▶ 0:55:53of this hearing today is to examine the progress made regarding the reorganization of the Department of State and the role that the Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources is in ensuring effective management of resources and operations within the department and the role of this position relative to the under secretary for foreign assistance and the under secretary for management. And I'm now going to recognize myself for an opening statement.
▶ 0:56:21I think it's been very clear that Secretary Rubio is leading sweeping overhaul to give us a state department that is efficient and accountable, which is something that it has not been. the State Department where every single dollar that goes through that agency, it puts this country, it puts our country, it puts the United States of America first above all else. Foreign aid is not benevolence.
▶ 0:56:52It's not charity. It's a soft power that gives America a chance to get what it is that we need because of some mutual benefit that exists out there between two nations. It's not an opportunity to push radical liberal ideas on countries that would otherwise want to be our allies.
▶ 0:57:14As chairman of this committee, I've called out this madness for a number of foreign aid programs with zero benefit to America or even to the countries that they're supposedly helping. America in many cases would have been better off burning that money than spending it in the ways that it had In the year 2000, the State Department's budget was $9.5 billion.
▶ 0:57:42Under Joe Biden, it was over 55 billion. And I don't think that we could say our foreign policy was $45 billion more effective in those years. This past Friday, 1300 State Department personnel were laid off. But guess what?
▶ 0:58:00Between 2007 and 2024, new State Department employees had been more than the number of agents that Border Patrol is mandated to have by That to me is an astounding number. America did not get the return that it needed on that investment. I could give you a number of examples that we looked at in the oversight subcommittee and on this committee over the years, but I'm going to give you just one right now.
▶ 0:58:31The disastrous withdrawal from left 13 US service members dead at Abbeby Gate. It left people literally hanging off the wings of military aircraft. left an overrun embassy and billions of dollars left behind along with millions of dollars of condoms left to the Taliban. Those were real things. Many colleagues in here, they tried to defend that record.
▶ 0:59:00The same people who said Afghanistan was a glowing success, that that withdrawal was everything was perfect and flawless and nothing could have been done better. The same people that said that are now begging us not to fix the broken machine that let that That's not diplomacy. That's delusion. They'll call President Trump's effort to eliminate 1300 duplicative State Department roles self-sabotage and a gift to our adversaries.
▶ 0:59:30what they call self-sabotage, we call accountability for the real sabotage of those who led the Afghanistan withdrawal and the funding of transgender job fairs and LGBTQ musicals and DEI operas and drag show tutorials. Our State Department should not be more concerned with promoting DEI and giving handouts to foreign NOS than defending the interests of the American people.
▶ 1:00:00That is changing under Secretary Rubio. That is changing. This isn't disarmament. It's a strategic America needs a focused and a missiondriven State Department where every dollar and every diplomat puts the United States of America first.
▶ 1:00:21a state department that can answer, not only answer, but actually takes the time to ask the questions, what does America actually need from a country or a region? What do we need from them? What does that country or region actually want from the United States of America? And does what we provide get us what we need or does it not?
▶ 1:00:47Because if the State Department can't answer those questions, then it is not meeting the moment. We need a State Department that isn't afraid of removing career bureaucrats who think they're above oversight. Many of these so-called experts oversaw two decades of failure from botched regime change to a rising China and wasteful foreign aid. That's not expertise. That is inertia. Congress should not be using taxpayer money to fund permanent jobs programs for globalist insiders. In my opinion, we should be funding a State Department that serves Americans.
▶ 1:01:18That means being able to explain why $1 should go from a person's pocket to somebody who is in another country, somebody who is not even an American. Why should that take place? They better be able to explain that. If that rattles the career the career bureaucrats at Foggy Bottom, then good. They need to remember who it is exactly that they work for. Secretary Rubio is not hollowing out the State Department. He is rebuilding it to win.
▶ 1:01:49This is about fixing a broken system. Real reform makes the State Department stronger, not weaker. Today's witness, Deputy Secretary Michael Riggus, is helping lead that charge. With a background in discipline resource management and nononsense approach to results, he's the right man to guide the next generation of State Department leadership. Mr. Rodriguez, thank you for being here.
▶ 1:02:14The American people are counting on you to make sure that our diplomats serve one interest and one interest only, the United States of In that, I'm now going to recognize ranking member Meeks from New York for his opening statement. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Deputy Sec, I appreciate you're here to explain the secretary's reorganization plans. You know, this is a dark time for American diplomacy.
▶ 1:02:43President Trump continues to isolate the United States, alienate our allies, and create space for adversaries like Russia and China to fill the void. We face serious global challenges from Russia's war in Ukraine and instability in the Middle East to great power competition with China. America's diplomats and development experts are are our first line of defense.
▶ 1:03:09If we are serious about leading globally, we need a capable, strategic, and fully staffed diplomatic core. Instead, Mr. Secretary, you and Secretary Rubio are gutting the very institutions we rely on to confront these threats. Just days ago, you fired more than 1300 State Department employees. Secretary Rubio claimed it was to put America first.
▶ 1:03:37But the people you dismiss, career public servants, many with decades of experience, working hard, just as our folks in the military, believing in America, one soft power, one hard defense, but all patriots of the United States, who have all put America first each and every day.
▶ 1:04:02They've served in war zones like Afghanistan and Iraq, responded to genocide in Burma, and helping bring Americans home during the COVID crisis. Let's be clear, you've created the largest brain drain in the State Department's modern history, occurring as China and others expand their global footprint while we shrink ours. and you're doing it without a plan, proper consultation, or transparency.
▶ 1:04:32When this committee asked for a rationale behind the state's 15% staffing cut, no one no one could answer. Like so many of our oversight questions to your department, we're still waiting.
▶ 1:04:48Your budget officials fell back on talking points about how the State Department's budget has doubled since 2000, ignoring inflation, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the department's expanded mission, including implementing programs like PEPFAR, which has saved over 25 million lives and helped slow the spread of HIV and AIDS worldwide, even here at home.
▶ 1:05:17Meanwhile, the Defense Department's budget has almost tripled in that same 25year time frame. Both our soldiers are heroes and our members of the State Department are heroes working for America every day. Yes, states budget has grown to meet new challenges, but staffing hasn't kept place.
▶ 1:05:43And if the secretary really wants to shorten the clearance process, the secretary can do that with a memo, not blind firings. Beyond the numbers, your disregard for congressional oversight is unacceptable.
▶ 1:05:58Since January, we've sent dozens of letters asking about plans to reorganize the State Department and unlawfully collapse USID interstate, rolled back mandated programs, diversity efforts, and closed offices supporting our Afghan allies. Guess what? We be we have almost nothing. The law requires consultation for a reason.
▶ 1:06:23And if the secretary can't even stay to answer questions that one at the one hearing this committee held with a state official, it's no surprise his staff follows suit. If you don't have answers to basic oversight questions, it would be wise to slow down and consider the consequences. The secretary claimed this reorganization was a product of consultation with the workforce. That's false.
▶ 1:06:50Your colleague Andrew Verkerk admitted it was designed by fewer than 10 people. The secretary also claims his firings wouldn't affect overseas po also force. We've heard from diplomats who have already sent their families and belongings abroad only to receive termination notices.
▶ 1:07:14Other assigned to serve as critical posts like Baghdad were fired weeks before starting language training or deploying. You even fired officers traveling with the secretary. People preparing his talking points for the very East Asia meetings he was tweeting about. That's not That's chaos. You fired veterans serving at state without cause, without process, without dignity.
▶ 1:07:40One of those veterans said it best and I quote, "These processes were not well thought out or executed. The personal the personnel aspect of this process the personal aspect of this process was as botched as it could have been and it was completely avoidable." And you aren't just firing experts. You're gutting the programs they ran. programs that advanced America's interest and protected American lives.
▶ 1:08:11What exactly is America First really all about? And let's not forget the $2.9 billion of so-called America First Opportunities Fund, a slush fund Secretary Rubio has proposed to spend on President Trump's whims with zero congressional oversight. House Republicans love to demand transparency. We will. Will will they demand it now or rush to rubber stamp his latest power grab?
▶ 1:08:39So, Secretary Riggs, are you putting American diplomacy on a dangerous path? Step back from the brink. Restore the dignity of American diplomats and work with Congress on a smarter strategic way forward, one that strengthens, not sabotages, our global leadership. And with that, I yield back. Thank you, Ranking Member Meeks. now recognize you, Deputy Secretary for your opening statement. Thank you.
▶ 1:09:05Uh good afternoon, Chairman Mast, Ranking Member Meeks, and esteemed members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me here today to speak about the president's fiscal year 2026 budget request for the Department of State totaling 28.5 billion.
▶ 1:09:22This figure is a decrease of $25.9 billion or 48% below the FY25 As the deputy secretary for management and resources, it is my responsibility to ensure we are good stewards of the taxpayer dollars you provide the department and that they are spent in accordance with the goals of the president and the secretary.
▶ 1:09:48Our budget reflects Secretary Rubio's departmentwide reorganization and the important work we are doing to make the State Department a more efficient and effective organization, better able to advance the core interests of the American people and accountable to the American taxpayers. As Secretary Rubio has stated, we must reform and streamline the State Department so that it becomes an effective instrument of American foreign policy.
▶ 1:10:15When the secretary announced the department's reorganization plan on April 22nd, the department had over 1,500 office units in the United States alone. This is for an organization that implements foreign policy.
▶ 1:10:32Any foreign policy decision, statement, or action at the State Department must pass through more than a dozen or more separate offices for review and clearance before it even reaches a senior State Department official to approve a course of action. This time-consuming and bureaucratic process is no way to run a department in the modern age where we must move at the speed of relevance.
▶ 1:10:58The reorganization will merge, eliminate, consolidate, or streamline nearly 45% of the department's domestic offices. Moving forward, every bureau and office will have a clear mission and purpose. We want to empower our ambassadors and diplomats in the field and our regional bureaus in Washington to push forward the president's America first foreign policy agenda and deliver results for the American people.
▶ 1:11:28For too long, single issue offices have mushroomed in number and influence, often distorting our foreign policy objectives to serve their specific interests, slowing down the department's ability to function. This reorganization includes a new approach to foreign assistance. As of July 1st, USAD no longer implements foreign assistance.
▶ 1:11:52Secretary Rubio has ushered in a new era where the State Department takes the lead and utilizes foreign assistance as a core tool of strategic investment and engagement for the United States. The State Department will now directly administer foreign assistance and other functions and programs that align with the administration's policy priorities as those are being trai transitioned to the State Department as well.
▶ 1:12:18This integration will better align our foreign aid with our foreign policy objectives and will ensure that every taxpayer dollar spent is justified by its benefit to American national Too often we have funneled billions of dollars in assistance projects that host governments did not even want and that led to no tangible benefit to the American people.
▶ 1:12:43Too often we've tried to impose divisive ideologies on other countries which have pushed away potential allies and partners into the hands of China, Russia, and others. Too often we have failed to leverage our generosity and good relations to bring home real achievements for the American people. The same American people who have bankrolled these programs for decades which have not provided tangible benefits to their own communities.
▶ 1:13:10As the secretary noted, the countries that benefit most from our generosity often failed to reciprocate that support. For example, subsaharan African nations voted with the United States only 29% of the time on essential UN resolutions in 2023 despite receiving billions in assistance paid for by the American Going forward, the United States will remain the largest foreign aid donor in the world by a wide margin.
▶ 1:13:40China and Russia do not deliver the kind of life-saving assistance that the American people have provided for decades, and there is no sign this will change. But our focus will be on trade, not aid. And we will always advance the interests of the United States.
▶ 1:13:57We will put the United States and the American people first in all as aspects of our foreign policy and we will continue to build and cultivate positive constructive relationships with the governments and people of the world. Congress and American taxpayers expect us to deliver results for the American people and I look forward to working with Secretary Rubio and this committee to deliver those results.
▶ 1:14:25As I've said before, I know that every dollar we spend and every program we fund comes from the labor of a taxpaying American family. Our goal is to have a State Department that is accountable to the American people and effective in unleashing the potential of the world's most talented diplomatic workforce. Thank you for having me here today and I look forward to answering your Thank you for your opening statement, Secretary.
▶ 1:14:52Uh I'm going to begin by recognizing myself for five minutes of questioning and then we'll alternate between each side uh as we go down the line. I want to start with this. It's my understanding that there was a goal of 15% reduction in force and that we're either close to meeting that or have met that that goal already. And so just beginning with that, what are the workforce modernization priorities that you that you want to focus on now at this point if we're if we're getting close to that metric? Sure. Thank you for that question, Chairman Mast.
▶ 1:15:21The priorities of the reorganization were to consolidate offices that had similar duplicative or overlapping functions, eliminate offices and bureaus whose functions were no longer relevant or were not aligned with the administration's policy priorities, and to focus the work of the department on making sure that everything we did uh was for the benefit of making America stronger, safer, and more prosperous.
▶ 1:15:49And the 15% number that you referenced came from our initial assessment after consulting with the uh under secretaries at the department which at the time were all I think with the exception of one they're all still uh career officers of the department who are serving as senior bureau officials where we asked them what do you need to operate what is a successful department organization look like to you and they came back and provided us what they proposed for org charts for the department that they thought uh ought to be functioning going forward. forward.
