On Thursday night the House of Representatives passed a vast supplemental spending bill (HR 2642), which would provide $161.8 billion in war funding, an expanded veterans' education benefit, an extension of unemployment insurance and money to deal with flooding in the Midwest. The bill now goes to the Senate for approval, where Democratic leaders have already endorsed it.
This piece of appropriations legislation also provides $1.864 billion for international food and disaster assistance, $696 million for refugee assistance, and $465 million to fund the first year of the “Merida Initiative,” a US-Latin American security partnership aimed at combating drug trafficking.
Upon passage of the bill the House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman said: “"The legislation also includes life-saving aid to refugees and internally displaced persons who have fled the conflicts in Iraq and Darfur. By granting $475 million more than the Administration asked of us, Congress has done much to respond to the dire needs of people caught up in these crises — and we must continue to do so.”
While this sounds like a big chunk of change, this is merely the tip of the iceberg in terms of foreign assistance modernization. Those concerned about global poverty can thank a new initiative called the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network for bringing Congress’ attention to this issue.
The network, comprised of development experts from a variety of institutions–think-tanks, universities, etc,–aims to "shape a consensus among a group of leading global development experts on how best to improve America's weak aid infrastructure," and then urge Congress to heed their advice.
Earlier this month Lael Brainard of the Brookings Institution did just that when she released the Network's culminating report at a June 10th Congressional hearing.
Titled "New Day New Way: U.S. Foreign Assistance for the 21st Century," the report underscores the need for international development concerns to be on par with those of national security:
"Since September 11, 2001, U.S. foreign assistance has been dominated by national security interests, with a particular focus on fighting terrorism. Security is clearly important, but it should not obscure the equally important imperative of fighting global poverty‚ which is itself a means to address the causes of terrorism and conflict, as well as a host of other urgent challenges. This link between development and sustainable national‚ and, indeed, global‚ security is increasingly recognized by foreign policy, development, and defense experts, and it must be acted upon. But the link is best understood not only as a rationale for providing foreign assistance to strengthen allies in the "war on terror," but as a rationale for supporting development because it leads to a world where capable, open, and economically viable states can act in concert to build a better, safer world."
In a press release, the Network's co-chair Gayle Smith of the Center for American Progress, said: “By giving development a seat at the foreign policy table we can narrow the gap between the world's haves and have nots, tackle the challenges posed by climate change, the global food crisis, and the world's weak and failing states and, most importantly, strengthen the moral foundation from which we lead.”
Next week the House will hold a hearing titled “Foreign Assistance Reform: Rebuilding U.S. Civilian Development and Diplomatic Capacity in the 21st Century,” which will include testimony from two Former Administrator of U.S. Agency for International Development: J. Brian Atwood and M. Peter McPherson. Atwood is also a member of the Network.
