EMAIL DETAILS
SUBJECT:
Friday, September 2, 2016
PRI: NORMAL
FROM:
T
thegab@usglc.org
DATE:
2016-09-02 19:45:01
MSG_ID:
<aae22dd5ce424ddfaf7362cad7771653@usglc.org>
RECIPIENTS:
TO:
H
Hunter Biden
<hbiden@rosemontseneca.com>
CONTENT:
TEXT: YES |
HTML: YES
PROCESSED
The Weekly GAB Friday, September 2, 2016 U.S. Global Leadership Coalition | www.usglc.org http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=ZUSJUbLZq920TVEyCgaUrg USGLC in the News THE UNION LEADER UNH Forum Covers America's Leadership Role in the World | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=C4knX2UMLrj9lbmrTViMqA Kimberley Haas ISIS, the global economy and immigration were all subjects covered during a forum held at the University of New Hampshire Monday. Hosted by the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, keynote speakers included a retired Navy admiral, the senior director of global government affairs at Wal-Mart and U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H. All agreed it will take both governments and businesses to lift nations out of conflict in order establish and protect peace. Campaign 2016 THE WASHINGTON POST What the World Could Lose in America's Presidential Election | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=uvWy3k6bk_rmgNmytK_Dsg Fred Hiatt The presidential election could be crucial to the future of democracy, and not just in the United States. The global impact of a Donald Trump presidency would be disastrous. But even a Hillary Clinton win won't help reverse the worldwide retrenchment in democracy and human rights unless she brings a change in policy from the current administration. THE DENVER POST Where Do Clinton and Trump Stand on U.S. Intervention? | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=Md9o_3Gj665Iq4MZAY2MeQ Ved Nanda In the current election cycle, the debate on this vital question is especially focused on America's military interventions - interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and hesitation in Syria - which provide some indicators for reflection. Donald Trump is usually described as a champion of non-intervention and Hillary Clinton the opposite. THE HUFFINGTON POST Joe Arpaio: 'What Difference Does It Make' Who Pays for Trump's Border Wall? | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=_tdwSURJXg6crpynqhkxSg Igor Bobic Sheriff Joe Arpaio... said he's not bothered by the GOP nominee's failure to discuss payment for his proposed border wall... with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto. Arpaio said in an interview on CNN. "If Mexico doesn't pay for it, they do get foreign aid. Maybe we can deduct the price from the foreign aid."... Realistic outside estimates have pegged the [wall] bill at $25 billion. In comparison, U.S. foreign aid to Mexico in the next fiscal year is projected to be about $130 million ? a meager sum compared to the billions it would take to build a wall. TIME Henry Kissinger and George Shultz Mull Hillary Clinton Endorsement | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=U8FkAMTTwIg2ANkac0XnlA Tessa Berenson Foreign policy gurus Henry Kissinger and George Shultz are considering a joint endorsement of Hillary Clinton. Politico reports that Shultz, former Secretary of State under President Ronald Reagan, said he will not be endorsing Trump and that he and Kissinger have discussed publicly backing Clinton. "We are going to do it together," Shultz told Politico of a possible joint endorsement. THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE Clinton Slams Trump as a Dangerous Isolationist in American Legion Speech | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=0hZMtxueg4xSPsUq0Dv0RQ Anne Gearan Democrat Hillary Clinton scoffed at the capabilities and worldview of Republican opponent Donald Trump on Wednesday, including his hasty trip to Mexico, as she courted support from veterans and conservatives concerned about national security. The speech, while repeating Clinton's frequent criticisms that Trump's populist foreign policy ideas are dangerous and unworkable, went further in establishing her own position as an internationalist who is to his political right on the issue of overseas engagement. Who's in the News THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER U.S. Must Stand Strong for Allies and Principles http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=Lkvn5y3qed3BjBOya9z7FA Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) and Rep. Charlie Dent (R-PA) As members of the House and Senate Appropriations committees, we've fought to prioritize funding for programs that will help bring peace and strengthen deterrence in these unstable times. Our bipartisan support for the European Reassurance Initiative, the NATO Security Investment Program, international security assistance, and humanitarian assistance programs are just a few examples of how our work in Congress is reinforcing our national security interests and honoring our commitments to our allies. Development & Diplomacy THE WASHINGTON POST Colombian Peace Deal Could Mark Rare Victory for U.S. Diplomacy | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=dS-LFW_63x5E0-atmGdw8g Nick Miroff In an era of frustrating, if not failed, U.S. policy interventions abroad, the Colombian peace deal announced last week offers the possibility of a rare victory for American diplomacy. "This is a transformational moment for our hemisphere," Bernard Aronson, the U.S. envoy to the peace talks, said in an interview. "It is a final repudiation of political violence as a means of changing governments." THE HILL A Great America Deserves a Great International Food Aid Policy | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=vxGHkyxjxAR0zkQZgR8ZXw Ryan Nabil, Stephanie Mercier, and Vincent H. Smith The United States currently has a major leadership role in global emergency food aid programs even though the government spends less than 0.05 percent of the federal budget on such food aid programs. U.S. food