During a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing last month, Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) spoke about the Trump administration's cuts to the State Department.
EDITOR'S NOTE: The committee name should be listed as the "House Foreign Affairs Committee", not "Foreign Relations Committee'.
00:00I now recognize Ranking Member Castor for five minutes.
00:04Thank you. I know in your testimony just now, and I think in your written testimony,
00:09you stated that you're often unaware of what programs the department funded or operated.
00:16And, you know, that suggests unaccountability.
00:19And, Tom, you served in the same role in the Obama administration, I believe.
00:24And I wanted to ask you, you know, is it accurate that, as Assistant Secretary,
00:28you had to sign off on all the funding recommendations?
00:31Absolutely, yes. I find this very strange.
00:34I signed off on every single grant program.
00:36I reviewed every single grant program.
00:38If I had questions, they were answered. If I had concerns, they were addressed.
00:41Congress was briefed on every grant program at that point that it wanted to know about.
00:47It was briefed on grant programs it didn't want to know about.
00:50That wasn't the issue. And DRL, one of the hallmarks of what makes it so good,
00:55is that it actually has an office of people who are dedicated to grant management.
00:59These are very small grants going to small organizations, often in developing countries.
01:04And so the oversight function of DRL is especially important,
01:09and one reason it needs to be empowered and not dismantled, as the Secretary of State is intending to do.
01:17I understand you all have been briefed that the people overseeing these grants are either going to be fired
01:23or moved into the regional bureaus, which I think former Assistant Secretary Destro and I agree would be a bad idea.
01:29So there is oversight. DRL is key to it, and that's why it needs to be strengthened.
01:36And by the way, there will be nothing to oversee if everything is cut.
01:40So we are kind of rearranging the deck chairs of the Titanic here unless we focus on the fact that everything is being eliminated.
01:48No, I mean, to your point, and that's why I said this is not reform, this is sabotage.
01:54This is a total dismantling of the infrastructure for diplomacy for the United States.
02:01But let me ask you, the administration's skinny budget proposes cutting all funding to the National Endowment for Democracy, or NED,
02:08making claims about a lack of transparency and disinformation.
02:12Dr. Kirk, are you aware of the claims made about the NED?
02:15Did the administration reach out to the NED or its grantees to seek information before making these claims?
02:21Thank you, Ranking Member Castro, for the question. I appreciate it.
02:24The charges against the NED from OMB and the skinny budget were, frankly, news to me.
02:29I'm not here to defend the NED.
02:31I do know they responded with a fact sheet, which I have here.
02:33I'm happy to submit for the record.
02:35What I will say is that individuals making similar accusations never at least knock on our door and say,
02:41hey, we have concerns of an X, Y, or Z program.
02:44Can we discuss it?
02:46Often the charges aren't backed up with any evidence.
02:48There is no follow-up.
02:50The NED are audited.
02:51They report to Congress and the USG, frankly, quite frequently.
02:55So the bit about them not being transparent just baffles me.
02:59And the administration's cuts to democracy and human rights programs was far-reaching
03:04and included significant cuts to the International Republican Institute's programs.
03:08Can you speak to how these cuts were made?
03:10And did the administration seek information from you all specifically before making these decisions?
03:16And did you feel like it was a thoughtful and deliberative process?
03:21So what I'll say about the foreign aid review is we've, any administration has the right to do it.
03:26We supported it from day one.
03:27And certainly there were some programs cut that, in my view, were not sufficiently linked to advancing US national security.
03:34That said, there were many that were cut that were in fact advancing US interests.
03:41Tell me how it's not in our interest to be supporting the people in Cuba, Iran, China, elsewhere.
03:46To your question, ranking member, about did the State Department reach out for information?
03:50The former F director of the State Department, whose name now escapes me, his office never came to us asking for that information.
04:01You know, we spent years talking about the threats of China, both to the United States, to our allies, but also to their own people, nations like Cuba.
04:10And I actually agree with you on Cuba, although I would say that we've, for some time now, pursued a strategy that failed a long time ago.
04:17And we should have made the change some time back.
04:20But let me ask, does anybody agree that cutting the diplomacy budget by 85%, 85% is actually going to make the United States safer and stronger and more secure around the world?
04:34Well, Mr. Castro, if I can respond.
04:39Please.
04:40I mean, there's nothing like a hanging to clarify the mind.
04:43I mean, the, you know, that's a, I'm sure that's a negotiable figure, you know, and that's what-
04:48Well, let's say it ends up at 50%.
04:50Would, do you think it's good at 50%?
04:52I can't answer that question.
04:54And the reason is, it's what you're spending the money on.
04:57It seems to me when we talk about things like countering China.
05:00Well, but China's increasing its funding, right?
05:02It's not decreasing its funding, right?
05:04It's not decreasing its funding.
05:05Of course, but it's the question is, how do you counter China?
05:07And one of the ways you do that is by increasing the independence of the countries that you're working with.
05:14Some of that's going to be trade policy.
05:16Some of it's going to be human rights funding.
05:18I've spent a lot of time working with people in West Africa about how do we use trade funding to do human rights.
05:27I mean, these are not incompatible.
05:29In fact, our programs here in the United States, human rights in the workplace, is one of our most stellar human rights achievements in the last century.
05:39Right, but they cut all the labor rights programs.
05:42I mean, I think what you're describing is a situation also where the countries are not likely, I mean, it could be possible, but aren't likely to become stronger and more independent on their own.
05:52They're more likely to rely on some other nation like China or Russia, which is, I think, what's going to happen.
05:58Well, you know, again, I don't disagree.
06:00I don't think we disagree about the importance of it.
06:03But a good friend who is from a South Asian country, that will remain nameless, has come here to study.
06:10Her Secret Service came to her and said, you know, you're working for the CIA.
06:16And she says, well, are you telling me I shouldn't come?
06:19To which they said, no, no, no, no.
06:21We just want you to know where the money's coming from.
06:23That's the perception.
06:25If that's the perception, it's not a big surprise why a country like India enacts something like our Foreign Agents Registration Act.
06:33So, I mean, actions have consequences.
06:36It's the how.
06:37Diplomacy is about how.
06:39It's not about whether.
06:41I've gone over my time, so we'll have to continue the conversation another time.
06:45Thank you, Chairman.
06:48I recognize the Representative Sarah Jacobs from the State of California.
