seems much more reasonable.  In 1996, USAID delivered the vast majority of ODA with the State Department and Treasury coming in a distant second and third.  The Department of Defense had a minimal role and HHS was entirely absent.”

To read the full post click here or read more from CGD’s blog by clicking here.

Update on the Budget

Tuesday, February 1st, 2011
Bookmark and Share

A week before the House Appropriates Committee is set to outline its budget cuts and set against the backdrop of unrest in Egypt and the Middle East, the battle over the International Affairs budget continues to heat up. A piece in POLITICO today acknowledges the “dramatic reversal of the activist Bush-era philosophy” as the rift grows between GOP old-timers who acknowledge the role the State Department and USAID play in national security and tea party challengers whose primary goal is to cut. The article quotes Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking member Dick Lugar (R-IN), who says, “It’s a new leadership group, and they are attempting to express that they are different and it’s a different time.” State’s spokesman P.J. Crowley told POLITICO, “If we have to take a significant cut in foreign assistance, in some fashion, that is going to affect Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen. Those are countries where we have vital interests and vital security concerns.”

Yesterday, Devex posted a story about President Obama’s five-year spending freeze announced in his State of the Union address last week. In a recent press briefing, U.S. National Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer noted that the freeze will likely exclude the International Affairs budget. Hammer continued, the freeze “is the guidance for all departments, and so our budgets going forward will reflect that we clearly are very keen to preserve our foreign affairs funding in order to be best able to advance U.S. interests.” Read more here.

Stay tuned for more to come.

GOP Voices Make the Case for Effective Foreign Aid

Friday, January 28th, 2011
Bookmark and Share

Daily Caller logoFormer Ambassador to Tanzania and Congressman from Wisconsin Mark Green, Managing Director of the Malaria No More Policy Center, along with MFAN Co-Chair and former Republican Arizona Congressman Jim Kolbe, Senior Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States and a Senior Advisor to McLarty Associates, and MFAN Principal and former President and CEO of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) Rob Mosbacher, Chairman of the Mosbacher Energy Company of Texas, put forth a strong defense for foreign assistance in a new op-ed in The Daily Caller. Green, Kolbe and Mosbacher urge policymakers to not cut short the achievements that aid has delivered over the last decade by slashing the budget, and instead focus on making US foreign assistance more efficient and effective—creating tremendous opportunities for the US to build markets and generate stability worldwide. Read the full op-ed below.

The Daily Caller

More effective foreign assistance can pay real dividends

Mark Green, Jim Kolbe, and Rob Mosbacher

January 28, 2011

As a new Congress gets into gear, both Republicans and Democrats have a solemn duty to do the people’s work and to make sure their taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely. U.S. foreign assistance is already under the microscope, as it should be, but we believe policymakers should focus on making it better instead of slashing budgets. Foreign assistance accounts for less than 1% of our federal budget, and our investments in it can pay real dividends for the cost.

The world has changed dramatically even in the last decade, becoming more interconnected and full of challenges that defy narrow solutions. Our foreign assistance is a projection of our responsible leadership in the world; it is more important than ever to our security and economic interests. We must take the politics out of this debate and get down to the facts.

In terms of our national security, we provide extensive counter-terrorism and counterinsurgency assistance to “frontline states” such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen. These civilian-led programs help build and train national army and police forces, support democracy and the rule of law, and improve destitute living conditions that can fuel extremism and anti-American sentiment.

Military leaders from Secretary of Defense Gates to Joint Chiefs Chairman Mullen to Afghanistan Commander Petraeus have issued strong calls for strengthening civilian programs that take some of the burdens off of our war fighters, with Gates saying recently that helping countries develop “is a lot cheaper than sending soldiers.”

(more…)