aid programs are important for humanitarian reasons but they also make a critical contribution to US foreign policy by creating good will and sustaining America's political credibility in many developing countries. CQ ROLL CALL [See below for full text] Foreign Aid 'Barnacles' Impede Effectiveness, Experts Say | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=QpqguXmtXi0mMJbU1VHeAQ Rachel Oswald Foreign aid advocates, buoyed by modest legislative successes this summer, are now pushing lawmakers to consider the most comprehensive overhaul of U.S. foreign assistance programs in 30 years. The foreign aid budget, still based on Cold War rationale, has become encrusted with outmoded policy and spending requirements that harken back to a time when the Soviet Union was the No. 1 threat and supporting U.S. private businesses was a widely accepted goal of foreign assistance. Politics & Foreign Policy THE WASHINGTON POST Zika Outbreaks Most Likely to Hit Eight Countries in Asia, Africa | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=id7qvHaeQHhBOYNeJUGErA Lena H. Sun The worsening Zika outbreak in Singapore and its potential to spread elsewhere in Asia and beyond is rapidly raising alarms among health experts. Singapore has at least 151 confirmed cases, authorities reported Thursday, with two involving pregnant women. Neighboring Malaysia also confirmed that a 58-year-old woman who recently visited her Zika-infected daughter in Singapore had been diagnosed with the disease. USA TODAY First U.S. Commercial Flight in 5 Decades Lands in Cuba | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=Z0XrCieOLbUhwTKCa0uZSg Alan Gomez The flight from Fort Lauderdale to this city in central Cuba on Wednesday morning took only 51 minutes, but it represented a major step in ending decades of isolation between communist Cuba and the United States. JetBlue Flight 387 was the first regularly scheduled commercial flight between the Cold War foes in 55 years, the latest example of how the two countries are normalizing relations. THE WASHINGTON POST India and U.S. Deepen Defense Ties With Landmark Agreement | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=DKFOmJh7mN9Wd29U6Bs9jA Rama Lakshmi After nearly a decade of painstaking discussions, India and the United States signed on Tuesday a landmark defense agreement that will increase the military cooperation between two of the world's largest democracies. The agreement was finalized during a visit by Indian Defense Minister Manohar Parrikar to Washington, and it was touted as an indication of deeper defense ties between the two nations in an increasingly tense part of the world. CQ ROLL CALL Foreign Aid 'Barnacles' Impede Effectiveness, Experts Say | http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=5R075K3GeEqy6_ND3D_cGg Rachel Oswald September 1, 2016 Foreign aid advocates, buoyed by modest legislative successes this summer, are now pushing lawmakers to consider the most comprehensive overhaul of U.S. foreign assistance programs in 30 years. The foreign aid budget, still based on Cold War rationale, has become encrusted with outmoded policy and spending requirements that harken back to a time when the Soviet Union was the No. 1 threat and supporting U.S. private businesses was a widely accepted goal of foreign assistance. Congress has fallen into the habit of renewing foreign aid programs with little evidence they work - a fact that frustrates Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker, who has discussed the need to pass a new foreign assistance authorization bill. The timeline for the bill is unclear, and it could be kicked into the next Congress. But the committee's top Democrat, Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, who could hold the Foreign Relations gavel if Democrats win control of the Senate in November, supports Corker's goals. "Our foreign aid policies today seem mired in a Cold War mindset that values buying friends in the developing world over establishing the right environment for foreign economic growth to occur," Corker, R-Tenn., said at a July hearing on the efficacy of U.S. assistance to developing nations. The 1961 Foreign Assistance Act (PL 87-195) has been updated multiple times but the last time Congress passed a comprehensive reauthorization measure was 1985. Because so much time has passed, a lot of language remains in the law that analysts say no longer makes sense for the post-Cold War and post-Sept. 11 world. "There are still plenty of Cold War barnacles in the Foreign Assistance Act that are frankly embarrassing," said Diana Ohlbaum, a former senior staffer on the House Foreign Affairs Committee under then-Chairman Howard L. Berman, D-Calif. Ohlbaum led the effort to produce in late 2010 a comprehensive foreign assistance overhaul bill that failed to get out of committee after Republicans took back the House in elections that year. Cold War Barnacles Particularly egregious in Ohlbaum's eyes is a restriction in the law that prohibits any U.S. aid going to a nation that is "controlled by the international Communist conspiracy." The State Department exercised its prerogative to remove China and Vietnam from that list years ago, but the Communist conspiracy language still remains on the books and is a source of embarrassment, says Ohlbaum. Congress today funds security and economic assistance to Vietnam and democracy, human rights, rule of law and Tibetan programs in China. U.S.