Big Day in the Senate on Advancing Foreign Aid Reform

November 18, 2009

After considering requests by the State Department, supported by Senator Webb, to delay mark-up of S.1524 (the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act) until it could complete its Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted the bill out of committee yesterday with a 14-3 vote.  The bill is characterized by most of its sponsors as a “first step” toward rebuilding USAID and reforming foreign aid, an interest aligned with statements of the Secretary of State and her senior officers many times.  For a first step, it lays quite a big — and, importantly, bipartisan — footprint for providing USAID with greater autonomy, authority and accountability of the development mandate.  Check out some of the key statements:

After emphasizing that the Secretary of State is responsible for setting U.S. foreign policy priorities and leading foreign assistance programs, Chairman Kerry stated, “S.1524 intends to strengthen the capacity of USAID to more effectively undertake development programs in support of the Secretary’s priorities.  We believe that diplomacy and development can and should be mutually reinforcing.  To that end, this bill will provide appropriate tools so USAID can function at the highest level and achieve key foreign policy priorities under the guidance of the Secretary.  I would also like to point out that maintaining institutional distinction between our diplomatic agenda and our development programs is essential.  Quite simply, development and diplomacy often operate on different timelines, assumptions and objectives requiring specialized expertise and capabilities.  We must ensure that our development programs coordinate effectively with our diplomatic programs, but this does not mean we should merge the two functions into one entity.”

And Senator Menendez:  “This is one of the most significant pieces of foreign assistance legislation that has passed out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in decades. I am proud that this is truly a bi-partisan bill, developed in a collaborative manner and that it includes input from a wide range of voices. These programs are critical to millions of people around the world, they contribute to our mutual economic health, and are in the direct national security interests of the United States. Furthermore, this legislation implements strong, new accountability and oversight provisions to ensure that foreign assistance is being used as intended and delivering a return on our investment. I remain committed to continue to push for a strong, independent foreign assistance voice in the U.S. government and to ensure that USAID is an empowered, innovative, and first-class development agency.  Today marks an important step, but it is just the beginning. I am committed to continue working with the Administration to build up our foreign assistance programs, not just to where they used to be, but to where they need to be.”

And Ranking Member Lugar, almost seems to be telling the State Department, hey, I’ve got your back on who’s the ultimate boss of USAID (he invokes the notion that some Senators would like to see USAID as a Cabinet agency but that he see the Secretary of State “at the top of the pyramid”), but get off my back and recognize that Congress has every right to also set priorities.  An excerpt from his statement:  “Clearly, the State Department will have ideas about development assistance that will be expressed in the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review. This Committee will be eager to review the State Department’s ideas when they are ready. But Congress also should be offering proposals on how to improve development assistance. The bill we passed today should be seen as an essential input into this process. It is the product of well over a year of research and analysis by Senators and their staffs. It has attracted the support of most development groups, led by the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network. It is co-sponsored by a bipartisan group of 19 Senators, twelve of whom are members of this Committee. This level of backing for a bill related to foreign assistance structure is extremely rare. It provides an opportunity to build something approaching a consensus on this issue.  It is especially important that Congress express its views given that the nominee for the USAID Administrator position was only announced last week. Without an Administrator in place for most of 2009, the USAID perspective has been at a disadvantage during the QDDR process. I look forward to discussing the future of the agency with Undersecretary Shah during his upcoming confirmation process. Although the State Department declined to participate at our hearing on this bill last July, I am hopeful it will recognize that a bill co-sponsored by a majority of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee should be given substantial weight in their review process. Congress will be making decisions about resources for development programs, and those decisions will be effected by our confidence in how funds are managed and coordinated.”

The fact that a foreign aid reform bill of any kind not associated with a specific national security issue like Afghanistan or Pakistan was able to generate this level of bipartisan support and pass out of committee is truly remarkable.  If this is a “first step,” I can’t wait to see what comes next.  What will happen to the bill when it hits the Senate floor?  And, together with the other important “steps” — the State Department/USAID QDDR, the White House Presidential Study Directive on U.S. global development and Congressman Berman’s work on rewriting the Foreign Assistance Act — the sum of the parts might just be something historic.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1. Anonymous Says:
   November 25th, 2009 at 12:17 pm

   I’m with you in celebrating that this bill has passed a very crucial first step. As you note, one of the most remarkable aspects is that it’s not tied to any specific national security issue, like so much American aid has been in the past. It’s my belief that if we eventually distribute aid more equitably and without numerous conditions that this will go a long way to increasing good will and support for America around the world. It’s abundantly clear that after the policies of the past 8 years this is something that is very necessary, and that efforts at boosting “soft power” are increasingly successful. We need look no further than the EU for an example of this.

2. uberVU - social comments Says:
   November 26th, 2009 at 3:37 am

   Social comments and analytics for this post…

   This post was mentioned on Twitter by cgdev: Sheila Herrling: Bipartisan foreign aid reform passes the Senate Foreign Relations Cmte. Great 1st step! http://bit.ly/3yGPHN…

3. Victoria taiwo obasaju-ayo - FAO-UN expert 2001-2020, Rome - USAID ta 1986-1996 Says:
   February 16th, 2010 at 8:08 pm

   institutionalization is a required step for reform – UC North Carolina – evaluation team and other institutions are calling for more rigorous evaluation – however participatory evaluation that will integrate project beneficiary is a strategy that should emerge. Beneficiaries dread evaluation and reform but for result base financing, cost effectiveness, and impact plus continue relevance / value it is important to promote the value of formative, terminal, expost and interim evaluation. The policy markers should work closely with institutions to absorb outcome / report of participatory evaluation that will improve project effectiveness

We value frank and constructive exchanges and encourage you to use your real name in your comments.