Barbara Lee

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this en bloc. There is a list of bipartisan amendments in this to address various Members' priorities. I appreciate the collaborative way in which we have agreed on this package. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, it is really hard to believe that you all want to eliminate funding for the Institute of Peace, P-E-A-C- E. The Institute of Peace is one of the best tools the United States has to bring people together to prevent wars--government officials, civil society practitioners, and defense experts--to really to creatively solve our world's thorniest issues. Congress created the United States Institute of Peace for this purpose in 1984. USIP applies practical solutions in conflict zones, and provides analysis, education, and resources to those working for peace. Peace is patriotic, my Republican friends. USIP has specialized teams of mediators, trainers, and others in some of the world's most dangerous places and works to equip communities with the skills necessary to prevent or resolve their own violent conflicts before they threaten the United States. Mr. Chair, I hope they understand that peace is the only option that we have to war. USIP works on the ground with local partners on the root causes of conflict that all too frequently result in America's military gains or diplomatic and development investments going to waste. In a world that becomes more dangerous and complex every day, we need the services and the creative thinking of the United States Institute of Peace. It is hard to believe the Republicans oppose peace. I guess that says that war is the option for settling conflicts, and I think the American people are war weary and support our efforts for peace. It is really a shame and a disgrace that you are uncovering this issue in terms of your opposition to peace. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, the OSCE is the world's largest regional security organization and has been critical in addressing the violent aggression of Russia. The OSCE is actively engaged in conflict prevention, conventional arms control, peacekeeping, promoting good governance and human rights, rule-of-law programming, also border security measures, counternarcotics work, efforts to combat organized crime, anticorruption and anti-money laundering activities, and election support. The OSCE is currently leading a Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine. This mission is an unarmed civilian mission tasked to observe and to report on the situation resulting from ongoing Russian aggression to facilitate dialogue among all parties to restore peace, p-e-a-c-e, and to monitor and support the implementation of the cease- fire and other tenets of the Minsk peace agreements. It is the only nonpartisan international body that maintains a continuous presence at the line of contact between the Ukrainian Armed Forces and Russian-led forces in eastern Ukraine. Peace in Ukraine, that is p-e-a-c-e, will be through organizations like the OSCE. I am completely perplexed by my colleagues and can't figure out why they would not find this a good investment of taxpayer dollars. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. Mr. Chair, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, the United States Agency for International Development's global operations are essential to defending United States national security, asserting United States leadership and foreign policy influence, and advancing stability, security, and prosperity worldwide. This account supports a direct-hire workforce focused on advancing the most critical and effective foreign assistance programs and ensuring strong relationships and stewardship and accountability of U.S. taxpayer dollars. A 50 percent reduction to the operating expenses account would devastate USAID operations, including its workforce, and its ability to implement critical foreign assistance and humanitarian assistance programs. At this level, the Agency would be forced to reduce permanent U.S. direct-hire levels by about 1,845 positions. USAID would cut approximately 965 Foreign Service and 880 civil service positions. This 50 percent workforce reduction would require a reduction in force since eliminating the backfilling of positions lost through attrition would achieve only about an 8 percent cut. USAID would significantly reduce its presence overseas, including closing some missions, once again leaving this void for our adversaries. This would leave these missions without American personnel to deliver aid from the American people and ensure our national security through development and humanitarian assistance. This drastic staff cut would leave programs extremely vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse, and impair the Agency's ability to respond to ongoing and future natural and human crises, pandemics, and development challenges. It also will result in the termination of programs overseas, once again creating a void for our adversaries to fill. This amendment is really counterproductive. We can't short fund staff charged with managing our foreign assistance programs and expect them to be effective. If we reduce our development efforts, we are not countering Russia and the PRC's influence. We are, instead, opening the door for their expanded global influence. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Salinas).

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart).

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, the United States Agency for International Development's capital investment fund supports facility construction, information technology, and real property maintenance. These include efforts to accelerate the construction of new, secure, safe, and functional office facilities for USAID personnel overseas. Without this funding, these diplomats would be vulnerable and at greater risk for harm on less secured compounds. This fund also supports information technology security, including efforts critical to cybersecurity and real property maintenance and repairs. I don't hear the gentleman talking about the fact that the policy of countering Chinese influence costs a little bit of money, also. I think this provides us a bigger bang for our buck. Without this funding, the Agency would be unable to upgrade and secure the IT environment against external and internal threats that could damage our national security and expose personally identifiable information of not only Americans but the participants we assist in times of crisis. Mr. Chair, this amendment is shortsighted, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, while this amendment does not have a budgetary effect, I thank my colleague for raising such an important issue for millions of women around the world. For more than 200 women, female genital mutilation can mean health problems that haunt them for the rest of their lives. The quest for gender equality will not be complete until women are no longer subjected to these practices, and I thank my colleague for raising this important issue. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart).

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, once again, I have no idea what my colleagues are trying to achieve. All this amendment would do is double down on the harm Russia's aggression has already wreaked on the poorest countries of the world through higher food, fertilizer, and fuel costs. This amendment would cut $750 million each from global health programs and the International Disaster Assistance accounts. These cuts would impose tremendous harm and suffering to the most vulnerable, including: 4 million children with malaria will go untreated; 350,000 deaths attributable to tuberculosis; 13 million fewer children vaccinated resulting in a possible 115,000 additional deaths; and A reduction by over 45 percent of humanitarian assistance to Sudan compared to FY 2023 levels. This doesn't sound much like pro-life to me, Mr. Chairman. It would also eliminate the entire Official Development Assistance accounts, affecting agriculture and food security programs, education, and clean water for millions of the most vulnerable people in the world. Development assistance is also used for Countering PRC Influence programs, which represents one of our most effective tools to counter and compete with the PRC globally. It is really ridiculous, it is cruel, and it is not pro-life. These are not funds that would be targeted to Ukraine in any significant way. It has no impact on the Ukraine debate and would inflict harm on millions of people. Mr. Chair, I would be happy to discuss with my colleagues about how we support Ukraine's pursuit of freedom, but this amendment would only alienate the rest of the world and forsake many of our allies' reliant on assistance from the United States. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, let me just suggest this: It really is an unrealistic position for the United States to allow 4 million children with malaria to go untreated, to allow 350,000 deaths attributable to tuberculosis, to allow 13 million fewer children vaccinated, resulting in a possible 115,000 additional deaths, and a reduction of over 45 percent of humanitarian assistance to Sudan compared to 2023 levels. Very unrealistic, cruel, and unusual. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. LEE of California. USAID's International Disaster Assistance Account, or IDA, is a critical tool which supports our country's foreign policy objectives and serves as a lifeline for millions of people. The IDA account provides lifesaving support including food, water, shelter, emergency healthcare, sanitation and hygiene, and critical nutrition services to the world's most vulnerable and hardest to reach people. This assistance is needed now more than ever. After 20 years of decline, there are more people facing hunger now than in 2019, almost 30 percent of the global population. Regardless of whether you have faith or not, I think that our values compel us to really address those in most need, not only in our own country, but, yes, throughout the world. It is important to provide this humanitarian assistance because it is morally the right thing to do. Once again, those who are people of faith, or not, do this because it really does solidify our commitment to humankind, and, also, yes, our leadership and influence throughout the world. It is unthinkable that the United States would stop providing this support to those who have lost everything through a natural disaster or conflict. I am really ashamed that the Republicans want to do this. It is really a disgrace. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.