tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN April 11, 2014 5:00am-7:01am EDT
the program is going to fail. when we do negotiate on the ground, when we do work with the authorities, with support of the entire membership the imf we do not forecast failure. our plan and actually the conditions under > when we enter, we do it so the country can re-finance itself and operate without support of the i.m.f. and that's exactly the conditions under which we enter into that project, which by the way, is not yet agreed upon. the board has met several times in an informal standing. and we hope provided that the
authorities deliver on their ommitment, which we have every reason to believe they will. > gentleman in the middle? >> chris giles from the financial times. madam, the i.m.f. regularly gives other countries advice and cause for a plan b, most recently asking the e.b. foment give effort on things. is it time now for a plan b. for the i.m.f. where you circumvent the u.s.?
>> you know, i don't think our institution should move to plan until we have full certainty that plan a is definitely dead. i'm not prepared to declare that that the point. and i very strongly hope that he results of the institution, the pressure brought to bear by the members of this institution on all those who have not yet ratifying will deliver fruit in the not too distant future. >> ok. going to say stay in the middle. lady in the white jacket. thank you. >> my question is about japan.
your projection with lower with 0.3. and do you still believe in economics? if so, why? especially third al lowe since not working well, do you have any concerns when you meet minister aso this afternoon, what do you expect from him and when that do you recommend him? thanks. >> well, i listen very do i feel his description of the three air owes. and they were described by former prime minister about demull various meetings. fair to say that the first arrow has been delivered and begown work and we see in situations not rising to targets but specifically in japan. we were interested to see when the fight was continued as of april 1. on that second arrow, we also
believe the medium terms, physical plan needs to be articulated and convincing. we hope to see them. >> on the third arrow. there are many reforms, many presents of a instruct wall ture that haven't yet been eye tookically. and off meeting with minister azull. i will certainly ask what the timetable is and what the accent of the reforms is. i will particularly focus on the presm reform of the labor market in order facilitate services for japanese women to the stock market. because we believe it's a strong component of the theme before. clearly the authorities have signaled interest and responded to recommendations. which i was very pleased about.
and i will not give up on that. >> ok. thank you. going to come down to the front row here. yes, ma'am. thank you. >> thank you. there was impressive demand for a five-year goal issued. today returning to the markets but the i.m.f. program is ongoing and night get a sustainable? thriggete and when do you expect it to be concluded? >> it is the case that greece is still in the program. and that we have just recently apoved a -- approved a review of the program which shows after significant discussions and work being done by the
greek authorities and greek people, progress is under way. i see the issuance that to place today, that was borg described in the direction and that they are listening the water testing and the water testing authorities wanted to do is really eff successful. now, there is still a lot to be done. program is not over. but the s a near return to markets which is clearly the objective of any i.m.f. program is on the horizon. >> ok. i'm going to stay here. >> my name -- i'm with the ruggets news agency. madam. i have all ukraine in russia. i do ly, fist i guess
know quite informations. do you tonight bierbrodt have especially elf-talk those. so my question is, is the new program, is it intended to provide specifically for grew crane to be cut into this bill for russia, to russia? that is to paying their ears and being dourned that payment. thank you. >> you know, the ukrainian program of project offer program, 1234r9 because it will be a program at once board has approved it. has been negotiated on the grounds. has been discussed in form tiff with the board, and there has been encouraging, very broad
based support from all corners f the i.m.f. the range of financing is going to be predicated on what the international support will be to that country. whether on a bilateral daves and that's the world full of interest. for the moment, what we are forecasting is ooh financing velope rangeing from $14 billion-$18 billion u.s.. that includes room for appropriate payment of you know, anything that is a legitimate area. right? to any creditor. i think that answers your question. >> thank you very much. swinging back around here. yes, ma'am. right here. . i would thank you to tv
clearly before when we had this meeting but one year later the driving sports the still clearly declining. so what's your answer to this kind of a ship and policy-wise what do you think american markets can do in order to gain the momentment and be here for the resilience? thank you cough. i would not call it a shift. because it is today that the bulk of growth is generated by the emerging markets. so this story about the emerging markets lagging behind and slowing down and having lost their moment sum a little bit overdone. they are still providing the bulk of growth. moment as s yes, the moment i would have at the moment. i wouldn't called it a shift,
though. i would call it re-balancing. having said that, citizens tapering talk in may the emerging markets have been under some pressure, and we have observed volatility. ich has had an effect dash snaunt on some of 24e7. which has since ben especially. by the various policy measures taking place that country. and they raj from one to another depending phenomenon columnization of those but from the money point and indonesia on the whole scope of tools player to the policy liesing. clear live there continue to be a need for constant attention to avoid the consequences of volatility. but volatility is something we are going to have to live with.
we have been massively protected over the past few years because of thunding pray pid. by that i mean and launched by several banks. this is normalized over the course of time. as the economy bounces back. >> ok. thank you very much. i'm going to take from -- yes, sir. with the glasses, you sir. yes, sir. thank you. >> ok. who has got this? >> everyone. >> thank you very much. my name is the al shop did from the african in u.s. of har modties. we fall or witness to claration whereby nigeria canner n, outside the
bear by. and which before that. everybody is a witness to what happened between the federal government and the central bank. well, noignige may not have anything to do right now with the fund $8.5. but ninth nige is only on isolated cases in spot for two. this is a behind teem cut me now. you know? cut me now? >> i'm sorry, circus do you have a question? >> exactly. to the question. where the government tends to victimize with but then government comes to the de pebbeds to put a proposal for a grant and stuff. this case, has there been found any upper hand to play
the superpower? by word i can condition formalities? >> i think -- it's a very important question that you raise. and i can assure you that there are cases when countries would not in a single african country would not single out another african country. when companies come from where we have that dialogue with the authorities at or about authenticity, the evidence relating to contracts to licenses, the ways in which business has been conducted and there has been instances and my watch where we have said about the circumstances under which such contracts and mining legs
with vet for. and i can assure you that it is efficient. all right. and i applaud any instances when authorities in africa or elsewhere actually have the courage to step up and to dentify when they are shaky if not shady circumstances under which those rights are granded. >> there are same rules with the superback. we need to think of a short cup. >> alexander from italy. there seems to be a different assess ment on the risks of attracted law formation and deflation and in european >> especially on the timing of the response. you just said there was anonymity on the other measures
but several come poventse of the e.c.b. also said these would not be imminent. to where as the lover said was the best of the timer. so they throon deliver later today when you meet them? >> well, i'm on the same page as the chief economist. we have an ongoing delige dialogue with the european authorities and we highly respect the judgment of the central bank. they have a -- >> their finger on "the pulse" of everything. nd we is that you they are utilizing any tools to respond to the situation. and i think it's going to be a
question of timing now. but we are encouraged. >> yes, ma'am? >> good morning, ms. will he guard. >> good morning. >> the question is about i.n.s. what will happen after the who refuses the agrease they i.m.f. hich >> and typical ones about struggling with debt. and it is said here, but it's a rumor that the i.m.f. is supporting the possibility of legislativing off theing ament of the collective actual class of stative. i think you would be good there
fter the crisis of neighborhood and during the support of his way. helping with escape. >> could you please tell us about it. we don't comment on rumors, but i am not going to leave you with that, it's a bit sort. it's -- i think it's clear to everybody that the collective apply lauses as they prove to have deficiencies and we certainly realize that when we dealt with the greek sovereign's debt reinstructturing. so what do we do? sit and wait? or we try to work in cooperation with the ores to see how they can be improved.
i think our duty so going to et enough this week to look at considerations on how they can be reviewed and submit them to board review. we have been tough by the board to actually restore them. now, i want to dismiss the idea that we would be heading in the direction of what some of you have been around for a long me known as the s.c.r.m., in -- as the c.r.m.? >> well we are not heading in that direction. but are we working on the efficiency of it and how we can sufficiently deal with those mat centers we have to. >> i think we are almost out of time. last question. you, sir. >> i think i am governness i've
already touched on that issue. i think about flying to ooh report planet. >> yes, sir? >> hello. please allow me to ask my uestion in french. >> i am from france and want to know how was your meeting with of prime f government minister and how is he going to be doing a census. and it's the first time in a long time since it's been genders that you will be planning for me. >> is he there 2014 and what are you saying when the i.n.s.