▶ 1:16:19Very good. I appreciate that. And you know, I think it's important that you work on focus. You mentioned in your comments just right now, subsaharan Africa, and I think I could put a fine point on something you were saying. You were saying, you know, a lot of these subsaharan African countries were not supporting the United States of America despite the support they were getting from us. A fine point I would put on that. These were some of the biggest recipients of PEPAR and they were giving the United States of America the least amount of support. I think that's a fine point to put on. And if our diplomats aren't paying attention to that, then again, they're not they're not meeting the moment.
▶ 1:16:49Um they're they're just being delusional about what is supposed to be a soft power and is not really being effective as a soft power. I want to switch gears to to something else and I want to talk about both your role and and other the other deputy role. Uh we have two deputy secretaries at the Department of State. It's a unique structure. Um, and it brings me to a question about chain of command, and I've kind of thought about it in my mind when one of my kids asks me something and they don't like the answer, and then they go to my wife and ask her the same thing, hoping for a different answer.
▶ 1:17:18And I I worry sometimes that can take place within the department. So, uh, in us looking for uh effective ways to consolidate financial management, uh, I'm of the mind that we should consider a chief financial officer uh for the State Department. And I'd like to know your opinions about that, giving them full statutory authority uh and and everything that they would need in that role. Uh one deputy, one uh chief financial officer. I'd love to know your opinions about that as a structure. Thank you for that question, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 1:17:47Um the State Department is one of the CFO act agencies. So it does have a statutory uh presidentially appointed Senate confirmed chief financial officer position. Uh that position hasn't been filled in in a number of years. is the duties have been performed by an acting CFO who's generally been the deputy and the head of the uh CGFS bureau. Um I think it would be um you know prudent to consider nominating someone for that role.
▶ 1:18:14I think having uh the DMR role serves as a kind of provides sort of a strategic oversight for the department in terms of how we ought to be engaging our uh resources and how we ought to be managing the department and the CFO uh is and the the other burrs are more of a sort of an action officer to execute and carry out those functions. So I do think there is a role for uh the DMR CFO rel relationship where one is setting the strategy, the other one is uh executing on it.
▶ 1:18:44Well, thank you. I appreciate that opinion. I think I have time for one more question and you uh having time to answer that. And I want to switch gears one more time to again a totally different subject than what we were just covering in the previous two. Uh President Trump implemented on April 9th an executive order uh reforming defense weapons sales. Uh, and I'd just love for you to talk a little bit about the progress that's being made on reforming defense weapons sales. Obviously, it's a it's an important issue for this committee, for both the the ranking member and myself.
▶ 1:19:13It's something that we deal with uh on a probably a daily basis, and so I'd love to hear what's going on with that. Thank you for that question, Mr. Chairman. Um that's a role I've recently been designated as the point person to um take care of that function at the department and work closely with uh my counterpart at the Department of Defense. Um I understand that process just takes too long, both the foreign uh direct military sales and the commercial sales.
▶ 1:19:40And that's something um I'm definitely going to be looking into and working with my counterparts at state at at defense to uh find opportunities to streamline that process and make it more effective. I think the president's push to have our NATO friends and allies contribute 5% of their GDP to NATO defense spending is going to be a big impetus to u streamlining this this process as well. Thank you. My time is expired.
▶ 1:20:08I'm now going to recognize ranking member Meeks for his five minutes of question. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Let me just ask you a quick question. What do you think of the people that work for the State Department, the women and men? Are they good Americans? Absolutely, sir. This is the the third presidential administration I've served in, and each time I've had the privilege of working with some of the most talented um and dedicated uh patriots who want to serve this country.
▶ 1:20:35Um it's never easy to um you know downsize an organization or eliminate offices or bureaus, but we had to put the mission and they make sacrifices for this country, right? Sure. I think everyone they um you know they don't carry weapons, but like the men and women of our military, they love this country. They come from the Democrats, they're Republicans, they come from all part and they basically took this job making great sacrifices even with their families. Is that not correct? Yes, it is sir.
▶ 1:21:03And so these are individuals who um you know and I know uh when Secretary Rubio was Senator Rubio we had you know conversation he would always you know talk about them in a manner of them doing their job as they and dedicated to do their jobs not that they were not meeting the moment they were meeting the moment they were doing what was you agree with that okay so now um let me ask this because When Secretary Rubio
▶ 1:21:33was here, he said, well, he was in Malaysia, I believe, that he was proud of the department's reorganization. On how it was conducted, he said, quote, I would argue probably in the most deliberative way of anyone that's done one. Now, to me, that's a bold statement. And so, I would hope that you have some things. So, let me just ask you, yes or no. Did did you develop a detailed national security strategy to define what objectives the reorganization should achieve? Well, thank you.
▶ 1:22:02So, my understanding is the national security strategy is developed by the national security council and so you but you didn't do anything at the state because state department does a number of things that puts our national they help us with that strategy. So, at the state department was there anything that any strategy uh that defined what the objectives of the reorganization should achieve so that we know we're moving forward? Was was there did you do Yeah.
▶ 1:22:31I mean the secretary articulated that on his first day on but Well then if you did then it should be something in writing. Can you get us something to this committee to provide to show us what those national that that national security strategy was? Sure. I think the secretary provided extreme clarity on that when he said I want to see the document that you you utilize. So let's if you have one please submit that to the committee. The committee have oversight responsibility.
▶ 1:22:56that would love to see what the strategic uh strategy was and how you did these uh these firings. Did you conduct a written analysis looking at the costs and the benefits of your proposed changes? Sir, I can tell you the thoughtful uh yes or no. Was there an analysis done? Certainly. I mean the the individual Do you have the analysis sir who provided us their input? It was Do you have an analysis experience?
▶ 1:23:24Do you have an analysis so that we could know what was that analysis looking at the cost and the benefits of the proposed changes? If anybody's doing any work and you're doing something that's really comprehensive, there's an analysis done. You're going to do this. This is the cost. This is why we're doing it. Do you have that in writing, I I I don't know if we have it in writing, but I can I certainly know that analysis was done on If you have it, it should be in writing and I would love to see a copy of it so that we can have it if there's a if not then I don't know. You know this.
▶ 1:23:51Let me say did you conduct a staff survey of the civil service, foreign service and local nationals who work with us overseas and our embassies. We did have a portal where we received 650 comments from employees at the Department of State and every single one of those comments were reviewed and considered and in fact some of those comments resulted in changes to the Were those comments in writing? Okay.
▶ 1:24:20Can you supply that to the committee also, please? I don't see why not. Sure. in my opening statement, I said that one of your colleagues boasted in a briefing, this is what I was, you know, to the committee that the reorganization was developed actually not by talking to everybody, but by fewer than 10 people. That's what he said to us. Fewer than 10 people. not going around and talking to everyone in that regards.
▶ 1:24:50Uh is that correct? Was his statement Well, I I think there are what six under secretaries. So, if you count to the the six people who are the most senior and most responsible for the uh various, you know, organizational families at the department, that would be a minimum. And if you add four more people to that, I'm not sure how many how, you know, all of the bureaus you task the six under time. I just want to submit this for the record, Mr. Chairman. I have a state department document of frequently asked questions from May that I'd like to enter into the record.
▶ 1:25:20It says quote the president the present assignment of foreign service employees is not a factor for rifts. So order that I yield back. Chair now recognizes representative from New Jersey, Mr. Smith. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for convening this hearing and Secretary Riggs Rigus, thank you for your your testimony and your leadership. Um, a couple of questions.
▶ 1:25:45You know, Marco Rubio, Secretary Rubio gave a very interesting a very interesting turn of a phrase when he said global uh spanning NOS's uh are part of an industrial complex at taxpayers expense. I thought that was, you know, no matter what the organization is, you got to make sure that the groups that we fund, the taxpayers subsidize, are doing the job and they're doing it efficiently, effectively, and inside the parameters of what the mandates are.
▶ 1:26:12U so I thought his comment, which I read on the state department's website, uh was excellent. Let me ask you a question. You know, you um you talked about um in and your testimony about the u uh 1500 office units in the US.
▶ 1:26:28uh if we're an organization that implements foreign policy and I'm not sure totally what that means but I know when I wrote a law back in the year 2004 on micro credit lending uh we were trying to help the poorest of the poor those making less than a dollar a day and we had a great bill totally bipartisan with my colleagues uh and all of a sudden K Street weighed in and they wanted their cut and I was outraged by it and we ended up when we got it over to the Senate we lost they had to get their their piece of it uh at the expense in my humble opinion of the poorest
▶ 1:26:58of the poor. Uh, and I'm not sure if that's what you're talking about, but you know, are these people, you know, maybe they mean well, but boy, they some of them, some of the NGO leaders get unbelievably large salaries, three and four times what any member of Congress might make. Uh, and and I wonder about that kind of of of subsidization uh for them. Uh, so maybe you want to speak to that. And as part of modernizing the department, what steps are being taken to monitor US foreign assistance to avoid waste, fraud, and abuse?
▶ 1:27:28Uh if you could speak to that as well. And one last thing that um for four years I tried desperately to get information out of the US Department of State and especially USAD uh about monies that were flowing not only to PEPAR but elsewhere. Uh what are we doing? Who are we subsidizing? How much are they getting? and especially what are their subgrantees getting? It was like pulling teeth. I would get these these spreadsheets that weren't worth worth the paper they're printed on.
▶ 1:27:58Then I would I would also ask as part of those the data requests, what are they doing with it? Okay, you just gave three million to a subgrantee. What are they doing with it? Crickets could not get it. So, I thank you that you're trying and I thank Secretary Rubio to really get to some transparency and we will get to it. Uh because I couldn't get it. I sat I met with Samantha Power went over and met with her in her office and very nice person but I wouldn't get the information.
▶ 1:28:24How do you do oversight and our subcommittee was tasked with that oversight and we couldn't get it. I have paper trails of all this stuff that doesn't mean anything frankly because I don't know what that means. It's like saying here's the scores of yesterday's game eight to four three to two. Who are they? We had no idea and what they were actually uh buying with US taxpayer funds. So the transparency issue is to me so extremely important. I know you're focused on that. Uh and finally, just let me ask you if I could.
▶ 1:28:53Um the deputy secretary of management resources advises the secretary on the department's participation in the national economic council uh and inter inter agency economic policy matters. Is that not the role for the under secretary for economic affairs or the department's chief economist? So thank you for that question.
▶ 1:29:14Congressman, um, with respect to, uh, foreign aid, you know, we've gone through and I I've got a whole list in front of me and this has been articulated u, I think previously with respect to how money from USA ID was being spent on all kinds of things that were completely unjustifiable. Um, what we've proposed in the FY26 budget is the America First Opportunity Fund.
▶ 1:29:38I know, you know, that was got some criticism from the ranking member on that, but I think what we what that proposes to do is to ensure democratic accountability on how those funds are being spent. You see the president every day uh in front of the cameras taking questions from the media, in the Oval Office, in cabinet meetings, when he's about to get on his plane, when he gets off his plane. He's completely accessible. The secretary is as well.
▶ 1:30:02And if anyone wants to ask a question about how foreign assistance money is being spent or how how how dollars from that fund are being spent to advance America's interests, they have an opportunity every single day to do that. By contrast, how these funds were spent at USID, nobody knows who to ask why those monies were spent or who made the decision to spend money on, you know, a million dollars for voter ID in Haiti. I mean there there's a page after page here I have of examples like that.
▶ 1:30:31Uh with your with respect to your question on the role of the deputy secretary for management and resources. Um this position provides sort of strategic oversight of the management and resources of how the department um conducts its affairs with oversight you know primarily of the M bureau and of the F bureau but really departmentwide. uh these other bureaus and officers are are the action officers for those taking you know taking care that that strategy is effectively delivered down the chain of command and what they do every day.
▶ 1:31:02Chair now recognizes Representative Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to uh deal with a couple of your comments. You point out that 13 brave American soldiers died in Afghanistan under the Biden administration. I'll point out 65 died under the first Trump and a And Trump could have signed the unconditional surrender that he signed in 2020 in 2017.
▶ 1:31:30Instead, he kept us there, accomplished nothing for our country, provided billions of dollars in weapons to Afghan to Afghanistan with no plan to recapture them, and most importantly, freed 5,000 bloodthirsty terrorists.
▶ 1:31:48and then blames Biden when he leaves him with an Afghanistan that has thousands of American soldiers and 5,000 recently released bloodthirsty terrorists that the bloodthirsty terrorists try to kill the Americans. But what also concerns me, you know, I represent the Pacific Palisades.
▶ 1:32:05Trump came to our district and said, "My constituent should sleep outdoors with no aid until our governor changes his policy." And I thought that was the most outrageous thing I'd heard until I hear that uh people in Africa should die of AIDS until their govern government changes how they vote in the United Nations. Um we just had a big puba on the floor where they couldn't pass a rule.
▶ 1:32:33Huge deal here in Congress and it was about the Epstein files. Mr. Secretary, would it harm American foreign policy if we release the Epstein files? Assuming of course we redact the names of the victims. Sir, I have no idea. So you have no reason to think that it would harm our foreign policy.