-funded democracy promotion and broadcasting programs in Cuba are another Cold War-relic, experts say. From fiscal 1984 through fiscal 2015, Congress provided nearly $800 million for broadcasting to Cuba, which covers the Radio and TV Marti news programs, according to the Congressional Research Service. The programs, which air anti-Castro viewpoints, have had a questionable impact on Cuban civil society, in part because Havana routinely blocks their signals. That hasn't stopped lawmakers from spending approximately $30 million annually for the programs. House appropriators are so wedded to the idea of maintaining anti-Castro programming that they included a provision in the fiscal 2017 foreign aid spending bill (HR 5912) to explicitly block an Obama administration plan to turn the Office of Cuba Broadcasting, which oversees Radio and TV Marti, into an independent grantee organization that would also carry out broadcasting programs in the greater Latin American and Caribbean region. "That is still a political football," said Ohlbaum, now an independent consultant, of the advocacy around the Cuba democracy programming. "It is not strictly partisan. It is about the lobbying weight of the Cuban-American community." Another sore thumb for advocates of efficiency is the U.S. Agency for International Development-administered Food for Peace Program, which provides U.S. food commodities to communities and organizations abroad, either for direct distribution or for sale to fund local development initiatives. While the program, which dates back to the 1950s, is overseen by the Agriculture committees and is authorized in the multi-year farm bill, the House Foreign Affairs panel also has a jurisdictional role. The program is a clear example of tied aid, or foreign assistance funding that must be spent on organizations and businesses from the donor country that in turn do work abroad. The Food for Peace program, which averages about $1.9 billion annually, is hamstrung by congressional requirements, which include mandating food be purchased from U.S. farmers and shipped mostly by U.S.-flagged vessels. In practice, these requirements have suppressed the development of sustainable agriculture markets in Africa and slowed food delivery to communities experiencing starvation and malnutrition in faraway corners of the world. "In general, the idea of tied aid is wonderful for domestic constituencies but it shouldn't be called foreign aid, it should be called domestic constituency aid," said Nicholas Eberstadt, an expert on economic development and foreign aid at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Eric Muñoz, a senior policy adviser with the anti-poverty organization Oxfam America, wants to protect money for food aid, but he and other advocates want it spent smarter. "This program is one that has been devised in some ways to benefit American private interests as much as it has been to feed hungry people and we really need to see that stopped," Muñoz said. "The fact that the Food for Peace Act is incorporated as part of the Farm Bill demonstrates that there is a strong interest in seeing that program linked to U.S. domestic interests including farm interests but also shipping interests." Moving to Evidence-Based Approach Foreign aid advocates were delighted earlier this summer with the congressional passage of a law (PL 114-191) that requires U.S. agencies to publish performance data, contracts and other detailed information on their foreign aid programs.They hope the law will bring more accountability to U.S. foreign assistance. However, some development professionals are skeptical Congress can ever bring itself to defund pet projects, regardless of what the evidence reveals. Steve Bucci, a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation, thinks it's likely that lawmakers will start hacking at programs they don't like. But years of partisan wrestling around perennial aid issues like family planning and climate change have left Democrats and Republicans well-equipped to defend their favored projects. "I think the two sides are already pretty entrenched to defend what they like and attack what they don't like on both sides of the aisle," said Bucci, who formerly worked on Iraqi security assistance issues during the George W. Bush administration. Lester Munson, former Senate Foreign Relations staff director under Corker, defended the aid transparency law, saying it will have an impact far beyond Congress. "The audience for transparency is not just the few members and staff who are working directly on the issues. It's for advocates, it's for professionals who work in the field, it's for reporters," said Munson, a former deputy assistant administrator with USAID, now with the lobbying firm BGR. "What you'll ultimately produce with more transparency and accountability is a better conversation . . . .about these issues and what's the best way to do things." Casey Dunning, a senior policy analyst with the Center for Global Development, says she recognizes that even with the "best, most indisputable evidence in the world," lawmakers may still decide to pursue their own differing agendas. At the same, Dunning, who specializes in aid effectiveness, says she believes there is a congressional appetite for moving forward with common-sense foreign aid reform, as evidenced by passage this year of a new food security law (PL 114-195) that authorizes USAID for the first time to provide cash transfers to local and regional governments for the purchase of emergency food aid. Another example is a law (PL 114-121) cleared by Congress in February that codifies the administration's Power Africa program, which seeks to spread electricity in sub-Saharan Africa through more public-private initiatives. "There is a moment for foreign aid right now," Dunning said. "If you look at all of the issues out there, I think foreign aid and development is one where you can clearly say there has been some really interesting bipartisan work being done." ### The U.S. Global Leadership Coalition 1129 20th Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036 Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | USGLC.org http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=bioSWiu_JR1Pomo-v_WCiQ http://action.usglc.org/site/CO?i=hoI3UDQ84ZflxJtu3P_AFJDY-kjTlU26&cid=1181 http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=a1epzq2m5Y4Dh2xST_AXOA http://action.usglc.org/site/R?i=YfqMnmVExY6opZvdjrPGfg
METADATA:
THREAD:
INDEX:
AdhhnyIdAlgYc3LeTm6d47536kbHNw==