-- >> monday? french then i will summarize this english so everyone understands what i tell you. >> first of all, the prime minister's visit with was a success as i see it, becauses a new prime minister he was able to explain to us his plannings, the reforms he plans to put in place by his government on behalf of the country. t it's not the just the i.n.s. reforms but the informenses he was quite struck by the his determination to implement reforms. to move the country forward. to modernize the country. to variety indianize. and i hope that we will continue to be able to work together. you know he has an i.n.s.
program which we also completed as third in review. and substantial progress has been made. and i hope that we will be able to continue on this seed progress. this will continue to be a success story. terms of the figures. think the opportunity -- to see that the i.m.f. use a lot to but it exists on the basis of fundamentals. so it doesn't mean we review our figures from day-to-day. we do it on the basis of knowing figures and on the base that are online with ternational developments between a certain country and the latest countries. >> i was just thinking the
prime minister of tunisia's visit was a successful! ooh it's now the program of the i.m.f. for the population of tunisia. on attracting foreign dollar investments in very strong growth sectors. and in really moving towards investment for growth. thank you niceya offers very much hope that out of the reviews of the program, that tunisia matured into those programs, it will be a success story, i'm convinced of it. he calls this country which i i don't prepare to see you until they rost a lot.
>> the atlantic county critical hosted a discussion today on the bit coin and the future of digital occurrencey. that's live. then later today treasury secretary will hold a press conference after the world bank meeting today live at 6:00 eastern. >> for over 35 years c-span brings public affairs events take over gton yoo and offer complete gaffle to gavel coverage at the house all as a service of proiftsthi industry. 35 years ago shts and brought to you as a public service by your local cable satellite performer. he has you like like of the international development talks about the
global epoverty. >> senate hearing is 09 minutes. and chaired by senator bob men 911 dez. >> senator bob menendez. you come at a time when you are doing nothing more than the job you were appointed to do. let me say for the record that when it comes to the issue of cuba or your work in any closed society, i do not believe that a.i.d.'s mission statement to promote resilient democratic societies that are able to
realize their potential are in any way a cock maimy idea. i believe it is exactly what the people of cuba, iran, burma, belarus, north carolina states r a thor contain need to communicate with each other. to have the quoted statement of aving a free, peaceful and fective legitimate life, but for helping them to find a way to connect and share their views. global free programs, u.s. international broadcasting and support for human rights act visits are all on the mental side of the efforts to promote democracy overseas. for more than 50 years the united states has had an
unwavering commitment to promote freedom of information in the world. our work in cuba is no different than our efforts to promote freedom of expression access in ed belarus, china or north korea. it should be noted that in the fiscal year setting the foreign operations bill, there's $76 million set aside to promote global international -- internet societies in closed societies like cuba, where the government allows no downtown point from press and also states that with respect of the decision for democracy, u.s. rights and govern nance activities that these programs "sthouled shall not be subject to the prior approval or any
foreign government or country." >> it's common sense that we presently vocate tore provide unsensored access to the internet or social media. at the end of the day just giving people the opportunity to communicate with the outside world than with each other is in my mind a fundamental responsibility of any demock cri, the internet becoming the town square for the glob. but to go one step further the town square will become more free and inclusive thanks to the democracy efforts of organizations like u.s. aid. and let me just close on this one point. i think it is dumb, dumb and even dumber to go ahead and suggest that there can be
freedom, and we should seek freedom of internet access and freedom of expression globally but that some how the people of cuba don't deserve the same freedom. and i will finally say on this topic that there's only one instance -- only one responsible for the imprisonment of alan gross and that's the cuban regime. it is not this government. it is not a.i.d. it is the cuban regime. and i a m tired of blaming ourselves when the entity that should be blamed is the regime that unlawful holds an american in prison for doing nothing but having the jewish community cuba be able to communicate with each other. pretty outrageous. now, finally, with reference to the overall priorities of the budget, we look forward to your
perspective on how we can make certain that u.n. and u.s. development is in line and look forward to hearing your priorities for the 2015 budget. i know i speak for all the members when i speak of the creativity and energy and to your agency's pursuit to ways which focus on best practices and results. as we have discussed on numerous occasions before, we do, however, remain deeply concerned about the resources for the western hemisphere. they are instoust meet the challenges of the reason and important to our shared interest in health and development. so that is something that we look forward to continuing to engage you on. and while that is to towards criminal networks, pose the
greatest short term effects in the region, a long-term strategy that boosts economic growth and consolidates a current law and in my view is better lacking. so i believe we can do better in the hemisphere, and i think we can do better in meeting within that context within the hemisphere. look forward to the ongoing -- getting help for usaid. for the taxpayers and now i would like to treckeds ranking republican. >> thank you mr. chairman. and thank you for those passionate comments, and mr. shot, we appreciate you being here and all the work you do around the womplt my comments are going to be a little more breefment we look forward to your testimony, but we appreciate you being here to go over your budget request for 201r5 and appreciate the reforms you're trying to put in
place around the world but also within u.s. aid itself. i think foreign aid is one of the most misunderstood concepts the american people have sometimes and the fact that we spend 1% of our overall u.s. budget on foreign activities. non-can i netic, i might add. but i would like for you sort of herald some of those skses. i know you're going to do that today, but i also believe it's healthy to have some skepticisms to the program. to make the food programs much where we will i be dealing 30% with local entities, and in one way, that's a much-appreciated concept. on the other hand i know we want to make sure we have results on that. but the thank you for being here today.
certainly your questions and testimony and we thank you for your work. >> administrative shore, the floor is yours. we will enter your full statement in without objection but summarizing in five minutes or so, so that members can have an opportunity to have a dialogue. >> thank you chairman menendez and i want to thank you specifically for your very strong leadership and your support for america's development programs around the world and ensuring that they are a full reflection 06 our values. i want to thank all the members of the committee for your guidance, county -- counsel and support and i'm honored to be here to present the budget request for u.s. aid which totals just about $20 million. this resource and investment is a score part of keeping our country safe and secure over the long-term and improving our own domestic prosperity as the
world prospers with us. our mission so end extreme poverty and to promote restill i can't. our efforts over the past few years with your support constant constituted a serious rebuilding of this. during my especially the newer we have hired over 1100 staff and projected policy priorities and food, energy, education, water and health. and ex panneded our partner se to include universities, scientists in ormse of our value. we've expanded our commatsty to evaluate all of our major programs. when i started there were a few dozen put forth. this year we will have nearly 29 0 with more than 50% of them used to make course corrections
on how programs are implemented. and with all of them being open and puck lickly available. our efforts have constituted a new model of development that engages the private sector, science and technology and faith institutions and others in new types of partnerships, and we believe these partnerships are delivering results. president obama's feed the future program which is 100 sented with nearly $ million small-scale farmers. if you're 12 1/2 million children will no longer be hungry because they are in amilies that are beneficiaries to match and sometimes exceed it through private sector partners. and i want to thank the committee for its leadership in supporting implemental food aid reforms that will help us reach an additional number disasters
around the world this year. our efforts to support and continue to save instant lives under the aim of 5 are supported in this budget with a $2.7 budget requests. between 1990 and today we save if than 500 million save they needed 6 million by 2030, mobilize the global community work with us. -- we work in a results-oriented way, and i look forward to that discussion today. last week i was in the philippines with secretary chuck hagel working with ministers on how we can coordinate humanitarian relief efforts more effectively and helping them as partners in dealing with the deficit. his is in places like syria,
and south sudan. our investments in human rights and govepble nance are an important part of what we do all around the world. this past weekend we noted with some initial success an election in afghanistan that saw nearly 60% voter turnout and a large portion, more than expected of women. those efforts were supported by the yuths and other international partners and led by afghan institutions they must it's. our work in our own hemisphere is of particular importance. and while budgets have been tight and that budget does make tradeoffs. we have now launched a new global north korea the lab ich brings >> and people were starting to see a lot of pictures like that.