▶ 1:32:52Um yeah, Carrie Lake was was here talking about our broadcasting and I pointed out that uh some 354 million people listen every week or did until you shut it down. And she said, and I'll quote, "Those are government numbers and I don't trust those numbers. Can we trust the listenership numbers issued by the State Department? I'm not sure what numbers you're referring to, sir. Those are the numbers of people listening every week to Voice of America and its sisters.
▶ 1:33:23Is there issued by the State Department? Yeah, I'm not familiar with that state. I'll point out that not only were those numbers released under the Biden administration, but very similar numbers were released under the Trump administration. So Carrie Lake was sitting there saying, "We couldn't trust Trump administration government numbers." Can we trust Trump administration government numbers? So I'd have to You're the management guy, right? I'd have to look at what numbers you're referring to. I haven't had officially released government. Okay.
▶ 1:33:54Secretary Rubio sat right there and told us no one had died as a result of the cuts uh to uh our foreign aid. Does the State Department stand by that conclusion? No one's died. I I would stand by Secretary Rubio's statement, sir. Yes. Okay.
▶ 1:34:08Well, we have behind me the first to die, the first child to die because you cut off his AIDS medicine, but we're going to have five 3.3 million people die as a result.
▶ 1:34:26And not only do we have that, we have uh uh the effect that cutting off aid does to migration, but also to diseases that affect us here in the United States. Because most of those 3.3 million people are going to die because of tuberculosis, malaria, and AIDS.
▶ 1:34:46And every time someone in another country transacts one of those diseases, it's a chance for that disease to replicate, replicate, mutate, and migrate back here. So, we're going to have a lot of deaths in America, not only the 3.3 million deaths uh there. Now, you recently um we I think it was today that 500 metric tons of emergency food reached its expiration date and it's set to be burned.
▶ 1:35:14Um, was there a reason why uh food that was acquired even before the uh beginning of this administration now has to be burned because you didn't send it to starving people in Sudan and elsewhere? Sir, I'm I'm not familiar with that particular uh story, but um my understanding is it is the policy of the government to not distribute expired food or medicine.
▶ 1:35:39Isn't it a huge management catastrophe to have food sit there in the warehouse for five and six months waiting for its expiration date and never ship it overseas to starving people? Isn't that a huge management I I'd have to look at what the issue is. Obviously, I don't know how long that food was there or when it was due to expire before Trump got there and now you're going to burn it. I It's It's hard to say that that's good management. and I yield back.
▶ 1:36:09Gentleman yields back. Now recognize Representative Bar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and um Deputy Secretary Rigus. I certainly appreciate your commitment, the secretary's commitment and the president's commitment uh to always advance the interests of the United States as you look to reform the State Department uh which is patriotic work and honors hardworking taxpayers.
▶ 1:36:32As you said, uh, every you're cognizant that every dollar you spend, every program we fund comes from the labor of taxpaying American families. I can't tell you how many hardworking Kentucky taxpayers. Ask me why on earth did we fund some of the programs that we saw coming out of the Uh, and it's not just waste. It's that these uh, expenditures in many cases were counterproductive.
▶ 1:36:59They were they were uh outlays that uh that were directly at odds with American interests. And so I welcome your testimony that um that we're finally shining a light on the fact that countries that benefit from our generosity often fail to reciprocate that support, citing subsaran African nations who vote only 29% of the time on uh UN resolutions uh with the United States despite receiving billions
▶ 1:37:30and assistance paid for by the American people. Now, you've heard the criticism of of these reforms. So, I want to give you an opportunity to respond to the following that we all hear. Well, if we withdraw from the space, if we leave, even in these difficult lesser developed countries where yes, we do have diplomatic challenges. If we just leave, then China will fill the void. That the belt and road or our adversaries will fill the void.
▶ 1:38:00Uh, Mr. Deputy Secretary, uh, does advance does it advance US interest to continue to throw good money after bad to countries that actually cozy up to our adversaries and don't do what we want at the United Nations? Thank you for that question, Congressman. No, it it certainly does not advance America's national interest to do that.
▶ 1:38:20I think what we're trying to do is tie any foreign assistance to uh measurable outcomes that deliver for the American people that make them safer, stronger, or more prosperous. A lot of the so-called aid that uh uh China has delivered to countries has really been uh predatory lending um that has not been uh that put countries into debt traps which they now regret.
▶ 1:38:47Um so I think you know and and the aid that we have the so-called aid that has been delivered previously by the government uh the United States through USAD has been things that the governments did not want did not need and was often promoting divisive ideologies in those And true or false after the proposed budget is implemented and the streamlining and reforms go into effect the United States will remain the largest single foreign aid donor in the world by a wide margin. by a wide margin. That is correct.
▶ 1:39:17Um let's take one example of US aid funding under the previous administration. Um uh under the Biden administration, US aid provided over a half a million dollars to empower Uganda's LGBT community to push back against their own government's policy and another 5.5 million grant to shift public perception and attitudes in Uganda, a very socially conservative place towards LGBT acceptance and train LGBT individuals
▶ 1:39:47on the skills needed to engage in the economy. As a result of that policy, Uganda agreed to a deal with China to finance a $5 billion oil Was that foreign assistance to to fight uh this country Uganda, was that in the interest of American national security to push that country towards China? No.
▶ 1:40:14I think anything that we did uh that the prior administration did to push countries into China's arms were certainly not in the interest of the United States. No. So, it's not just about honoring our taxpayers. It's about advancing American interests. And there may be differences of opinion um here in Congress about a particular country's views on a particular social topic, but I think that the job of the State Department is to advance American interests.
▶ 1:40:43And that's why I am so grateful to you, the secretary, the president for reimagining our our foreign assistance programs and prioritizing what is in the interests of this country, not other countries. Um I I I don't have any more time.
▶ 1:41:02Um, but I just uh just want to just reiterate uh uh this is the right thing to do and I think uh American soft power will not only persist under this administration but it will actually work under this administration. I yield back. Thank you. Chair now recognizes Representative Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 1:41:21Uh, President Trump after years of uh, having very what he termed pleasant and friendly conversation with his friend, a person he admired as a genius, uh, President Putin, suddenly realized he was being played for a fool.
▶ 1:41:37And he uh indeed his words uh realizes that Putin was giving him a whole lot of uh during that time and that Russia was continuing to bomb innocent civilians, women and children uh in the process and he he changed his policy in that regard. Uh and so I want to ask you this question.
▶ 1:42:01Why did you fire the entire team investigating war crimes committed by Russia in Ukraine? Why were those people fired? Uh sir, I think I believe that office was consolidated and the work of that office will be conducted by the regional bureau and by um the staff at posts All of this is fine. People are let go from there that we're assisting.
▶ 1:42:28I worked with the prosecutor from Ukraine as they were training their own people to deal with these. Here's the kind of crimes they've been committing. They've been committing serial rapes of teenagers by Russian soldiers. They were targeting maternity wards of hospitals. They were targeting emergency responders coming to aid to give medical care to these innocent people that were being uh attacked.
▶ 1:42:54They committed torture uh of the worst kind against innocent civilians in communities like Bucha. They also uh took 20,000 children, abducted them from their families, who knows where they are now. These are the kind of crimes that they're committing. A and accountability. I mean, this administration, I guess, is talking a lot about accountability.
▶ 1:43:23accountability for teenagers uh undergoing sexual assaults. Well, what about here? What about what happened here? Making cuts in that area right now is critical uh in terms of helping Putin use terror against civilians to continue this. Uh I just can't see the priorities of whether you however you call cutting, reorganizing down, it's the same thing.
▶ 1:43:48You're taking a team that was there working for years helping accountability occur. That's so important after this war is finally over to have this happen. Now, uh you've also uh consolidated whatever terms you want to use. You've eliminated two offices in the Bureau of Counterterrorism and Violent Extremis. And this is at a time when uh at home you're saying these are the greatest threats we have.
▶ 1:44:14whatever small increment of money there is that could have helped that play it against the billions of dollars that being used now uh by our government lastly in this uh great bill that was just passed. I say it sarcastically uh and uh the money that was spent there uh going around taking people uh off the streets with no criminal background, no violence, but you don't have enough money uh to counter uh the violent extremism that's coming from other countries.
▶ 1:44:42I mean, no wall can stop some of that effect here as a threat. People work and aspire people here uh to to get involved. But your countering you're you're cutting in that area is so shortsighted if you're really worried about protecting the American people as a whole against violating against violent extremism all the way from ISIS to al-Qaeda. So those are the areas you're you're cutting.
▶ 1:45:11You're cutting in areas dealing with our NATO allies, our greatest asset that not only Russia, but we have our greatest asset against China that they don't have, and you're cutting in those areas as well. So you're looking at all these areas, taking great pride in making these incremental cuts and saying you're just reorganizing when indeed you're cutting. uh and and your rationale is we're making America safer.
▶ 1:45:39Well, you're not being good stewards, in your words, uh of Americans in terms of their safety. You're not being good stewards uh in terms of the threat from violent extremism. You're not being good stewards in terms of the threat of the uh to the American people with Russia.
▶ 1:45:55And indeed you're not being good steu stewards with what's going to happen when China uh views what the actions of the US in this regard and comes in not only makes their influence greater but makes their threat to the American people greater as well. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. I found the comments amazing. I wouldn't be sarcastic about cutting Americans taxes which is what the big beautiful bill was while being serious about sending their money abroad. That seems very misguided to me. I now recognize representative.
▶ 1:46:26Mr. Chair, since you said that, uh, I wouldn't be so cavalier about putting5 trillion dollars of debt to pay for that this is a government that spends way too much money and I thank the secretary for working to take care of that, especially with dollars being sent abroad to other places, foreign countries, foreign NOS, foreign terrorist organizations. But if you want to be sarcastic about cutting the taxes of Americans to do those things, that to me seems cavalier.
▶ 1:46:52I'll just let it rise other than to say uh the things the rest of my remarks were about threats to Americans. Wise to let that go. Representative Kim is recognized. Thank you, Chairman. Um I want to thank Secretary for joining us today. Uh on May 29, 2025 this year, the committee received notification of the department's intent to reorganize its domestic operations and functions.
▶ 1:47:19As part of this reorganization, the department is eliminating the Bureau of Energy Resources or ENR. So, I want to talk to you a little bit about that. Uh, and also in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in May, Secretary Rubio stated, "Energy is going to be at the forefront of foreign policy for the next 100 years, and we just don't have we just don't produce enough global energy to meet the AI demand." I wholeheartedly agree with that.
▶ 1:47:49So if energy policy will be at the forefront of our foreign policy for the next 100 years as Secretary Rubio projects and um we know energy diplomacy is essential to uh meet our future AI demands. Can you talk to us why there is a need to eliminate the Bureau of Energy Sir, thank you for that uh thank you for that question, Congresswoman.
▶ 1:48:15So the bureau that bureau has been consolidated into um the uh under secretary for economic growth, energy and the environment. Um so those functions uh continue to remain our our commitment to energy development and energy dominance, our one of the central themes of the president's administration. Uh this is just simply a consolidation of that bureau into the larger. It wasn't a criticism or anything. As you know, I chair the subcommittee on the E family.
▶ 1:48:46So, we welcome the opportunity to work on that issue. And I just had a uh my subcommittee hearing on uh breaking the choke point of the China's dominance on critical minerals, rare earth elements. I mean, these are so important issues. So, I look forward to that opportunity and hopefully I can uh work with you and your uh office uh in uh meeting those uh demands.
▶ 1:49:09Um but uh in 1980 moving on the foreign commercial service was pulled out of the department of commerce to and uh that was transferred to commerce uh to elevate the importance of commercial diplomacy. But uh looking at the last uh you know few decades the opposite has occurred in my view.
▶ 1:49:32The move uh divorced commercial diplomacy from our foreign policy and limited the ability or our ability to help American businesses access the foreign markets and protect them from predatory practices.
▶ 1:49:47uh our focus should be helping uh our American businesses especially abroad especially in the region in the Indoacific especially uh with the diplomatic tools in the toolkit in the box that's available so uh as we are working to reauthorize the state department uh we are considering a proposal to bring the FCS back into the department so would you support such a I I'd
▶ 1:50:17be happy to to work with the committee on that proposal. I think, you know, our engagement with countries. I think the president has really led the way on that with his uh trip to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE where where you showed the importance of economic diplomacy. Um obviously there are other equities, other departments that that may have a say in that, but uh I' I'd be happy to to weigh in about the importance of that.
▶ 1:50:42I hope you can weigh in strongly and uh as you do and consider our proposal you uh you will allow my team to work with yours uh as and then make that uh transfer back to state. I hope it does uh as seamless as possible. So I hope you can commit to working with my team on that. Okay. Uh and in April there were reports that the department was considering closing its consulate office in Busan, South Korea.
▶ 1:51:13South Korea as you know is a very critical ally of the United States and they share our concerns about North Korean aggression expanding the Chinese influence and especially in the economic and military areas and uh Russia influence uh in the in the Pacific uh especially the north areas.
▶ 1:51:32So what is the status of that proposed closure of the US consular office in Busan or is there such a proposal to actually eliminate that consulate office from Busan, South Korea? Thank you for that question. Um so I don't believe there is any proposal to close any uh facilities overseas.