nd we will spend $5. local need 133 military. d and hand >> it's what's possible if we do things in a more creative and effective way. let me close by saying thank you. i tad opportunity this year and i was honored to deliver the speech at the national prayer breakfast, and it reminded me that when we come together to serve the world's most vulnerable people, this is an issue that can cut across artisan divides and allow us to continue over the past decades as the world's humanitarian and growth lead ernlt thank you. >> thank you administrator. let me start off where the one concern i had which is the western hemisphere.
almost every major account in usaid's fy-2015 will be cut relevant. venezuela will be cut by 14% even amis the current crisis. hatey, guatemala all will be put by 20%. we ought matic the problems we ace in our committee >> what do we do? >> one of the highest homicide rates in the world. we have challenged governments in terms of meeting that in lenge, we have still mexico, some states that are relatively lawless near the frontier border with the united states. we have the challenge of
venezuela and a growing set of circumstances there where a civil society is under siege. d ecuador we have basically because of the governments have closed our mission. so i just see a wide range of issues. and i understand some of these countries have sort of like graduated. 3wur by the same token, instead year king for other tends over year over year double-digit cuts that from my perspective are not sustainable. so can you commit to me that you will work with us as the secretary said he it would see how we change this dynamic if -- trr so many
levels of interest on so many different questions from security to drug addiction to economic opportunity to health care issues that no borders when it comes tom diseases. can you talk a little bit about that? >> yes. thank you senator. and i appreciate that point of view and agree with the central nature and importance of the region. while we have made tough tradeoffs over the last many years as secretary cary noted and as president obama said, this is of critical importance to our future from a trade immigration and partnership perspective. and as a result we are trying to position our programs in -- and upper middle income status. we naminged more private partnerships and we're doing under creative and technical in some cases,
slightly lower resources. we have dramatically expanded the number of loan guarantees we provide to low-income banks whether it's in el salvador. t open 25 million of dollars businesses or in mexico well with same progress and helping topping unlock local finance using our credit guarantees in a highly-leveraged way. i would like for us to be able to do a right more of and as we preview science and technology, we have a renewed hope with businesses throughout the region. one i would note is the innovate partnership with starbucks to help them reach 25,000 small scale conductors. previous general beth.
now they can bring farm supporting their own presence there. so we're trying to evolve into ever into those types of partnerships, and i think the region can become a model for that new model of development and developmental partnership, especially in countries that are moving up the income scale. >> well, i appreciate that innovate thought and welcome i want. but we're also looking at some of these other challenges in , e hemisphere so whether he this committee and in the senate and house asked to reprogram usaid assistance to ukraine. $50 million to improv free elections among other things and security spread other the next the three fiscal years. where are you in the process of
re-programming this assistance? and when would you expect it to get to ukraine? and when do you believe the .s. aid mission by signing the agreement with the government which will transfer to the billion-dollar loan guarantees i have will take place? o you have any idea on the specific questions, but our acting deputy are out and in the ukraine right now they are working with civil society groups and groums that are supporting the election process. i would note some of our partners there were critical about documenting some of the human rights cases turg the 45-day protests. d support during the
agreement so ukraine can get access to the via resources. we are helping them with technical support to change fuel stanley cup subsidy structure and the future of their energy security policy and the number of areas where that type of assistance has been requested. so we have had a prout and significant history and deliver results and look forward continuing to do that but at a higher level now given some repositioning in resources and given the very strong support of the committee. >> finally, i understand aid plans to incentivize in onbudget savings. hey, based on the progress before and it's an important initiative that deserves highlighting evering and accountability for the funds and strains and will only grow in importance and necessities. what sort of things will we be
omforting during african developments? some of the challenges there. >> first thank you senator for your leadership in supporting the programs in afghanistan for 2%-37 of the cost of the total war we think we have delivered tremendously on the basis of a more stable and secure society going forward. we were constant tokyo that it took constrict you want to create a set of conditions that the government i mean, development assistance not just from the united states but the u.k., australia, japan, all the international partners screaming with one's voice, ome of those were they transparent and effective and
included the conduct of free and fair elections and peace and power and collecting more customs revenue and using it to replace developmental issues ver the quite car of 21 0. n protecting women and girls rights. our community meets twice a year to assess their performance and we are prepared to make determinations after the assessment is conducted with the new government. >> thank you for being here. you and i have talked a great deal about the food for peace program, and i know it's being partially implemented. t i think we all know due to parochial interests we are not elivering food in a way that
is alleviating suffering for -- i wonder if you can talk a little bit about that whabbed you would like see fully happen relative to our food programs. >> thank you, senator, for your leadership on this issue. america has food for peace. over the last 50 years served more than $3 billion providing them food assistance when they need it. because of -- nearly every other country that provides food assistance has made a with from preparing food he world food program. -- >> to be far more self-sufficient. raises the standard of living. how many people could we actually serve if we moved
forward from the stand point of what we're trying to do makes more sense than what we are now doing which is shipping u.s.al products overseas to places and never building up that independence that we would like to see over time, how many people would be served? >> this calls for 25% flexibility and it correlates to 2 million additional children who would receive food in times of crisis. those are children and men and women inside of syria and south sudan. >> and if we did it fully, how many more people would be served? >> i haven't made the 100%est mats. >> we have done it and think it's 7 million-9 million more people would be served if we moved away from the con sthraints we now have about ensuring that instead of again building up the independence, helping the local economies, which is what this is all
about, we would -- and i guess we also have preferred she rds. will you tell us a little bit about that? >> well, the way that shipping and contracting system works on a handful of core partners, they have been important partners over the course of the programs and the president's proposal which is an implemental proposal maintains control and were simply asking for a little bit of flexibility so we can need mesha's orders that is because our budgets were constrained. >> another program you have under way is usaid ford. we've asked for a g.a.o. study on that. and again, this is along similar lines in many ways, i think your goal to contract 30% of your activities at the local level. one of the concerns we have though is right now the way
you're tracking that is you're tracking how much money you're spending but you're not spending -- tracking outcomes to see that even though money may be 30% going there are we getting the same kind of sflult now, that is different kind of earth than food aid program. this is actually contracting with people to carry out the work usaid is dealing with and we're only measuring money out not ruts? >> well, i would refrain that a little bit. cause i think usa forward is covering a range of things that allows us to be better at reporting on core results so that is a package of reforms that includes a number of innings to move us in that direction, and i believe we have been able to do that. i will say i believe the g.a.o.