▶ 1:51:53I do know that there was an analysis that was done earlier this year uh which reviewed every post overseas uh its costs its benefit what what services it was providing any you revenue it was generating you know consular services in particular generates a fair amount of revenue for the department is there any other areas uh the US consulars in East Asia and the Pacific region that is under consideration so I don't think it's fair to to frame it as any any post being under consideration
▶ 1:52:24for closure. I think uh an analysis was done um on uh or a sort of a data call was done and asked people to assess different posts overseas, but uh as of now there are no plans to to close any facilities. Looks like my time's up. Thank you so much. I yield back. Chair now recognizes Representative Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um I'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the Atlantic article from yesterday that um Mr.
▶ 1:52:52Sherman was referring to Um, you know, in that article, and we'll make sure you get a copy, Secretary Riggs, um, it talks about 500 um, tons of emergency aid, high energy biscuits that are going to get incinerated. Now, I come from the private sector. We spent $800,000 on shipping that aid over um, and it was stored in um, warehouses in in the Middle East.
▶ 1:53:18We're going to spend another $130,000 to incinerate those biscuits that have been sitting there. That to me does not seem like a a a good financial investment since those were already sunk cost. We should have gotten that food to save lives of of kids. Um we've not met before. I don't don't know you. Um so I'll take you as a as a honest um public servant.
▶ 1:53:40Um, I appreciate that you describe the folks that work for um the State Department for USAD as talented and patriotic Americans. They are talented and patriotic Americans. I've traveled across this world, gone into refugee camps, gone into conflict zones in in Africa and in in Asia and elsewhere, and you see these men and women, these diplomats, these civil servants out there doing their work every day. And I think it's reprehensible how they've been treated.
▶ 1:54:06Again, I'm not arguing if you want to do a reorganization, if you want to go through section by section, program by program, but how these folks have been treated in terms of being laid off one day, saying, "Hey, come back the next day, being laid off the next day," you're going to lose a ton of talent, these folks that are at the peak of their career. And when we try to rebuild these organizations, even if they're streamlined and elsewhere, these folks are not coming back because of how poorly they've been treated. And that is extremely unfortunate.
▶ 1:54:36And to to folks that are watching out there, I am sorry that you were treated that way. You guys are, as the secretary said, talented and patriotic Americans. I appreciate that this country has changed now. You know, part of I'm a doctor by training. Part of what led me into public service was growing up in the the 70s and 80s and seeing what we did when we saw commercials of babies in Africa starving to death, swollen bellies, flies on their eyes. We didn't just sit around. We are a faith-based country.
▶ 1:55:04I appreciate the chairman has us um recite the the pledge of allegiance, one nation under God. This is not what a faith-based country does. I talk to faith-based aid organizations all the time, we're a benevolent country of Our values are saying those folks that are dying out there, even if their governments don't agree with us, even if their governments don't vote for us, we don't want to see kids die. Is that who we are? Are we going to change who we are as a country?
▶ 1:55:34That isn't what I believe the American that I believe in. I think this is a great nation, United States of America. I think we are a nation that has been blessed and I think we have a responsibility to lead the rest of the world based on our values. I understand I've heard my colleagues on the other side um and in your opening testimony, you said, "Well, this is no longer about um being out there benevolent and saving lives. This is about trade, not aid.
▶ 1:56:02I hope that's not who we become as a country. I hope we are not now saying, "Okay, well, we'll go out and save those kids' lives, but you know what? Here's what you got to do in return for that." Again, that's not the America that I believe in. We designed a system that both supported American farmers, supported our economy, saved lives, put food out there, put medicines out there. Mr. Sherman's correct. Millions of people are going to die around the world because we're not there because of the vacuum.
▶ 1:56:33Secretary, um do you know what percentage of our um budget goes the United States budget goes to foreign aid? Is it more or less than 5%. Oh, it's it's certainly less than 5%. Is it less than 2%. Yeah, I think I believe it's less than 1% of the total foreign budget. Uh I it is less than 1% of our budget.
▶ 1:56:54So if we spend less than 1% of our budget, but we actually do good work around the world, we save lives, we I've been to refugee camps where I see that American flag and says from the people of the United States. I've seen I've gone into villages post the Ebola crisis where they greet us and they're cheering us and they're saying thank you to the people of the United States. You saved our lives. Um that is what we do. That is what this is about. That is who we were blessed to be as the United States of America.
▶ 1:57:24I don't want to be China. I don't want to be Russia. The way they operate is purely transactional and they don't do it for the betterment of the world. The world that we've created post World War II, the United States of America, we damn well be better be proud of it. And I am extremely disappointed that what is happening under this administration is going to leave us weaker and less benevolent and more transactional. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Bear. I think you speak, you know, true to your heart. We've traveled together. We've been together.
▶ 1:57:55I think it's always an important thing as we look at the budget and I think we can all acknowledge it's less than 1%. But it's still a borrowed 1% that we are dealing with. It's a 1% that we have to go out there and and ask somebody else for money for. And just reflecting personally, most of us don't go out there and ask our local banks from a loan so that we can give that loan away. And it's something that we have to wrestle with as Americans as we deal with our budget. And I appreciate your thoughts on the issue. Can I I'll just make one comment.
▶ 1:58:25I I completely, you know, agree with your comments, Congressman. Uh the life-saving humanitarian assistance has been exempted from the secretar's foreign assistance review. So that aid would continue to flow. I think we're looking at all of these other examples that are not this life-saving kind of humanitarian assistance.
▶ 1:58:44uh and even to the extent that we are providing that aid, there has to be some kind of graduation strategy so that one year, three years, five years down the road, uh these countries are able to assume that obligation themselves for their But don't incarcerate, don't um incinerate food aid that is out there like the aid that is in warehouses, etc. Deliver that aid to folks before it spoils.
▶ 1:59:07Yeah, it's going to cost a little bit to sign those contracts and so forth, but let's not um and and that those are some costs. Get that food to folks and let's save those lives. Chair now recognizes Representative Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to Deputy Secretary Vgas for for being here today. As we evaluate the work that is being done at the US State Department, it's vital that America's global health programs continue to prioritize American innovation.
▶ 1:59:38I look forward to hearing how the State Department is continuing to implement US global health priorities that protect all Americans. Uh the the State Department has an integral role to play in implementing global health programs like PEPAR. Can you provide an update on the status of PEPFAR transition planning to partner country ownership? Sure. Thank you for that question, Congressman.
▶ 2:00:05Uh about 85% of the funds for PEPAR for direct care are is what we requested in the budget. The 15% that was not requested are for countries that we assess have the ability to execute those programs on their own.
▶ 2:00:21uh there's an overall 54% cut uh for administrative nondirect care uh funds for PEPAR but again as I mentioned like this the 15% reduction represents our philosophy that as countries are able to administer these programs themselves they should be taking on that responsibility when will effective transition planning for partner country ownership for PEPAR begin to move forward and if conducting conducted on
▶ 2:00:51a country bycountry basis. What countries do you plan to assess Uh thank you for that question, Congressman. I think that is I'd have to refer that question to uh the bureau administering the program to get their assessment on which countries are sort of further up the um chain when it comes to their ability to uh administer the program.
▶ 2:01:13But we would certainly start there with those who are most able to carry out uh the delivery of the aid and uh America's innovative uh companies have long been a cornerstone of America's global health efforts. Could you share how programs like PEPAR and Gavei uh can utilize American products to ensure uh effective solutions to global health problems? Sure.
▶ 2:01:39We are I mean we are leading the world when it comes to innovation in pharmaceuticals and life-saving treatments not just for Americans for people all over the world. Um when it comes to PEPAR I mean I think that's been a great example of how aid has been delivered. U but the the second letter in PEPFAR the E stands for emergency. Um and this was an emergency program implemented over 20 years ago. And I think we need to you know ask ourselves how long can a can a program be an emergency?
▶ 2:02:09and when can we sort of move to a graduation pro strategy where countries can begin to take this responsibility on themselves and to move into a more normal kind of environment. Uh thank you. I I yield back. Thank you. Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes Representative Elchesky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank uh you Deputy Secretary Deputy Secretary Riggus uh for your time and and for your service.
▶ 2:02:37Uh, I did hear in your confirmation hearing that your father spent over 25 years as a public school teacher. That's right. Please, uh, thank him for his service as a former public school teacher myself. Oh, thank you. I will. Um, colleagues, as we know, the administration claimed to shut down USAD. And while we can sit here and debate whether or not the process was legal, we can debate whether it was warranted, uh, what we don't want to do is debate facts.
▶ 2:03:01And so a few weeks ago, Secretary Rubio wrote a eulogy of sorts for USID. Unfortunately, it was a liefilled mess. So I wanted to ask you uh Mr. Riggus, as the um chief operating officer of the State Department, I want to get your feedback on a few of the statements uh in that document.
▶ 2:03:22The the first claim from Secretary Rubio was that quote, "USID had a near infinite taxpayer budget." Is that a statement that you agree with and support? I think when you look at the spending that was taken u that the that the USA ID department undertook um it's hard to justify how a lot of those dollars were spent unless people felt that there were no more important uses for those dollars and some of the frankly very wasteful spending that was done. Okay.
▶ 2:03:52And I think as a member of this committee I'd be more than welcome the opportunity to talk about how we could best spend those resources. Uh but for me it's just interesting that he would say that considering back in 2017 he said quote foreign aid as a part of the overall budget. I know this just came up with uh the ranking member is less than 1% of the total amount. I think you guys just talked about that and agreed. And anyone who tells you that we can slash foreign aid and it will bring us the balance is lying to you. So just it might be a small number.
▶ 2:04:22We might disagree on how it's spent but it certainly doesn't sound like near infinite uh to me. A second claim that Secretary Rubio made was that quote, "USID marketed its programs as charity rather than instruments of American foreign policy intended to advance our national interests." Is that something you would support in terms of a statement about USAD?
▶ 2:04:42I think you if you look at sort of the mindset that how how else could you describe the mindset that would inform some of the spending that was done that was not lifesaving humanitarian aid but was kind of all of this social engineering spending that would was not advancing American interests and even the host countries themselves were not asking for it. You know, someone described it to me as sort of a reverse robbery where we hold a gun to their head and tell them to take our money.
▶ 2:05:10That's not a way to sort of conduct foreign um foreign assistance, I don't think. Okay, I appreciate that. Again, contradicting himself, Secretary Rubio's past remarks was that foreign aid is not charity and it is quote critical to our national security, not a one-off statement. Uh he's also said that if we we give foreign aid because it is a quote cost-effective way to further our national interests. And I just want to share in light of the deep cuts that's being proposed, I don't think there's a way to continue advancing those national interests again, even if we disagree about any specific program.
▶ 2:05:41Uh, another claim from Secretary Rubio was that quote, "USID had little to show since the end of the Cold War." Is that a statement that you would agree with in terms of his assertions? I I'm I think I would I mean I'd like to know what sort of what American national interest that made America safer, stronger, more prosperous could be tied to um spending that was done by USAD. Okay. Um well again I appreciate your your response but that that claim is news to me. Um and Mr.
▶ 2:06:10Chairman, I'd like to introduce for the record uh an article and a study from Lancet Lacet that shows from uh 2011, which was after the Cold War, uh until 2021, USAD supported efforts to have helped prevent more than 91 million deaths, including 30 million deaths among children. In 2000, more than one in four people lived in extreme poverty. Today, that number is fewer than 1 in 10.
▶ 2:06:36And again, that's thanks in large part to USAD le economic development program. So I would argue that's not little to show. That's actually quite quite a bit. The secretary did exempt the humanitarian and life-saving assistance from his his foreign aid review. So that kind of assistance I think would continue, but I think we'd want to see some kind of graduation strategy. Again, I think it just will be hard to graduate when we are absolutely gutting all all of that, including those economic development programs, which has, as I understand it, very little congressional oversight. It's one big lump sum uh with little oversight.
▶ 2:07:07So, as I've said countless times on this committee, I'm all for reform. I'm willing to work with anyone to make sure our taxpayer dollars are used effectively. But as we think about the future of foreign assistance, we want to make sure that we're telling the truth about what's happening to the American people and being real about what the numbers represent and what that might limit us in being able to do. So again, I thank you for your time today and Mr. Chairman, I my time is up so I will yield back to you. Thank you. Thank you. Chair now recognizes Representative Self. Uh, thank you, Mr.
▶ 2:07:35Chairman, and thank you, Secretary, for being here with us Um, State Department has over 1,500 domestic offices in the United States, all for a department that, as Benjamin Franklin on the wall up there, was meant for foreign policy. Uh, can you elaborate on your plans to merge uh, eliminate, consolidate these offices? So thank you for that question, Congressman.
▶ 2:08:01So the reorganization which we just sort of began to execute on Friday uh will eliminate u 100 offices uh merge uh another 100 or so offices uh so that the the key functions that we want to continue will continue uh under a combined office.
▶ 2:08:23Um, we do have a number of, you know, in in federal buildings all over the countries, you've got folks who are processing or taking applications for passports and whatnot, but it does seem that we do have probably more offices uh than we need for a foreign uh for foreign policy department um in in the United States. And could you comment uh and I'll leave it an open question on your on your plans to downsize your workforce? How is that going to be accomplished?