review is focused specifically on this shift to including more local n.g.o.'s and local institutions and i would have hoped that they might have broadened the analysis, because if you do, what you would find is unlike a few years ago today i can sit here today and say we're reaching 11 million effort -- and we're saving millions of lives a year. and that ability to quantify report on those results is also a part of ssa forward. i would also note our progress against our goals in moving to local institutions has been designed implemental and we think we're doing this at a pace that's responsible. but the ultimate goal so build enough capacity locally so that american aid and assistance is not needed over the very long run, and we want to build that self-sufficient cri so we don't
ave to be there forever. trading capacity billing and it's along the lines i think most of the people here would like to see which is making sure we're going on a daily basis everything we can to 'em pure countries we're working allowed e able to be cam pain to determine who is in charge of trade capacity building the 24 u.s. agent dris involved in that, and i would ask you which one is ultimately responsible for building trade capacity in countries we're dealing with? >> well, sir, i think first of all i think this is a critically important issue and we commit more than $200 million a year in trade capacity but far more if you look at agricultural trade snupt regions like africa and elsewhere.
we are co-hosting a discussion with the number of our partners to understand how together we can on the nies implementation of the new agreements that create a framework for improved intracountry trade with many of the countries we work in, and president obama launched trade africa last year in africa based on some extraordinarily strong and independently validated results that showed for every dollar we invested, we were generating $40 of economic value to our east african trade hubs. so the u.s. representative, myself and -- work in close coordinate snation. >> but i think the concern is, and again, you're one of the applaud aders and we your efforts, but i think the concern is there's not really one person or a small group of people that's driving this. and as you mentioned, i mean,
it's incredibly important, and there's so much we can do without much noun really empower these countries to be involved in the trade that goes is there a way you would not answer it in a setting but work with us to help figure out who actually is it has a for these so neeks gets us to a place where we'd all like to go? >> we absolutely would like to work with you but the way it usda tly works is the ensures the they are effectively design and -- for these programs to be effective and again ployed where they are most needed, and it's critical that we're working closely together and i can report to you with a high degree of
confidence that that partnership has never been closer. >> thank you very much. i appreciate hearing from you, mr. chairman. >> again, thank you very much for your leadership. development assistance is a critical part of our national security sbrepses and the obama administration has made it clear that our national security budget includes the development of assisted programs. you're less than 1% of the federal budget and very small fraction of the total national security budgets it's veryings very important. i particularly wanted to acknowledge the budget report for the subcommittee that tiff opportunity to chair. as i told you before the hearing started you're working under very tough budget on the overall budget and growth that is very much reduced and you had to make very tough decisions, so i appreciate the priority that's been given to
asia and the specifics paralyzing assistance to burma democratic institutions and i might say to senator corker. your trade capacity improvement in lay yose. there's many countries that are benefiting directly from what you are doing in east asia and pacific. the initiative, secretary clinton initiated affecting the countries in that region not just on environment but on alth and inform fighter -- we want to make sure the aid is done in the most sufficient way. that's why the food aid program -- i agree with senator corker, very valuable improvements so we can reach more people and lesm our dollars further than we do today. this year you started a global
development lab, and i want to talk a few moments about this using science and technology and in development to leverage the moneys na that we mike available to our academic centers that have expertise in to. area that are ready as well as private companies that also putal markets in these countries, so are prepared to make investments if we work in a coordinated way, we can get a much more effective results and do achieve our development assistance objectives in a more efficient and hopefully shorter time period. can you just share with the committee how this program where you're using existing resources, how you anticipate it operating as you now have operated the development lab? >> well, thank you senator.
on so many issues related to our work and for your personal commitment to food aid reform and the u.s. global development lab. we are excited to have lunch the u.s. global development lab. in my time in this role, we have increased spending on science and technology, research and development, from about 100 $30 million previously to just over $600 million this year, and we have done that entirely through programmatic trade-offs where we are making tough choices to move money into this area. what this has allowed us to do is create development innovation laboratories on college campuses across this country, and we are seeing groups of students and faculty and researchers create new technologies like new ways to allow babies to breathe through low-cost continuous airway pressure devices that came from rice university, the pratt puch, from the duke school of biomedical engineering. women can take that, go to their homes, and when they give birth
a qantas before and one the child after and prevent the transmission of aids from a mother to a child without being in an assisted medical environment. those reduce the cost of saving kids' lives, mothers' lives. >> also improves the customer would do in direct health services in these countries, dealing with babies that are affected. and also reduces the cost. >> that is exactly right. we have also found that companies across the country and the world have been eager to partner with us. walmart has joined and is working with us to reach farmers throughout sub-saharan africa. unilever and procter & gamble are providing packets of material that allow us to purify water in places like burma. they are donating those, but also helping us reach hard-to-reach communities where
too many children die just because the water is impure and has micro organism's in it. these public-private partnerships, coupled with a real professional science and technology capacity, will allow usaid and u.s. development efforts around the world to have a darpa-like capability to create new technologies, deploy them on behalf of the world's poorest people, and allow young people who want to create entrepreneurial businesses, whether it is making and selling solar powered flashlights in parts of rural africa where there is no energy access, or commercializing the cpap positive airway pressure device, which they now do for $20 or $30 a device, we find a lot of young people are inspired by the opportunity to become inventors and entrepreneurs and use the business savvy and skill to solve the world's most challenging problems.
>> you are leveraging the strength of america in science and technology, and what we have been able to discover and share with the world, as well as our entrepreneurial spirit of private companies. these are american values being used to help you deal with your objectives in development assistance. where are the challenges, and where can congress help? >> we have requested a series of new authorities in congress to help us be a little more flexible and modern in how we carry out this work. they include the ability to use program funds to hire specialized individuals with science and business backgrounds, the ability to provide prizes. we have seen a lot of technological innovation comes out of prize competitions, and you only spend money on those that are winning. you are able to motivate hundreds, sometimes thousands of new partners, some you would never otherwise be able to find, to computer winning prizes on some of the innovation awards.
some flexibility in how we use resources in the development assistance account, which is particularly critical to finding this effort. of course, funding the usaid budget. those would be the requests. i would like to thank members of the committee for the extraordinary effort you have made to support this new way of working. >> one final comment. as i understand it, it is using existing resources in a more efficient way to accomplish greater results? >> that is correct. >> senator rubio. >> thank you for being here and for all your work. mr. director, usaid is not a charity, right? it is a u.s. agency that promotes humanitarian development around the world. but also furthering u.s. interests around the world. a two-way street. doing what is right for the world, but also furthering our national interest, right? >> yes. >> so as you get involved in each country, you look at the
specific needs. every country has different needs. some have a lack of access to water. some countries, women are not treated appropriately or rights are violated. every country has different needs. so what usaid aims to do is go into specific countries, determine what the needs are, and promote those humanitarian causes but also in a way that furthers u.s. interest, is that an accurate position? >> yes. i mission is to end extreme poverty and promote democratic societies, because over the long term, touching that mission makes us safer and more secure. >> so with that in mind you have programs on the island of cuba you have been engaged in in the past and continue to -- the clearly stated goal of the program, available for the world to read, is to break the information blockade in cuba and promote information sharing, among other goals. those are stated goals of our involvement, correct? >> we have notified congress every year since 2008 on the
goals of those programs, and we run internet access and freedom of information programs in many parts of the world, including cuba. >> the reason i bring that up, rightfully so that you focus on information sharing, because cuba according to freedom house is the second most repressive government in the world, only after iran, a very close second after iran in terms of denying access to information sharing, denying access to the internet. people in cuba cannot go on the internet. if you are close to the government you may be able to sneak in access, but the average person on the street cannot go on the internet in cuba. it is not just capacity. it is prohibited. i will send out a tweet right now. if i sent this out in cuba i would be put in jail. i will send it as an example of what people in cuba cannot do. people in cuba cannot do what i'm about to do, so as a result of that usaid, as has been revealed in the last few days, usaid had a program that was designed to provide the people
of cuba access to information and break the information blockade and allow people to share information. i want to walk through this. there has been an insinuation made by some that this program was illegal, but in my opinion, and yours i believe as well, was completely within the stated mandate of your purpose in cuba, to promote information sharing. that is accurate, right? within that goal. >> we have publicly notified that these programs are designed to enable open communications. >> i have heard the argument this was a covert program, but this was reviewed by the general accounting office, right? >> correct. >> and they had no criticism of the way the money was being administered. >> they consummated usaid on improve management oversight of the program.
>> this was not an intelligence program. we were not spying on the cuban government. >> no. >> we were not selling weapons on this program or somehow arming elements on the ground in cuba to the program. >> no. >> this was basically allowing cubans to communicate with other cubans because the government does not let them do that. in an advanced society, people should at least be able to do that, right? but in cuba they are not, so the program chose to fulfill the mandate of this program to break the information blockade and promote information sharing. i read this article that said that at its peak there were 40,000 users. that is actually not true, at the peak there were 60,000 users. here is my question. when was the last time we stop the program because it was too successful? this program in my mind is successful. not only am i glad we did it. i am upset we stopped, and i don't think we should stop at a twitter-like program. we should do everything
possible. maybe usaid is not the perfect agency for this, but i believe we should do everything we can to provide the people of cuba and other repressed societies full access to the internet. if they want to read a communist rag in cuba, they can do it. if they want to read the cnn website or the "new york times," whatever they want to, they should be able to as well. for everyone outraged by this program, when was the last time undermining a tyranny was counter to the stated purpose of the united states? when was the last time we were outraged by a program that undermines a tyranny and provides the free flow of information? i read these quotes, people setting themselves on fire about this. since when? we have radio broadcasts to europe during the cold war. we have radio broadcasts to europe right now that have content in them.
all we want is for people to talk to each other, and i want to know, when was the last time it was against the stated purpose and goals of the united states of america to undermine tyranny? we heard testimony three days ago, tyranny involved in the single greatest violation of u.s. sanctions against north korea since they were imposed. a tyranny consistently on the side of every madman and tyrant on the planet. when there was a vote on syria, they were with assad. if there is a vote on russia, there with putin. time and again. when was the last time cuba ever lined up on the side of decency and human rights? this is an anti-american government not as undermining its own people, it tries to undermine our foreign policy and the foreign policy of the free world. my question, and i know this is
a long-winded question, when do we start this program again? not just start it, but expanded to people in cuba can do what i just did, speak freely to the world and each other about the reality of cuban life and anything else they want, including the latest record from beyonce, what someone wore to the oscars, whatever they want to write about. when do we start again? >> i want to clarify, usaid programs are designed to promote open access to information and facilitate communication. any programs that have further purposes are not implemented by usaid but by other parts of the state department or national endowment for democracy. in terms of restarting these things, we have the fiscal year 2014 guidance, pretty clear as to which agencies will be pursuing these activities in the future. >> senator durbin.
>> thank you. i guess i want to follow my colleague and friend senator rubio. i sure don't quarrel with the premise. whether it is china or cuba, opening up information, free exchange of information is so fundamental to our country, so fundamental to what i consider to be the basic values of democracy. so critics, mr. shah, ought to come up with a better idea. but the notion behind the premise is sound. i may go a little further than my colleagues on the committee when i say that after over 50 years of what has been a dubious foreign policy in cuba by the united states, i have been in favor of opening up as much as we can cuba to the ideas of people of the world and the united states. that is how communism and the soviet union came to an end. they were overwhelmed by
reality. i have been to cuba. they are isolated from reality. if we had more contact, i don't think the current regime could survive, as the communistic regimes did not survive in eastern europe. i want to bring in one point, that i am sure has been mentioned. i visited alan gross two years ago. what a heartbreaking situation. this poor man is being held because he may have brought in equipment that would have brought in more information into cuba. i do not know specifically whether he did or did not, but that is the charge, espionage. what they have done to this poor man is heartbreaking. when you visit and see what his life is like today, you meet his wife and family, as i have. i said to cuban officials, i have leaned your way in opening relations with the united states, but you lost me on gross. what you have done in closing
out his small little effort to bring in equipment is outrageous. this poor guy is still in prison, and is going on a hunger strike. i do not know how he keeps his mind about him when he faces every single day. i do not disagree with your premise, senator rubio. open it up. the more ideas we can pour into the island, the better i think the chance they will move toward values that we share. so those who are critical of this basic approach, give me a better one. give me something else. two things i focused on. one was a legacy from my predecessor, senator paul simon, about water for the world. appropriating money. i know usaid has been focused on it. the other one was child marriage. we finally passed that as part of the violence against women act. i know there is a program
underway in usaid to try to discourage child marriage and all the awful things which come as a result of it. i would like you do comment on those two areas, if you could. >> thank you, senator. first, thank you for your leadership on water and water for the poor. thanks in part to your leadership and your predecessors, we have an extraordinary opportunity now to reach 32 million people who would otherwise not have access to clean and reliable sources of water. when we succeed, that means girls who are usually sent into dangerous environments to fetch water have time and a safe places. they avoid being abused and rates and hurt as they're going about those tasks, and they can do things like go to school. it is an extraordinary accomplishment that the entire congress should be proud of. prior to 2012, are spending went up from $1.4 billion to $2.4
billion. we were able to make that extraordinary increase at a time of tight budgets because as we have focused on investing in those things that deliver the most cost effective results, save the most lives and reduce the most opportunity, particularly for girls around the world, investments in water are near the top of the list, and that is why you have seen that transition. i just want to thank you for your leadership. i am proud of the way the agency has focused on measuring results in terms of lives saved from water programs and diarrheal disease reduction and sanitation access. with respect to child marriage and gender-based violence, we have new programs that focus on these issues in particularly high risk places. but it is just extraordinary, the challenges people face. i was just in eastern congo a few months ago and saw the u.n.
report last week that shows 15,000 girls that have been raped, a part of how war has been conducted in that part of the world. i am proud of the fact that thanks to your support and the committee, the united states leads the world in supporting health services for victims, helping girls get back on their feet and helping people reintegrate into society in finding economic opportunity going back to school. the range of those programs has gone up significantly since secretary clinton made a visit to that region five years ago. i think it is something america can be very proud of. >> thank you very much. i might add that i am promoting a product made in chicago. this is shameless promotion. it is called portapure. this man is an engineer in water sanitation and he has made a six
gallon thermos. whatever you pour in the top comes out clean drinking water in two minutes. no chemicals involved. using nanofibers. it is $60. in haiti a family spends $3.50 a week for a jug of water. in a few weeks, they could buy this job that for two years would provide them safe drinking water for their family. one idea you mentioned. i hope your folks will take a look at it. portapure -- one word. if you meet george page, you will be very impressed with this man trying to change the world. >> thank you, senator. we set up the u.s. global development lab to help distribute precisely those technologies, so we would be eager to follow up. >> take a look at it. thanks.