▶ 2:08:54So what we what end? Yes. Uh so what we just did, we did the the most complicated um reduction in force that the federal government has ever seen. And we did that in consultation with the office of personnel management. I believe we had over um 173 competitive areas. And what what a competitive area is is an office that uh performs a function.
▶ 2:09:18Um and what we were able to do is when you're combining two offices, uh it is personnel agnostic. So individuals who lost their uh jobs were not there was no individual who was targeted. We asked the under secretaries to say what are the functions that you need to carry out this um the mission here and and what positions do you need to do that?
▶ 2:09:42And once that those positions are identified, you then take all the employees who are in that competitive area and you basically compete them against one another based on their seniority, their tenure, their skills, their um and the those with the highest um ranking scores are the ones who are retained and those with the lowest ranking scores are the ones that um do not make the you know once you have you reach the compliment or whatever it is 50 people that you need in office or 20 the top 20 remain.
▶ 2:10:12and the remainder do not. So even though there were, you know, certainly people who were qualified and and great patriots who were separated from service, you what you can take comfort in knowing is that the people who remained actually were um selected using merit systems principles to actually have ranked as higher um higher you know quality in terms of tenure, in terms of experience, in terms of skills to be able to carry out the mission. So I think I just heard the description of a meritocracy.
▶ 2:10:43Uh along those lines though, budget and planning actually coordinates with the office of US foreign assistance resources in developing policy plans programs to achieve our our goals. Uh but we have heard that decision-m is slowed down uh due to budget functions being spread across the M family which includes budget and planning and the office of foreign assistance.
▶ 2:11:07uh can you describe how you're going to streamline those offices together to meet your Yes. So that's that's an excellent point and that's actually one of the key objectives of the reorganization is taking all these management support offices which were spread out among the under secretariats and even further down among all of the bureaus and offices within each under secretariat family and moving them up into one sort of ex bureau within each of the under secretariats and then moving
▶ 2:11:37most of those management functions over to shockingly the management bureau of the department. So they are the one place where most of these functions uh will be executed. So you won't have um redundant offices throughout the department um executing on the same mission. Very good. And in the last minute that I have, can you talk about examples of feedback you got from the workforce during your draw down planning? Yes, thank you. We got over 650 comments from the workforce.
▶ 2:12:06And these were really very thoughtful comments, uh, which showed the, you know, experience that the workforce had both among the foreign service and the civil service and the care that they took and the thought that they put into how things ought to work based on their experience. You know, describing pain points that they had in their in their work, how it was difficult to execute on the mission, where they thought we could improve.
▶ 2:12:30Um and all of those comments were reviewed, considered and um a number of them were implemented or were used to revise what the initial uh reorganization plan was. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Chair now recognizes Representative Dean. I thank the chairman. I thank the ranking member. And I thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here. Uh since his return to office in January, President Trump has chosen to bully our foreign partners rather than to negotiate.
▶ 2:12:58This administration has claimed their policies will bring safety, security, and prosperity to America. But all I have seen thus far is weakened relationships with our allies and emboldened adversaries. Friday's termination of 1300 State Department employees, I would risk to say heroes, patriots, decades of experience, and specialized technical expertise will only make us worse off.
▶ 2:13:27combined they have hundreds of years of experience, expertise, sacrifice, and work. And they got a note on Friday, you're done. Secretary Rub Rubio has repeatedly said, addressing the threat to China is our national security interests. Yet the same day he was in Southeast Asia lauding the cooperation that will come from future engagements, the entire team that prepared him for his trip were fired.
▶ 2:13:55offices that were responsible for ensuring arms control and non-prololiferation of weapons of mass destruction by our adversaries gutted. As we struggle with drug smuggling at our borders and deaths in our communities, the department fired those who were working to inter interdict drugs at foreign borders before they would get to our own. Those who were fired were essential to our national security. They were selfless public servants who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution.
▶ 2:14:26I so regret the action that your department took. They negotiated key agreements for our global stability. They ensured threats do not reach our borders. They they sacrificed their own safety and time with their families all in service to us, the United States of America. I believe the administration has actively betrayed them and we in turn have lost experts who were were quietly and faithfully keeping us safe.
▶ 2:14:52Secretary Rodriguez, how is any of this improving the safety and security for America? Thank you for the question, Congressman. Um, with respect to the office that prepared the secretary for his trip overseas, so none of the country offices were affected and none of the people who prepped him were terminated. So that was That doesn't make us safer. That's that's such a nonsequittor. That does not make us safer. You fired 1300 people, the very team who prepped him as he was in Asia.
▶ 2:15:21I want to follow up on what the ranking member said and his line of questions and I look forward to you sharing the 600 respondents. Where did that survey go? To whom did it go? And to whom did it go back? 600 respondents. Yes. So it was who sent it out and who got it? Um, it went it was a departmentwide email distribution asking all employees, foreign service, civil service for the So, how many people received that email? Yeah. Yeah. That's my understanding. That's my understanding.
▶ 2:15:51That's your understanding. I've spoken to people. They didn't receive it. It's your understanding it went to everybody. Who sent it out? Did you send it? I did not send it out. It was sent out by by staff. Sent out by staff. It would it was a global distribution list. So, I' I'd be curious as to someone saying they didn't get that And okay, we look forward to seeing exactly the distribution list and who wrote back because I have a wonder. I bet they didn't write and say, "I think you need to can 1300 people on Friday.
▶ 2:16:21Let's talk and shift to Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the newly formed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. Uh, do you agree that the American people deserve to know where their taxpayer dollars are being spent and for what policy objectives they're being used? Do you know that all foreign assistance programs are required to conduct risk assessments for funding they will That sounds right to me. It's true.
▶ 2:16:47Nevertheless, it has been reported that the State Department waved nine mandatory counterterrorism and anti-fraud safeguards to rush the $30 million award in simply 5 days for this startup Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. Sound like the right way to go about I I I'm not familiar with this particular situation, but I'd be happy to.
▶ 2:17:10are familiar with the famine, uh the deprivation in Gaza, uh the fact that uh other programs are there like Mrs. Cindy McCain World Food Program that have been working faithfully there for a very long time, not to mention ENRA. Uh five days, $30 million grant, and they waved through nine mandatory counterterrorism reviews. Do you think that's efficient and effective? I I'd have to look at that particular situation.
▶ 2:17:40I would think you would want to. It's within your purview. It's $30 million. Let me move on. This organization has been rejected by humanitarian and human rights organization. It's proving to be a death trap for gazins. Do you know that and and I want to ask as I end here, I recognize my time is up. Uh Mr. Chairman, uh nearly 900 gins have been shot and killed seeking desperately seeking food in some of these aid areas.
▶ 2:18:06The chair will remind members that you're more than welcome to uh put a question in writing through the chair and that will be submitted. More questions. I seek unanimous consent to enter onto the record. May I tell you what I have? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. An article. Uh two articles. Uh Gaza, 875 people confirmed dead trying to source food in recent weeks.
▶ 2:18:29Uh and then a Reuters article, former Doge employees rushed grant uh to Trumpbacked Gaza aid group over staff objections. So ordered. Thank you. With that, gentle lady's time is expired. Uh with that, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. McKenzie, is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. Deputy Secretary, thank you for being here today. And I'd like to start by thanking you for all the tremendous work that you're doing at the department.
▶ 2:18:54uh we have contacted your office and the department a number of times to help with particular passport and immigration related issues and just can't thank you enough for uh again the incredible work uh regardless of uh any changes or anything you've made uh the impact that I can say for my constituents and our office is exceptional. So really tremendous job that you and the department are doing there. Uh we have heard great things about the online renewal process for uh passports.
▶ 2:19:22Uh the one area and it's not ex uh necessarily a new issue. It's something that seems has been going on for years is a small category relating to P2 visas for internationally recognized entertainers. Uh we have a number of cultural events in our local community.
▶ 2:19:41things from Musicfest uh to the Ukrainian Homestead Festival where these international entertainers want to come into our community for just short periods of time uh do their work, provide great entertainment, cultural experiences uh for those in our community, but unfortunately uh they have been many times getting hung up and then ultimately missing uh the one event that they're looking to uh to be able to possibly attend or or perform at.
▶ 2:20:05Uh, so just want to talk to you about uh what you might be able to do to help us uh speed up and improve that that process for P2 visas. Thank you for that question, Congressman. I'd be happy to look into any specific um issue you have with that visa or any particular case. Um but if there are issues with that visa, I'm happy to to take that on board. Well, I I appreciate that and again, this is the type of uh action that we've seen out of the Trump administration the entire time that you've been there.
▶ 2:20:31Uh is your willingness to tackle these issues and uh the staffing and uh funding that you're looking for, I think, is the rightsized approach for uh putting American priorities first around the world. Uh but also making sure that our constituents back home are getting the services they need. So, I want to thank you again for all the work that you and the Trump administration are doing and look forward to continuing to work with you. will follow up after the the hearing. Thank you again. Thank you, Congressman. Gentleman yields back.
▶ 2:21:02With that, uh the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Jackson, is recognized for five minutes. Thank you so much, chairman. Thank you so much for your time and coming out today. Um to start this series of questions, I'd like to ask you, could you please furnish for us a definition of woke? What does woke mean? Uh well sir I mean I I I think in in popular parliament um there a lot of people have a lot of different definitions for that Your definition please.
▶ 2:21:30I I don't know that I have a definition. Okay. Do you find something particularly offensive about diversity, equity, and inclusion? Do you think it should be I think how it's been applied, sir, seems to have been in violation of American civil rights law. Okay. Well, that's incorrect. But let me get on to my other questioning. This administration has made no secret of its hostility towards diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. Shutting them down, not just at the State Department, but across the federal government.
▶ 2:22:01That's your prerogative. As you know, even if many of us believe as a co-equal branch of government, we believe that it undermines our national security and weakens our diplomatic core. But let's talk about the implications of your obsession with diversity, equity, and inclusion over diplomacy. As you well know, federal and um foreign and civil service officers rotate assignments.
▶ 2:22:23A career official could have landed in a job focused on increasing recruitment that was required by law and retention of a diverse workforce through a standard assignment um in a general cycle, which is hardly a political assignment. In fact, working to ensure that the department's workforce reflects the America it represents sounds very patriotic to me. It's an asset that the United States has.
▶ 2:22:49I want to ask you before this massive firing took place, what safeguards were in place to protect career officers from being targeted for removal simply because they served in a portfolio this administration now deems politically undesirable.
▶ 2:23:04So the the the functions the offices and bureaus that were eliminated um some offices were eliminated some offices were combined that were duplicative and but what was the criteria overlapping functions if they if they were not sort of a core foreign policy mission of the United States um that's I think one of the number one criteria or if it if it was an office that no longer um was relevant um in all right well let me go forward if you don't mind in the interest of time that we cuz I was
▶ 2:23:34getting a bit of word selling. Couldn't figure out what you were saying. Uh I know you to be an upstanding and lawful abiding citizen. Um section 5403 of the 2022 NDAA strengthens recruitment of underrepresented groups, mandating outreach to universities, employee affinity groups, and expanding paid student internships among other actions.
▶ 2:23:57But now under Secretary Rubio's leadership, which is substantially different than Senator Rubio's leadership, employee affinity groups are not allowed to meet outreach efforts or paused and critical recruitment programs like the Payne Fellowship have now been terminated. When you talk about replacing diversity, equity, inclusion, has anyone been removed from the Franklin Fellowship program in the State Department?
▶ 2:24:21Uh I am not familiar with the um with the membership of the different programs at the department and who's in them and who's not. Okay. Well, they have not. I hope you would look into that next time. Um can you tell us more about the Franklin Fellowship program on why that program has been protected and preserved? Isn't that a specialy interest group? I sir I am I could get back to you with information on that. My understanding is these these affinity groups are sort of employee generated. I'm being very specific about Franklin.
▶ 2:24:52The one group that has expanded during this time period. Yeah. My understanding is that's a that's an affinity group that is founded by employees and whose membership is managed by those employees themselves. It's not a official state department organization. It's my understanding. I might be wrong, but I don't Your understanding is incorrect at this point. I hope you would refresh yourself on that. Section 504 of that bill requires that the Secretary of State to reward and advance officials that promote diversity and inclusion.
▶ 2:25:21But under Secretary Ruba, the department has abolished the performance evaluation criteria. Do you agree with that? That was feedback we also got from a number of career foreign service officers that they felt that their language skills, their foreign service skills were not being adequately considered for promotion and that so I would ask you why are you not carrying out the law? It's real simple. I've got a very basic line um to follow the law. This is the law. Will you respect the law? Well, absolutely, sir.
▶ 2:25:51If you want to let me know which particular law you think is not being faithfully executed, I'd be happy to look into that. 5404. I'd be happy to look into that, sir. Thank you, sir. I yield back at this time. Thank you for coming out. Gentleman yields back. With that, gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Shre is recognized for five minutes. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, uh, Deputy Secretary Riggus. Um, uh, couple points of feedback.