>> legitimate promotion is one of the duties of the united states senate. [laughter] >> we have pretty good water filtration technology centers in milwaukee as well. probably helped out that company. administrator shah, welcome. i really enjoyed your keynote at the national prayer breakfast where you made a very strong case for foreign aid. unfortunately, not every american got to hear that case. it is also unfortunate that when you take a look at our current budget situation, the enormous pressure we are under, most americans look at foreign aid and it is the first place they want to cut. can you speak little bit in terms of making the case for foreign aid? >> thank you, senator, and thank you for your leadership. what i learned from the opportunity to be at the prayer breakfast this year was that
when we come together across different communities, republicans, democrats, house, senate, business, entrepreneurs, and very importantly, faith community members who carry out this mission with exactly the right intention of serving those who are least fortunate amongst us, we present a picture to the world of an america that cares about vulnerable people, that cares about countries and societies that have been left out of the tremendous growth and opportunity that has swept over the world over the last several decades, centuries. and when we start to remind americans of just how much suffering there is out there, that 860 million people will go to bed hungry tonight, 6.6 billion children will die under the age of five, almost all from the simple illnesses they can be dealt with with pennies per dose treatments, people will see the
opportunities to do more, not less with our foreign assistance and development. our priority at usaid has been to demonstrate that the resources congress interested in us at a difficult physical time are deployed as effectively and efficiently as possible, and congress has helped us a lot rebuilding our agency to do that, but we now evaluating every major program. i can sit here with confidence and describe programs that work, and sometimes those that don't, that need to be changed. >> i will ask senator kaine to preside. i will vote and come back. i know senator flake wants to come back. this way we will maximize your time. >> you mentioned a word dear to my heart, prioritization. one of the things that harms foreign aid is when foreign aid is given to countries that are very corrupt and maybe supporting programs -- the opposite of what senator rubio
asked. can you name a program, give me the argument where we ended a program that has been unsuccessful, because we have not been able to influence a country into better behavior? >> over my tenure, we have shut down 34% of our programmatic areas of investment around the world. that is what we needed to do to free up the resources to invest in feed the future, which works in 19 countries and delivers incredible, outstanding results. specifically, i went out with my team a couple years ago to afghanistan. we did a comprehensive review of everything that was planned. we called it a sustainability review, and we removed from the game plan a number of projects we did not think would be financially sustainable or generate the return on investment that would have been required. right now, i am very glad we did. i do not want to name those --
>> provide my office with that list. that would be good information. i can say, we have a good administrator, looking at the programs. 34 of these ended, appropriately so. also, let's keep going on prioritization. looking at your budget request, you have about $500 million toward level climate change initiative. the appropriations committee, we talked about somebody whose writings i respect awful lot because he is really looking at prioritization spending. where'd you get the most bang for the buck? he wrote a pretty good book that argues we are far better off sending money on malaria, addressing the problems of hiv and aids, freshwater initiatives, freshwater for
populations, as opposed to spending money on global warming, climate change initiatives. so, can you speak to that? it is 3% of your budget being allocated to something that he is really scratching his head, saying you are far better off spending money elsewhere. >> we can. first, i want to be clear about what our priorities are. our largest area of investment at usaid is health, $2.7 billion. when you include the hiv program, it is $8 billion a year. food is the next largest, $2.5 billion. that includes the feed the future program that invests in agriculture. >> here is another $500 million for climate change that could be put toward food. >> we have 800 million dollars for education, six hundred million dollars for water, and our energy programs which are often characterized and are part of the president' is climate change initiative are growing in the budget.
it is because access to clean energy in country after country is critical for development. i was in the democratic republic of congo. they have 9% energy access. they want hydropower. they want energy solutions for local communities. we work on all of those issues, and those are also, by the way, as we carry them out and implement them, they will be carbon reduction strategies as well. >> hydropower is very cost effective. i like that concept. solar power is not economically feasible. >> hydropower is very effective. i am asking the question, where is this money being spent? >> it is being spent wisely and i point out when we are looking at communities, people pay a huge amount of money for diesel generation, for power and energy where there is no access. in that context, small-scale
energy solutions that rely on solar, wind, and other sources are cost effective for those communities in those contexts. this is the kind of math we do to make sure we invest in things not just because we want to invest in things that have the highest return, but we are making an initial investment, and countries have to sustain these systems over time, and like in afghanistan, we want these sustainable and how we carry out this work. i give it credit to our team for bringing that analysis and thinking to how we do this work and carrying out cost effectiveness and analysis on these programs. >> thank you for your answers. >> thank you. i will be with you today, just three comments, and a set of questions around syria and humanitarian relief. senator cardin and others talked
about global development lab. really excited about that project. i was in the palestine recently and met with technology entrepreneurs that are benefiting the cause of work with usaid, not only creating opportunities, but strong regard for our country. you were a good ambassador in that way. i have concern about the concern of the latin american budget. it is a combination of things. when we see the line items going down, when we see there currently 10 ambassadors in latin america that are unfilled, some of that is on the white house, but some of it is on people languishing on the floor of the senate. the south com region of our defense has been hit hard. the combined message we seem to be sending, is that latin
america is not a place of importance to us. because it is not a place of importance to us, does not mean it is not a place of importance to others. russia is doing exercises in the caribbean for the first time in 20 years. i want to ask you about syria. the committee two weeks ago and the full senate last week passed a resolution dealing with humanitarian aid in syria. the u.s. is the largest provider of aid to syrian refugees outside syria. touch of the aid has been -- much of the aid has been delivered through ngo's to refugees who have fled across the border in turkey, lebanon, and jordan, to a lesser degree in iraq and egypt. we passed a resolution last week i came up on the u.n. security council resolution of january 22
saying now is the time for cross-border delivery of humanitarian aid. there is 3 million refugees outside syria, but nine million people needing assistance inside syria. the u.n. is supporting this to the security council, and we call on the administration to come up with a plan how we are to be more aggressive with the delivery of aid. what is the potential role for usaid in facilitating a more aggressive strategy? >> thank you for your leadership on such a broad range of issues. i hope more americans can see the $1.7 billion we provided is making a huge difference. it is reaching 4.2 million people inside syria. it is reaching that 2.5 million refugees that represent an
unsustainable crisis in jordan and lebanon. within syria, 3.5 million of the 9 million euros referenced are essentially not reachable because of the occurrence constraints placed on how aid is provided. in that context, usaid has been the world leader in providing cross-border assistance. and the u.n. security council resolution calls for you and agencies to do the same, it was agreed to by the security council, and valerie amos' report showed that the syrian regime has not allowed for that terms that security council to be met at any reasonable scale. there has been a few convoys across the border that was done in coordination with the syrians, but that is a small and very incremental step given
there are 3.5 million people that could be reached that are not being reached because of the terms of that resolution are not being implemented as aggressively as necessary by the regime. we are currently the main provider of cross-border assistance. that assistance has allowed us to provide surgeries and medical support to 250,000 injured syrians in the north and the south and places that other partners are not reaching. i want to say i want to recognize syrian-american doctors and other humanitarian actors who have risked their lives to do some extraordinary work in that context. we need to do more, we need the u.n. agencies to do more, and we need this syrian regime to abide what is in the resolution to allow for that. >> i was at a meeting, with one of the ngo's, and we talked about the regime is not allowing access in accord with the security council resolution.
an important thing for the administration to understand in terms of congress, while there is compensated feelings in congress about syria and that was demonstrated in the vote about authorization of military force in august, there are not, located feelings about humanitarian assistance. the resolution we passed came out of this committee unanimously. we would not be providing the aid if it was controversial. as the administration wrestles with the next cap to make the policy more effective, take advantage of the fact you have a congress that was unanimous about the aggressive delivery of aid including cross-border. i think there is much more that can be done. >> thank you, and that is wonderful dinner because -- and is wonderful to hear because tomorrow i am convening my counterparts from other donor countries to ask them to do more
of this type of cross-border work. it is good to know there is support for that. thank you. >> thank you, senator kaine, for presiding. >> thank you for your testimony. i want to respond to some of the comments made earlier that the chairman started off by talking about the cuban issue and said it is dumb, dumb, and dumber to shield cuba from the inputs as we have on other dictatorial regimes. i could not agree more. that is why i have opposed our policy on cuba for so long. the senator mentioned that iran is the only country less free than cuba. even in iran, we do not shield the people from iran from the influences or the government of iran from the influences from
americans traveling there. we encourage it. north korea, if their government would allow more of it, we would encourage more of it, where more americans not just dennis rodman would travel there. we have oliver stone going to cuba and praising the education system in cuba. if we had bob from peoria say no such thing because they realized it is a different world from those who travel there. for the life of me i cannot understand why when our goal is to expose cubans and the cuban government to american influence. we cut off our arm and her feet by denying everyday americans the ability to travel freely there. i have no doubt that if we opened up the travel ban, ended it, the cuban government would
be more selective on who they allowed to come to cuba. they are all about control. but if somebody is going to limit my travel, it should be a common us, not this government. -- a communist, not this government. that is the broader problem i have with the whole policy writ large regarding cuba. specifically, with this one. i do have issues. not with the fact that we have programs like this going, but the fact they are conducted by usaid, and you can say until you are blue in the face this is something we should have known more about. it has been authorized, it was covert or discrete, but that does not shield the fact that it is ill-advised advised for usaid, that has the role to provide humanitarian relief and
encourage democratic development around the country -- around the world, because that benefits us and then in the long term. it benefits u.s. interests as well. when we have programs elsewhere in the world, just describe some of the things that usaid is doing. we are providing humanitarian relief to those in south sudan. we have supplies coming from nairobi to south sudan. we are working with partners inside syria. we may not have people on the ground, but we do in neighboring countries. this is serious stuff. what are we doing to our usaid programs are in the world when they hear there are covert or discrete programs like this going on by usaid? do you have any concern that this progress in cuba jeopardizes our programs elsewhere in the world? i am not questioning whether or
not we should do this. i am questioning where we are doing it. >> well, senator, i appreciate your remarks. there is a policy debate on the overall policy. with respect to the implementation of programs, what i can assure you is our implementation is consistent with the authorizations and appropriations language that has to record us to do this. -- directed us to do this. and by that i mean they are not covert. they are intended to provide access to open information. they are consistent with programs we conduct as part of our efforts in a number of other countries around the world as part of supporting democratic and open governments and societies and civil society actors. at the end of the day, i believe our mission to end it extreme -- to end extreme poverty requires a broad open society to participate in that task.
and i appreciate your mention of south sudan and syria, where our people are conducting i believe heroic activities. >> we can argue whether it is discrete or covert. but when we look at the description of the program here, look at some of the text messages that we hire people to write, a satirist somewhere in south america to write this, and i am reading a few that we have accessed. the latest tweet sent out under this program -- >> i am sorry. i do think this program is no longer operational. i have asked my team to review the content we are seeing. we know the intent of the program was to support
information. >> along those lines, will we have access to all of the tweets or the messages that were sent by usaid or its contractors in full so we can judge, so we have to provide oversight. will we have access to these? >> i will as my team to review these documents. most of the documents are not in our position. -- possession. they are in the position of -- >> but you have access -- >> they will gather them, review them, and we will make our findings available to you. >> i am not interested in your findings, i am interested in the data. >> we will make the data available. >> we will have access to each of these tweets or messages that was sent out by usaid or its contractors? >> you will have access to what we are able to gather.
>> we had programs like this dating back -- i am not pointing fingers to this administration. this program has done great things in broadening travel. i applaud this administration for doing that much better than the last administration. the republican administration in this regard. the last administration had for a while a ticker in cuba where messages were put up that, the only way to describe them, was juvenile. it would chide cubans for not providing school lunches for their kids when those were provided in miami, for example. it is juvenile sayings that i do not think served anybody's purposes. we are continuing the things like that. it smacks of that kind of
program. i am not making a political point. our policy is wrong. let's simply allow travel to juvenile and we would achieve in my view -- if we have the information from this program to actually review it, then make a decision, do we want to continue to fund programs like this that in my view my point usaid contractors or individuals from other countries, including cuba, that participate in this program in danger for what? i'm not sure what we get out of this. allow americans to travel, allow them to take flash drives, allow them to go and do good instead of saying you cannot travel, we are going to shield the cuban government from the influences that come with american travel. i do not see american travel as
some kind of a reward for good behavior have the cuban government. we are unlikely to see that. it is finally a get-tough policy with the cuban government. >> if i may say, the fy 2014 languages clear about the purpose and authorizations of these programs as well as which agency should be in the lead for their implementation. we intend to follow the law and that case and transition some of those issues to the national endowment for democracy. the larger policy debate here, but i want to come back to assuring you that we believe our implementation and passed with this program has been consistent, that these are not covert, these have been publicly notified a number of times. >> thank you, senator. administrator, do you conduct internet access programs in
other countries in the world? >> we do. at the direction of specific language in the congressional -- >> do you have an idea how many of those are? >> part of what we do everywhere around the world, and internet access is one component of is supporting civil society so that you have an open and inclusive approach to development in a number of different contexts. >> because a society that can come together and share what its goals are is part of the information as to what is sustainable programs we might be able to support. i would like you to give the chair a list of all the internet access programs you conduct. i may ask you for the same thing senator flake has asked for for all those programs, because it seems to be we are either going to judge whether or not we are
going to be supportive of internet access in the world or not. and i think it is consistently unfair that one set of democracy programs has the greatest scrutiny of the federal government to the absence of all others. as the authorizing committee, we want to see what is happening across the entire spectrum. and i would ask you to give me information about all of those programs and all of the programming of those programs and all of the tweets and all of the e-mails and everything so that we can make an informed judgment here. and that share is of the view of -- the chair is of the view of the authorizing committee that either we believe in these programs collectively, which i generally think i do, in which case we support it, and not choose which country deserves it
and which country does not as it relates to internet access, and whether or not the aid is the appropriate entity. aid as part of its overall development program, the democracy programs that have been run by aid are critical. and so i am not one to advocate having aid all of a sudden be stripped of its democracy programs. because democracy programs in and of itself, generally speaking, maybe they are in some open societies in which we seek to strengthen democratic institutions, but there are many in which they are not, which is why we are having democracy programs in the first place. these are not governments that are receptive at the end of the day. the are governments that oppose it and just as the voice of america and a whole host of other surrogate broadcasting was meant to bring broadcasting to
different parts the world, it seems to me what we're trained to do is to exactly that for which we have a global perspective and understanding the value of those programs and a commitment to it. those commitments should not be decided by picking and choosing which country we somehow like and which countries we do not. if they fail to provide their people access to the basic flow of information, it seems to me we should be pursuing it. i would like the information on all programs. and if i could finish, and also, let me just say i would like to get a full sense of all your democracy programs beyond the internet as well. because we are gone to judge all of those in context as well. and maybe i will ask for gao inspector general reports on some of them. because in my mind, there is a
siege mentality. i respect that there is a difference of opinion as to what our policy should be. what i do not respect is the siege upon one part of our democracy programs to the exclusion of all others. so that is something we are going to have a full spectrum analysis of. senator flake? >> i was going to care for, this -- clarify that this program is not to provide internet access. it was social media content within access that already exists. >> this program was designed to provide access to information and create a platform. >> it did not provide internet access to any cuban that did not have before, correct? >> i will let my team respond later. but the program was intended to provide open access to information and a platform to
communicate with each other. >> clearly there is a basis that didn't exist because people thought to when they had the -- flocked to it when they had the opportunity, if they have some other venue, they would use some other venue. telephone access inside of cuba. the problem is the regime blocks access to both the internet and to these platforms. and so that is the challenge of a regime as other regimes of the world that simply do not want to allow its people have information, because when they have information, they may suddenly decide to make choices or to peacefully protest to try to create change in the government, which we generally in the world -- we look at turkey and what it is doing, and the world has come down on turkey for what is happening there. we look at iran and what has happened there. we look at china and the challenges there. and we condemn those.