▶ 2:26:17uh your department did an extraordinary job uh for my office on behalf of a constituent in Columbus, Indiana over the weekend in getting a visa had a constituent whose wife had a heart attack young wife over in Kenya and he's hustled to get over there and in the middle of the weekend uh the department turned around a visa as he was in flight to uh or to or deaul to get on to Kenya.
▶ 2:26:46So, I think constituents very much appreciate that continued level of service on behalf of the department. I think your stated focus on trade over aid uh sells with the constituents that I represent in the sixth district of Indiana. And so, I appreciate that. Um you um noted in your opening comments that uh you'd completed the folding of US aid in the state just 15 days ago.
▶ 2:27:15Um but of course you've got decades of directives and instructions authorized assistance programs uh that you've got to work with in uh as part of the foreign assistance program public This must I would think materially your desired use of US foreign If you agree with that, if you had your ways,
▶ 2:27:46how would you how would you reorient restructure uh US foreign assistance if you were untethered? So I think what the secretary's articulated uh and the president himself is that foreign assistance should be tied to an American foreign policy objective or presidential foreign policy priority and that we should be able to um there should be some kind of return on investment whether it's going to make America safer or it's going to make America stronger or it's
▶ 2:28:16going to make America more prosperous. You know, I got I just spoke at the foreign assistance class at the Foreign Service Institute about two weeks ago, which was actually based on some of the feedback we got from Congress when we were briefing on the reorganization. They thought we ought to do more training on that. So, I went out and spoke to the first class. Um, and I got a question about should we be um could we provide foreign assistance for u for job development or job training?
▶ 2:28:41Um, and my response would be, you know, that um, the way you could justify something like that is if we want to make a trade deal with a country and they're concerned that this trade deal is going to negatively impact um the the the population of that country, you say, "Hey, if we can spend a million dollars on job training where it's going to generate 10 million or hundred million in net economic benefit to the United States, then to me that's a good return on investment." you say that's we spent a million but we got a h 100red million back for American
▶ 2:29:11businesses or we created jobs here in the United States. So that's the kind of kind of investment opportunity we want to make. We want to help countries help us or or if it comes to you know remigration helping countries um that want to be a safe third country for for folks or want to take back folks who have who've uh come illegally to the United States but don't have the capacity. We can help them potentially do that as well.
▶ 2:29:37Um, so they're relieving a potential economic burden that might be coming from folks who are um on US assistance and helping them uh return back safely to uh to a safe country. I appreciate that. I appreciate your service and that of so many people that you work with. U I know that those cuts had to be painful. Um but you're not spending your own money and so I appreciate the the work that you've undertaken and are playing through with that. got to yield back.
▶ 2:30:08Thank you. Representative yields back. With that, Representative McBride is recognized for 5 minutes. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, uh, Mr. Deputy Secretary for joining us today, for your testimony, for your patience as we go through the list. Um, as we've talked about throughout the course of this hearing, over 1300 State Department employees were removed from their jobs last week.
▶ 2:30:30Um, I'm curious if you're aware that these layoffs reduced the staff at the office to monitor and combat trafficking in persons by 71%. Have we seen a 71% reduction in human trafficking globally? My understanding is mo the responsibility of most of the folks who were reduced were actually writing reports. They were not actually engaging um in the field as foreign service officers.
▶ 2:30:57Is there not a role for individuals, employees of the state department to be able to monitor and understand the full scope of the human trafficking crisis? Oh, certainly. Yeah, that function continues to remain. We do have people continuing to to write reports. Uh but there was just an excessive number of folks who were writing reports. So 71% of this office was useless. I would say there was a number of redundant functions. I'd be happy to to to give you a list of the uh of the positions that were eliminated.
▶ 2:31:28I would appreciate that. I would appreciate a a list because I I do think it is it boggles the mind and defies belief that 71% of this department was so dispensable amidst a global crisis of human trafficking. I I'm not surprised that the MAGA base is now questioning this administration's commitment to human trafficking globally and domestically. But I want to move on to talk about waste and corruption.
▶ 2:31:57While claiming to root out waste, fraud, and abuse, Doge itself has estimated that shuttering USID will cost taxpayers more than $6 billion and millions of dollars worth of humanitarian aid, which the US has already paid for and it's wasting away in warehouses across the world. This administration has destroyed the world's premier international development agency because the Doge Bros didn't understand how to read a spreadsheet.
▶ 2:32:22This administration has also paused enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act while foreign interests spend millions at the president's resorts. I simply fail to see how these actions make Americans safer, stronger, or more prosperous. And I want to focus in on this topic of waste, fraud, and abuse. Um, Mr. Deputy Secretary, are you aware of the America First Opportunity Fund that's been talked about? Okay. Um, what is this account actually going to fund?
▶ 2:32:52So this will be the uh premier foreign assistance fund for the department which will be at the direction of the secretary and it will provide for foreign assistance that will make America safer and stronger and more prosperous and will provide for democratic accountability in how those funds are being spent.
▶ 2:33:12So we don't have the situation where we had all these examples of foreign assistance spending that kind of shocked the conscience uh of ordinary Americans about how their taxpayer dollars were being spent overseas for purposes that didn't advance our national interest or or or we were being spent on things that even the host country did not want. Can you tell us what controls if any will be put in place to ensure that this fund cannot be used for personal or political benefits of anyone in this Sure.
▶ 2:33:40I think there are numerous controls in place. You have uh public accountability number one. You have congressional oversight. You've got inspectors general who are uh who can review all of these uh spending. Congressional oversight. Well, I don't think we're seeing much actual congressional oversight by the majority right now in this Congress of this administration. So, I am uh skeptical that this slush fund will have any kind of appropriate oversight.
▶ 2:34:06And I am deeply worried uh about the effect of us sending $2.9 billion dollars to the administration for a slush fund that has pretty limited oversight and limited controls or guard rails. I would also add you have public oversight as well. I mean, as you know, the president is before the cameras almost every single day at cabinet meetings, at the White House, getting on the plane, getting off the plane. He's taking questions. Any enterprising reporter can ask him about how this money is being spent. You're right.
▶ 2:34:34He does talk a lot on TV right now. I I I did see him recently uh try to um defend not releasing the Epstein files. But with that, I will yield back. Representative yields back. Uh with that, the representative from Indiana, Mr. Barrett, is recognized for five Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate uh you being here, Mr. Secretary.
▶ 2:34:58And uh I guess my question focuses on the fact that your duties as a deputy secretary of management and resources you oversee modernization and and operational efficiency. Uh in that vein, you know, uh I want to make sure that the that the and we talk about soft diplomacy and I'm interested in agriculture.
▶ 2:35:22So the commodities that end up going to some of these countries, I want to I want to be sure that they actually reach those people that that it was intended for. Uh American farmers and ranchers and and we as a country as well u are a giving people, but we also want to make sure that it gets to those that that uh we intended for it go to.
▶ 2:35:45So, so in that vein, um I guess I guess since your confirmation back in May, uh could you highlight I want to give you the opportunity to highlight some of the the inefficient areas that you found and what processes you are using or decisions you're using to improve those efficiencies and make sure that we're being effective for the kinds of programs that we're operating here. Sure. Thank you for that question, Congressman.
▶ 2:36:12So, we've conducted an extensive review of the organization at the department led by the under secretaries at the department who um at this point were all career foreign service officer, career civil servants who've been at the department for years and have tremendous experience and knowledge about how things work and how they don't work.
▶ 2:36:32um and have experienced the department on a bipartisan basis through Republican administrations and Democrat administrations and told us what they thought worked, where there were duplications, where there were um offices that were not really performing well, how we could do a better job advancing America's foreign policy interests and the president's foreign policy priorities.
▶ 2:36:54Um, we looked at all the management functions in the department and consolidated those mostly into the management bureau, but every every many of the bureaus and offices had their own management functions that did um human resources functions and accounting functions and those were all consolidated into you a single executive uh management offices within the bureaus to allow for economies of scale and to allow for efficiencies.
▶ 2:37:21So, we've done a lot of work to create these efficiencies across the department um and looking at how we uh do foreign assistance. There was a huge foreign assistance review that was done at the department before I arrived um that looked at um how we were spending money and that's the been the result uh what's resulted from that is the FY26 budget request where we have the America first opportunity fund to create better accountability for how those monies are spent and to ensure that they are spent to advance uh the
▶ 2:37:51secretar's priorities and to ensure the president's foreign policy is faithfully So continuing in that vein, you know, had a chance to go to Africa a couple times and one of the current concerns that I saw there was the nefarious groups or gangs or thugs in some ways because those commodities end up being fungeible just like like money. If you've got it, you've got control.
▶ 2:38:16Uh can you give me some insight into or us some insight into how you think we're improving monitoring where those uh commodities are going? So, I think for life-saving humanitarian aid and foreign assistance, you know, th those uh programs have were exempted from the from the uh humanitarian or from the foreign assistance review.
▶ 2:38:40But this is the kind of thing that um as we take a closer look at how we do foreign assistance, making sure that these are is we have partners on the ground who are able to ensure that our foreign assistance is able to be delivered securely and that is safeguarded from these kinds of uh malevolent actions. Um and that other aid that is delivered um is tied directly to a foreign policy priority that the president has.
▶ 2:39:09If you've got um sort of particular scenarios or examples in in in in individual countries that you want us to look at, happy to look at that and make sure that uh to the extent those kinds of activities were happening or our aid was subject to inappropriate use that we could take corrective action on that. And I thank you for mentioning again you mentioned it earlier but the the fact that those humanitarian efforts are exempted from from this from what we've talked about.
▶ 2:39:35So, with that, I got about 17 seconds less and that's enough to just say thank you for what you do. Thank you, sir. The gentleman yields back. Uh, with that, Representative Titus from Nevada is recognized for five minutes. Thank you very much. Uh, I'd like to pick back up with something Miss Kim was saying earlier about the closing of consulates.
▶ 2:39:59Earlier this year, the department, your department, sent a preliminary notification to Congress that it was going to move to close dozens of consulates and embassies. And they were they're around the world. They range from Luxembourg to the Maldes, from Durban, South Africa to Busousan, South Korea. I mean, they're everywhere. And one that I was especially concerned about was uh in Europe and that's uh Thessaloniki that plans to close the consulate there in Thessalani, Greece.
▶ 2:40:30And I think this is at a time of real rising uh geopolitical instability especially in that part of the world where Greece plays such a key role. uh the consulate there especially it it's ensuring the potential of the base at uh and the the port at Thessalaniki it plays a role in the implementation of IMC uh it's helping people come to the Olympics I just wonder without the consulate aren't the beneficiaries
▶ 2:41:00of our not being there going to be China uh and Russia and given your experience and connections there do you really think that's a good idea Yeah. So, I I don't think there's been any move to close the consulate in Thessaloniki. I do know a uh a review was done of all of our overseas post to assess their costs to the to the American taxpayer to assess their benefits to the American taxpayer to assess any revenue.
▶ 2:41:26As you know, consulates can generate revenue through uh fees and and visa applications. Um, but my understanding is I don't think any decisions have been made regarding closure, but uh people may be drawing conclusions from that analysis if they're looking at a consulate that maybe is very high cost or is in a remote area or is not providing substantial benefit. But I'd be happy to look at any particular concerns you have about um individual consulates.
▶ 2:41:51Well, I appreciate that because when the secretary came to the committee, I asked him about how we're going to process visas for people to come for upcoming Olympics and the World Cup. if you're cutting these different consulates because that's where a lot of people go. And he said, and I'll quote him, there is no proposal at this time to close embassies or consulates. There has been media reporting because people like to leak lies, but there's been no such proposal. And I think I would know.
▶ 2:42:19Well, uh, we're not hearing any more specifics whether it's what's happening with the study. Is it going forward? Are you going to consult with Congress because that's the law before you close any of these overseas posts? Oh, certainly. I mean, we've consulted on the reorganization that we we've just begun to undertake. And I think I you know, I my understanding is we provide briefings, I think eight briefings per day to uh to the Congress on various activities that are happening at the department.
▶ 2:42:48So, I don't think this would be any different. All right. Well, if you can help me get that information, I'd appreciate it because I think China is expanding its diplomatic footprint while we're uh decreasing ours. That seems to be not in our strategic uh interest. Uh, another thing I'd like to ask you about is what ranking member Meeks was talking about with the present assignment of foreign service employees not being a factor for riffs.
▶ 2:43:15I think that was kind of the conclusion that he drew based on a circulated department memo back from May. But we know that's not true because just last month without talking to Congress, y'all changed the foreign affairs manual and it that's the document that sets out the procedure for riffs and now it makes it easier to fire foreign service officers.
▶ 2:43:38And when committee staff repeatedly reached out to try to get details on the riffs, they were told that the department wouldn't provide such details in order to protect that I'm quoting the dignity of the workforce. So I wonder if you'll just explain to us what about the dignity of the workforce was protected when you just sent 1300 employees home and said thanks but no thanks. Well certainly thank you.
▶ 2:44:04I mean, look, no one wants to be on the receiving end of a reduction in force notice. Um, you know, this happens all the time in the private sector. Um, it happens, you know, I think President, um, you know, Clinton, he reduced the federal workforce by, I think, 377,000 employees. The federal workforce was reduced by 220,000 under President Obama.