but in cuba, the cuban people deserve that flow of information. we are going to have a broad range of judgment. one final note, i know that senator flake has a different view, senator durbin expressed some of that, too, but the problem is that way and you do -- when you do travel to cuba, there are millions of people going to cuba, millions, europeans, latin americans, canadians, and others, and yet the regime has become not less repressive but more repressive and more selective. when you travel and go, you end up feeding who? unfortunately, not the cuban people, but the regime. why? because the regime is the one that has through its company, which is basically owned by the military, the entities by which those who go visit and largely
stay at her either with a foreign partner or with entities that are totally owned by the military. so we ultimately feed a regime versus feed people. this is a legitimate debate. we have different views. what should not be a debate in my view, in this context, is the nature of our democracy programs and creating access the information, people, anywhere in the world. with the thanks of the committee, we will keep this record open for questions until the end of tomorrow, friday, and this hearing is adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> the whole number of the electors to vote for the president of the united states is 538 of which a majority is 270. george w. bush of the state of texas has received for president
of the united states, 271 votes. al gore of the state of tennessee has received 266 votes. the state is a vote for vice president of the united states and has delivered to the president of the senate as follows -- the home umber of the electors, the pointed to vote for vice president is 538 of which the majority is 270. dick cheney of the state of wyoming has received for vice president of the united states, 271 votes. joe lieberman of the state of connecticut has received 266 votes. this announcement of the state of the vote by the residents of the senate shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons elected president and vice president of the united states each for the term beginning on the 20th day of
january, 20 -- 2001 and shall be entered together with a list of the votes on the journals of the senate and the house of representatives. may god bless our new president and our new vice president and may god bless the united states of america. [applause] find more highlights from 35 years of house floor coverage on her facebook page. by america'sed cable companies 35 years ago and brought to you today as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. during this month, c-span is pleased to present our winning entries in this year's student cam video documentary competition. it is the annual competition that encourages middle and high school students to think critically about issues. students were asked to create their documentary answering what is the most important issue the u.s. congress should consider in 2014?
second prize winner is an eighth grader from st. mark's school in california. he believes congress should consider how the united states intelligence agencies target and use surveillance to collect data. imagine amben bloch, if you could monitor the government every move and have access to their private classified documents. the government found out about this, you would be sentenced and prosecuted under federal law. in reality, united states government has been spying on ordinary citizens for years. it is both illegal and unconstitutional.
2001, 23 days after the fall of the twin towers, president george w. bush issued a secret order that authorizes a variety of surveillance within the u.s. to combat terrorism including digital spying on americans. in 2014, the government is still using the surveillance tactics. in the summer of 2013, edward snowden revealed a national program agency prpriosm which has no connection to terrorism but collect information on americans including e-mails to family and chats with their friends in private videos and photos. the nsa has access to all of our
data and internet communications. consequently, in the internet era, everyone's busy has the potential to become demised. >> the government surveillance in general can be used as an investigative tool. the reason we have agencies like the nsa and fbi is because of attacksle in stopping on the u.s. war crimes within the u.s. but this is not something that can be totally unchecked or can happen without any oversight. of course there are pros and cons but it is up to the american people to decide what sort of surveillance is being done and whether those pros outweigh the cons. >> these were actually in the initial stages of bombing the
new york stock exchange. two saidi's number tapping into the e-mail of an al qaeda leader in yemen led them to this manning kansas city and then two other americans prepare to attack in 2008. >> united states government applied multiple tactics to spy on citizens. the bottom line is that all of the surveillance techniques share the same purpose -- to collect information for offense of or defense of purposes. the prevention of terrorist attacks on u.s. and foreign soils is clearly a benefit to these programs. however, the over use of surveillance in the united states is unconstitutional. surveillance cannot be an advantage if it breaches civil rights to a high degree. >> it currently allows government agencies search americans private e-mails without a warrant. the nsake with whistleblower and former at&t communications technician who
revealed his company's cooperation with the nsa installing hardware to monitor and capture american telecommunications in the famous room 641a. >> the internet is a whole new level of surveillance that was never dreamed of by george orwell. intonternet has penetrated every pore society. it's in your house, it's in the phone you walk around with everyday, it's in your car, every day they are expanding places where the internet can access and the nsa can penetrate all those places and scooping up all that information and collecting it and storing it at huge data were -- they to warehouses. we heard they have tapped into the transatlantic fiber-optic a goodwhich cover
portion of the world communications. anytime the government wants to look up someone, it's all there. all yourfind associates, what you have talked to people about, what your financial transactions are, will kind of pictures and video you look at, your whole life is out there on the internet. history,hout american intelligence has helped secure our country and our freedoms. u.s. intelligence agencies were anchored in a system of checks and balances. with oversight from elected leaders and protections for ordinary citizens. >> government surveillance is a crucial issue that congress must address in 2014. the fact that the government is targeting and using billions of e-mails, chats, and other data without a warrant or even probable cause is a breach of the united states constitution.
it's the basis for all of america's freedoms. while it is the government's duty to protect the citizens of the united states, the fourth amendment protects all u.s. citizens from unreasonable search and seizure. for this reason, congress should craft public policies that limit surveillance to specific suspected terrorists, prohibit warrantless surveillance, and require the nsa to obtain individual search warrant for people of interest. smith, the microsoft executive vice president of legal affairs, said -- people will not use technology they don't trust. governments have with this trust at risk. and government need to help restore it. to watch all of the winning videos and learn more about our
competition, go to www.c-span.org and click on student cam and let us know what issue you want congress to consider. you can post it on facebook or tweet us. c-spanover 35 years, brings public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, readings and conferences and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on >> house budget committee chairman and former vice presidential candidate paul ryan was the two republicans in cedar rapids, iowa tonight. live coverage begins tonight at
8:00 eastern here on c-span. washington journal begins in a moment. on c-span. later this morning, or conversation on digital currency and bitcoin. that is from the atlantic consul, live at 10: 30 eastern. at noon eastern, first lady michelle obama will host an event at the white house for military and veteran caregivers. jack lew will hold a news conference after the world bank meeting. that is live at 6:00 eastern. coming up this hour, we will talk with the heritage foundation's john malcolm about the investigation.
later, we will talk with georgetown university history about the professor 50th anniversary of the 1964 civil rights act. we will also take your calls, and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. ♪ >> good morning. very atiday, april 11 to "washington journal." will announceius today that she is stepping down. that comes months after the troubled rollout of the government's health care website. her decision to resign comes just one week after sign-ups closed for the first year of insurance coverage under the affordable care act. president obama is expected to nominate sylvia matthew for well as director of the office and management of budget to replace her. we will begin there this morning. we want to hear from you. our phone lines are now open.