▶ 2:44:26Um but we wanted to make sure that any employee was not um finding out through media reports that they were going to be losing their job. We had a sacred responsibility to tell them individually directly from the department about their particular uh job situation and that we didn't want them to get that notification from anyone else. But some of the reasons for why they were riffed were just like coincidence of being in the country.
▶ 2:44:53Not the not anything that they had done or the job wasn't needed. I mean that seems to be pretty undignified. But thank you. And I guess my time is up. The gentle lady's time has expired. Uh and I'm going to recognize myself for uh for five minutes. Um Mr.
▶ 2:45:09Rodriguez, there's been a lot of speculation and uh projected on to you personally, uh the State Department, certainly the Um explain to us what is the purpose of this fiscal and personnel realignment in your words? Well, thank you for that uh question, Congressman.
▶ 2:45:32It's to align the uh the mission of the department with the core function with what its original core function is, which is conducting the foreign policy and diplomacy of the United States government. And and are you saying that maybe we had gotten out of focus on some of that? I I think so.
▶ 2:45:48So I think some of that started in the postcold war environment where there wasn't we didn't have that Soviet threat anymore and so we a lack of focus led to sort of a an expansion of offices and issue specific areas that um it was sort of a department looking for a mission looking for a function I think we're now I think it's pretty clear we're back in an era of great power competition and I think that's focused the mind and focused our intentions to back to engaging in real Yeah.
▶ 2:46:18Many of us up here questioned uh the role of USAID in pushing not aid but philosophy and actions onto a lot of countries. And uh I'm assuming that uh this kind of reform is intended to enhance transparency, enhance efficiency. Anything else it's trying to do? Yeah. And and centering the mission, empowering our diplomats.
▶ 2:46:45We we most of the work that's been consolidated, the offices that have been eliminated have been to take those functions. The functions themselves haven't been eliminated or at least the functions that we want to keep have not been eliminated. They've been moved and as you were pointing out with the office with trafficking, correct? Yes. They've been moved to the regional bureaus, right? And to the posts overseas. So our ambassadors who are in those countries where say human trafficking is occurring or the regional bureaus where it's a big problem.
▶ 2:47:11They are now the ones who are empowered who know these countries best and who are in a best position the best possible position to take action. Is that why we put ambassadors in place? That is why we put ambassadors in place. They have they have the title plenty potentiary because they are the chief ranking official in that country representing the president of the United Well, uh, welcome to Washington, which always believes if 10 is good, uh, a hundred must be better and frankly a thousand must be essential. Yes.
▶ 2:47:40Uh, so I I I think we're we're seeing this disruption of this notion of just adding to budgets and adding to um, uh, FTEEs. somehow that means a better product or certainly that the interests of the United States are being uh are being uh brought about in a better manner around the world and I mean that's clearly not been the case. Correct. That is correct. Yeah.
▶ 2:48:06And you see even some of the most successful and iconic American companies out there Facebook, Microsoft, Google, they've laid off people, they do it all the time. And it's not because they don't have the money to pay for it. It's because those offices or those functions aren't doing what they need to be doing and they need to focus on their core mission. Um, not to mention 36 trillion dollars in debt. So, I'm going to I'm going to move on though. I'm going to take on a personal issue. This has been particular interest to me.
▶ 2:48:34Uh, that following the Biden administration's disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan uh is the treatment of our Afghan allies. Again, these are Afghans who have risked their lives and their famil family's lives to serve alongside the US armed forces for years uh thus saving uh countless American lives along the way. I know the chairman had has had personal experience on this.
▶ 2:48:58Um I've said this on many occasions that we must hold uphold that sacred commitment that we have made to them and I believe these brave Afghanis who uh have undergone rigorous vetting processes that have been required and prop properly and so are welcome into my neighborhood and my state any time. Um can you give me a quick update on the status of the US Department of State's office of coordinating uh coordinator for Afghan relocation efforts care?
▶ 2:49:25So, yes, we're so we're continuing to uh um those requests for folks who uh who want to get SIV visas. Um I believe we have $500 million from the prior year that um we've deemed sufficient to continue operating uh that effort going forward into FY26. Um we've admitted I think 1,200 folks under that program since the beginning of the administration.
▶ 2:49:54um and the functions of the care office um have moved to the regional south central Asia desk. Um again, this is part of how we're empowering the regional bureaus and the ambassadors to take care of the diplomatic work in their countries and in their regions, the people who are best positioned to know those areas best. Um so that that work is continuing. All right, my time has expired. With that, Representative Jacobs uh from California is recognized for five Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 2:50:23Deputy Secretary Riggus. Uh thanks for being here. I want to start with the Global Fragility Act. Um as you know, a bipartisan landmark law that passed in 2019. Uh this law was designed to implement many of the lessons from years of costly and unsuccessful US stabilization efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and and Somalia. And it was designed to make foreign assistance more strategic and effective, something I know the secretary has said he cares about. Congress remains very committed to this law.
▶ 2:50:50I just recently introduced a GFA reauthorization bill with Chair Ammeritis McCall and the House National Security Appropriations Bill just appropriated money for GFA Secretary Rubio also recently promised Senator Coons in an appropriations hearing that GFA would still be implemented at the department. However, the riffs announced last week closed the office, the Conflict and Stabilization Operations Bureau and fired the staff that have implemented GFA since its passage.
▶ 2:51:18So, Deputy Secretary Rigus, how does the department intend to implement the Global Fragility Act if you just fired all of the relevant staff with the institutional knowledge and expertise to do this effectively? So, thank you for that question, Congresswoman. The functions of that office are going to be uh carried out at the regional bureau level and this is something the secretary has talked about is empowering both our ambassadors and the regional bureaus who are charged with doing the diplomacy rather than sort of specific functional offices.
▶ 2:51:46Uh so we're focusing the functional offices and empowering the regional offices to be able to carry out uh those diplomatic sure there are about 20 people who were previously dedicated to GFA implementation who were carrying out important coordinating monitoring evaluation and learning and planning functions. Exactly how will that be So those functions are going to be done at the at the regional bureau.
▶ 2:52:14So each of the regional bureaus uh will take responsibility for those functions to ensure and they're taking responsibility for foreign assistance in their regions and the ambassadors are going to have No, I I understand I but why didn't you move over anyone with any actual experience with GFA to the regional bureaus if that was your intent instead of firing them?
▶ 2:52:37So the folks I mean the the folks who are in those offices are also working contemporaneously with people in the regional bureau. So I don't think it's correct to say people in the regional bureaus or at post don't understand how to carry out foreign assistance in accordance with the global fragility act. Um so I'm I'm very confident they're going to be able to do that going forward. Deputy Secretary Riggus, you and I both know that foreign service officers and civil servants in the regional bureaus are already stretched thin.
▶ 2:53:07And the idea that we are now putting on top of that significant programmatic and coordinating and monitoring and evaluation on top of their existing workload without any of the expertise or institutional knowledge from that process over the last 5 years. And remember this bill passed when President Trump was president the first time. This is not some like lefty priority.
▶ 2:53:31This was is a bipartisan priority of Can you provide to our committee a clear plan for how the department will implement GFA, including by ensuring adequate staffing with the appropriate conflict expertise and implementation Sure.
▶ 2:53:48So we have um we have hired or in the process of hiring back about 400 folks who had worked at USID um at the regional bureaus and at the uh at posts overseas in addition to hiring about another 400 folks who are going to be locally employed staff who help to administer these programs.
▶ 2:54:07So to the extent that we uh and this is something we're going to be under constant evaluation and review to ensure that our ambassadors and regional bureaus have the staff and expertise they need to be able to execute and implement on that. So are you going to hire back any people from cso or people who work specifically on the GFA?
▶ 2:54:27So the um to the extent that there are jobs that so there are very prescriptive rules around how riffs uh reductions in force have to be done in the federal government and how people can be hired back. So we'd have to make sure we are abiding by um how those rules are promulgated. But if there are if there is a need that our ambassadors or regional bureaus are demonstrating that they want uh or need a particular expertise, we'd be happy to consider Okay.
▶ 2:54:56Well, I will look forward to that um written um response from you on what the actual plan is. I will also say in the CN that we received the reorganization CN, it said the Office of Foreign Assistance Policy was going to take on certain statutory policy. What you're telling me is that it will actually be the regional bureaus who are doing the GFA implementation.
▶ 2:55:17So, if we could also get clarification on who actually will be responsory, bipartisan, congressionally mandated GFA implementation, please include that in your written response on the plan to implement it. Thank you. I owe back. Thank you. Chair now recognizes Representative Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 2:55:36Uh, Deputy Secretary, Secretary Rubio, OMB, Director VA, and administration officials have repeatedly asserted to Congress that funding is not being cut or frozen for the procurement and delivery of Americanmade readytouse therapeutic foods. However, as of today, as I understand it, uh, no RUF orders have been processed this year.
▶ 2:56:01uh and the two nonprofit manufacturers who make these products which are sourced from 27 states across the US are in danger of going out of business. Can you provide me with an update on the status of moving these orders forward? Uh thank you for that question, Congressman. I'm I I regret I'm not familiar with this particular issue, but I'd be happy to take it on board uh look into it and get your response. Okay. If you can do so expeditiously, that would be helpful. I will do so, sir. Thank you.
▶ 2:56:29Um what what is the status of the state department's office of the coordinator for Afghan relocation efforts? So that office uh we're is we're still processing SIV visas um that um for under chief of mission authority that work like the work of a lot of um that's being done at the state department now under our reorganization is being moved to the regional bureaus.
▶ 2:56:54So um it's being moved from that uh the the care functions are being moved to the regional south central Asia desk. Um my understanding is we've admitted about 1,200 uh people under this program since the beginning of the administration and that work um you know the the processing of those visas continues. So you expect that that program under the opaces of the regional desk will continue uh moving forward?
▶ 2:57:22Yes, it is continuing under the south central Asia desks. Yeah. Okay. Do you see any has there been any discussion of changes to the actual approval uh of visas uh for Afghanistan interpreters and others uh that helped us during the Afghanistan war uh moving forward or do you see the program largely continuing as is?
▶ 2:57:47My my understanding is that about 400,000 people have been admitted um with SIVs from Afghanistan. Um and that the sort of the the so-called easy cases have kind of made their way through and there are sort of a number of hard cases at the end of people who you know did not did not or could not pass vetting to be admitted into the United States. Um and so I I think it's down to harder cases now.
▶ 2:58:14So, I don't know that we're going to see the kinds of numbers we've seen previously admitted, but um the the review work continues. Uh one of the things that was obviously a big concern with USAID uh was some of the funding uh that went to uh different projects or entities that uh you know on the face we would not support.
▶ 2:58:39for instance, an anti-semitic rapper who got $3 million to promote anti-Israeli rap songs in Gaza in the West Bank. Um, as well as obviously funding that previously went to ENRA and the work that they did uh to undermine uh and ferment hate uh and and teach uh Palestinian students uh to hate Jews and frankly want to kill Jews, which is part of why we saw October 7th
▶ 2:59:09uh happen. What is it that uh the State Department is doing now uh to make sure that that type of uh funding does not occur ever again? Uh and two uh obviously with uh the change in how we're getting humanitarian assistance into Gaza, how do you see that So number one, I think the uh the elimination of USAID as a foreign aid institution, I think is was step one
▶ 2:59:40to that. Uh number two was the creation of the America First Opportunity Fund, which is what uh the administration has proposed in its FY26 budget to ensure democratic accountability and how foreign assistance funds are being distributed. Uh you look at this long list of USID funds that I think kind of shocked the public conscience about how public taxpayer dollars were being spent. Um and you can't really answer the question who authorized that or who approved it or there was no one that you could really hold it.
▶ 3:00:09I mean, you could technically hold the USA ID administrator accountable for that, but they're going to say, "I I never saw that or never approved it um with the America First Opportunity Fund. This is done at the discretion of the Secretary um under the president's um authority as the, you know, the chief foreign policy officer um of the United States and he's someone who's before the press every single day. They can he can be asked questions by the public. Um I mentioned earlier there, you know, congressional oversight as well.
▶ 3:00:39um inspe the inspector general can also review how monies are being spent. So I think there's going to be the questions about accountability. Um I think there is there are multiple layers of accountability for how that uh money is spent and the ultimate accountability is to the American voter right they can say I don't like how this money was spent or I do. Thanks I yield back chair now recognize representative Jipal. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
▶ 3:01:06Thank you, Deputy Secretary Riggz, for being here. Um, before coming for Congress, I worked for a Seattlebased nonprofit that was one of the largest um implementing global health issues around the world. And in our state, uh, Washington State, global health is a leading industry. It creates tens of thousands of jobs right there at home. It generates billions of dollars for our economy.
▶ 3:01:30and the destruction of USAID and the massive cuts that we've seen to research and science and global health, I believe, are really weakening our soft power um abilities through global development. And I think they're leaving Americans vulnerable to the spread of disease that does not know any boundaries.
▶ 3:01:51Thousands of people in my district have worked for state um or for programs that receive that funding and they've devoted their lives to putting America first. But you fired them. You fired them. Not based on merit, not based on skills, not based on work history, not by looking at if there was anywhere else in the State Department that these career civil servants could be. You just fired them because you had a 15% staff firing target.
▶ 3:02:17Um, one of them speaks multiple languages, had an onward assignment to promote US businesses and strengthen our critical mineral supply chain. Another one was sent back after spending her entire life devoted to humanitarian assistance work in Afghanistan, Sudan, the Middle East, some of the toughest regions in the world where we desperately will need translators, people with bilingual experience.
▶ 3:02:41Another one served in war zones in the Middle East and was fired one week away from qualifying for her pension after nearly 20 years of service. It is stunning to me to see how these career civil servants have been treated by your administration. And on top of that, the administration's budget request slashes global health spending by almost 2/3.
▶ 3:03:06And a recent study estimates that in 10 years, these cuts could cause 14 million preventable deaths. 14 million. I've worked all over the world, lived all over the world, and seen the power that the United States builds by the work that we do in other countries. I want to remind any public that may be watching that we spend less than a fraction of a percent of our budget on foreign assistance. In fact, sometimes I go out and people say, "You spend too much money." And I say, "Great. You tell me what you think we spend.
▶ 3:03:36Usually they say around 20%. I say you tell me what you think we should spend and I will do that. I will do that number. And you're laughing because you know that what people say back to me is spend 10%. If you just spend 10%. I would do that. I'm like great. I'll take it because the work we do through these programs is so important and the skills and the talent of our public servants is so incredible. The average taxpayer, Mr.
▶ 3:04:05Riggas, spends 18 cents per day to fund USAD. That's funding that saved over 90 million lives and prevented outbreaks that would have threatened American lives. And so, I guess I just want to know, do you understand how your cuts are going to make Americans less safe? So, um, as I noted earlier, this the secretary has exempted life-saving humanitarian assistance from the foreign aid review. Um so that kind of aid will continue.
▶ 3:04:34Um but I've al as I also mentioned we need to have a graduation strategy for countries for whom we're providing this kind of assistance whether it's one year 3 years 5 years like when is when are they going to have the capacity to be able to administer these programs themselves. We've seen that with our uh FY26 budget request for PEP FAR, which is Let me stop you there just for a second to say that life-saving aid alone, first of all, it's not flowing the way that we thought it was going to flow when the secretary said that. Secondly, you know, it's not enough.
▶ 3:05:05If you listen to the experts, life-saving is very different than disease prevention. I've worked on disease prevention for a long time. When a disease breaks out, what you need to know is that there is a response immediately. And the work of USAD took disease prevention response times on outbreaks from 2 weeks to two days. That two weeks is a critical moment for us to be able to stop those diseases from spreading.
▶ 3:05:32And we're in a situation now where we can't even analyze samples that come to us from other countries because they're being put through all kinds of other cuts at the CDC, at other agencies. And so it's it's simply just not the case that life-saving is enough. I have 19 seconds. So I want to turn to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. How many sites does Gaza does GF uh GHF operate? Do you know? I I am I do not know. That's under your jurisdiction, your resources. It's four. How many square miles is Gaza? Do you know?
▶ 3:06:02I do not. Guess what? It's over 140 square miles, six times the size of Manhattan. Do you know how often those sites are open? I do not. They are barely open. Mr. Riggus, this is not the way to get aid to people in Gaza.
▶ 3:06:19And if you're going to be here over personnel and operations, I would ask that you know the details of what you are actually overseeing and ask the experts to come in and help you because whatever people say about UNRA, we were delivering aid lady's times to the people that need it. Representative Vice is now recognized.
▶ 3:06:40Deputy Secretary, you've uh you've been beat up over the six months or so that the new administration's been in trying to change uh what is effectively a lifetime of problems in how we implement the taxpayer dollars around the world. So, I'm going to switch a little bit. It's not going to be gentler or kinder, but it will be different.
▶ 3:07:03I want to talk about the things that have been wrong for a long time that I see currently these what's gone on so far not implementing these changes and I'll give you the heads up. It's basically OBO operations visa processing and your IT CIO and CTO. So I'll take them in in reverse order.
▶ 3:07:27With the consolidation of so many disperate organizations, many of which had multiple CIOSCTOs, multiple different server systems, and uh quite frankly didn't even talk within their organization.
▶ 3:07:44Do you have or can you work with this committee to present us with a plan to get to a single consolidated and of course modern and secure presumably cloud system so that we can have confidence that it's both secure and Yes, I would be happy to do so, Good. It'll be a tough job. Secondly, uh I'd like to talk about OBO. Long before Benghazi, the organization was a mess.
▶ 3:08:14Long before Benghazi, it was decades behind in meeting the modernization just for basic safety and security of embassies, much less desperate remote locations, offices, uh, and so on. During the George W. Bush administration, there was tremendous progress made by changing from one of designs to standard design, standard built.
▶ 3:08:40Obviously, each site looks somewhat different, but standard parts and for the most part cookie cutter uh programs that allowed us to speed up dramatically. President Obama enjoyed during his eight years, the four years of work or the eight years of work done by General Williams. Are you prepared to return to a system that is cost-effective, speeds up the process, and improves the security for all the men and women who work abroad? Absolutely.
▶ 3:09:07And I think the the cost of building overseas and the the the requirements that we put on our contractors um I believe we only have really two contractors that currently provide services to us overseas which I think is just um not adequate is not enough competition and there's not enough companies that are able to to meet the requirements. I'm shocked you say a duopoly is not a good way to do business. Shock shocked. Yeah. Well, thank you and we look forward to working with that.
▶ 3:09:37Lastly, the chairman has announced and is in the process, as you know, of a full reauthorization of your agency. That is a an amazing task and one that hasn't been done in decades. In that task, I want to call back to the era of the visa decision that was made during Chairman Henry Hyde's day.
▶ 3:10:02At that time as the Department of Homeland Security was being stood up, the goal of the George W. Bush administration under Colon Powell, they planned on removing all uh visa services, the consular services that actually do the interviews and evaluation and give the visas to foreigners. They were going to move it to Homeland Security and Homeland Security would then field people as necessary.
▶ 3:10:27Henry Hyde listening to the State Department pushed hard and was able to stop that on the on the theory that it was a a career path and b that it would streamline the process to keep it within state. Mr. Deputy Secretary, that hasn't proven to be true, has it? No, I don't think I I don't know, but I I take your word for it. And in that sense, uh, if you talk to anyone in your consular section, they're going to tell you that they are the beginning of the process.
▶ 3:10:56But at the end of the day, Homeland Security and other agencies not facing the public make all the decisions and they can only say we don't have approval. We don't have delay. And those delays go on for months without answer. I'm sure you've heard that. In the reauthorization, would you work with the committee on the possibility that we do in fact implement some version of that original plan?
▶ 3:11:22One in which the forward- facing, the uh to homeland security to make those decisions in a single step, not in a series of steps that are so opaque.
▶ 3:11:34Would you agree to work with us at least on the concept and the possibility that that would be good for both the foreigners who wait in line and quite frankly uh for a massive amount of people who begin in that position and that position is I at least my observation is truly not part of the career path of foreign officers. Yeah, I'd be happy to work with you sir. Thank you. At that I yield back, Mr. Chair now recognize Representative Stan. Thank you very much Mr. Chair. This is an important hearing m uh Mr.
▶ 3:12:03Deputy Secretary, as you well know, we are in the middle of a intense competition with China and we will need the strongest military on the planet. But we will need more than the strongest military on the planet because the true battle for is for economic superiority and of course this battle of communism versus our former government democracy. China has spent vast amount on international development projects over the last decade almost 700 billion compared to USA's 80 billion.
▶ 3:12:33So I appreciate and support the request for a budget increase for the Development Finance Corporation to counter China's Belt and Road initiative. Let's be clear, China will outspend us. This means we need to be smarter about our spending. The Government Accountability Office suggested that our dollars go further if we have larger incountry present presence. But Donald Trump, President Trump just arbitrarily cut 1300 department employees.
▶ 3:12:57that includes includes employees who are directly working on the US response to China, who are experts in global tech competition and who spoke fluent Mandarin. We know that multilateral efforts like export controls are more effective at protecting American supply chains uh when we work together with our allies than doing so alone.
▶ 3:13:19But President Trump has burned many relationships by imposing tariffs on our strongest allies and given China the ability to position itself as the defender of free trade. And then of course there are reckless cuts. This budget request moves USAD under the State Department and only 14% of the projects remain and only 6% of USAD staff. China will see this vacuum and has already stepped in to fill it. This budget request z request zeros out funding for the UN.
▶ 3:13:49Meanwhile, China has been increasing its funding and putting its people in key leadership roles, shifting global power dynamics away from United States leadership. This budget request cuts funding for the international narcotics and law enforcement. Funding that is directly used to curtail Chinese illegal trans shshipment and counter Chinese aggression in the South China Sea. China will undoubtedly take advantage of weaker law enforcement to expand its presence. Um, Mr.
▶ 3:14:16Deputy Secretary, are you aware of how large China's overseas diplomatic footprint is around the globe? And then does it worry you that it is overtaking the United States diplomatic footprint? Uh, thank you for that question, Congressman. Uh my understanding is um while we are somewhat equally matched in terms of how many posts we have overseas, we the United States does have substantially more personnel serving overseas both at the State Department and other at the inter agency at our posts overseas.
▶ 3:14:44I really appreciate that and I want to keep it that way and even continue to enhance it. I'm a big believer that our diplomatic efforts are going to help us continue to lead the world. Uh, deputy secretary, according to the Loi Institute, China has the most expansive diplomatic network in the world with more outposts in Africa, East Asia, and Central Asia, and the Pacific Islands. Can you give us specific examples of how you plan to keep engaging in those regions after the reductions in force? Sure.
▶ 3:15:10So, first of all, the reductions in force only affected our domestic um operations. They did not uh affect our uh foreign service officers overseas. Um I think the president has really shown the way with his you know first trip abroad where we went to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and UAE about economic engagement both US investing there and bringing back enormous amount of investments to the US economy and I think that's the kind of uh diplomatic and economic engagement we want to see that ties together the
▶ 3:15:40interests of the United States with countries overseas so that we are economic partners. We're helping them grow and they're helping us as well. I think the restructuring of the department and the reduction force is going to be of enorous importance to both Democrats and Republicans here. So, will you commit to keeping this committee informed about plans to restructure or reduce personnel who are post abroad and do so before you start implementing those changes? I really appreciate that. Here's what's at stake. China is taking advantage of this moment to strengthen their standing on the world stage.
▶ 3:16:10Meanwhile, the administration is gutting the State Department budget to its lowest level since before World War II. In my opinion, that does not make the United States stronger. When America retreats, China advances. When we fire our experts, they hire more. When we walk away from the table, they sit down and set the terms. And I believe if we keep handing Beijing the king, the keys to global leadership, the next generations will ask why we let America's influence crumble.
▶ 3:16:37not because we couldn't afford it, but because we didn't fight for it. With that, I yield back. Chair now recognizes Representative Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Deputy Secretary, welcome here.
▶ 3:16:53I'm going to start with a 2024 GAO report that flagged $3.2 million in duplicative contracts for overseas cultural And I'm just wondering if you can identify for us any specific duplicative contracts that have been terminated and kind of what metrics use. I think the work you do is probably very difficult to measure success, but you know contracts are contracts. Money is being spent. The American people demand something for it as they should. How do you how do you do that?
▶ 3:17:23Can you name any duplicative contracts that have been terminated? Well, I don't have the the specific contract lines in front of me, but there were um what what the secretary has articulated in terms of how we want to spend our money both in grants and in contracts is that we we can tie that directly to the three goals he has articulated and that hopefully every contract and grant that we are um delivering on or executing on is making America safer, making
▶ 3:17:53America stronger, making America more prosperous. If it's not doing all three, it should certainly be doing one, at least one. If it's not doing one, then we're not doing that contract and we're not doing that grant. So, I kind of agree with that. Now, the State Department's budget has operated without reauthorization for 23 years, which is astounding. Most Americans don't understand that, and there's not a good explanation for it. 80% of the operations are literally unauthorized.
▶ 3:18:20Recent report exposed $1.8 8 million in grants for overseas gender equity programs including 500,000 for workshops in subsaharan Africa. Deputy Secretary, you're familiar with places like Chad, Somalia, Ethiopia. Do you think like my my colleague from Arizona was just talking about China winning the diplomatic race because we're not there and we can afford to do more.
▶ 3:18:49Seems to me if you can't if you can't find enough food to eat, the last thing or in you know the list of the last things you're interested in are gender equity programs, right? Um we we can't ill we can ill afford it. We're never going to be able to outpace China if it's just spending money. We have to be smart about it and we can't waste our money on things like that.
▶ 3:19:17department's got a history of funding programs that stray and the word stray I kind of use loosely uh from American interests like $700,000 for climate climate focused art exhibits in Asia per 2023 IG audit audit you have a list of spec specific grants like those those for gender equity or climate art exhibits that have been axed or realigned with the FY26 budget with America's
▶ 3:19:48strategic priorities. Do you have anything like that? I can certainly provide you a list. I mean, I have a series of examples here in front of me that I think have g, you know, the secretary's gone over in prior um hearings as well as um have been, you know, talked about from the White House podium about, you know, examples of grant spending from USAD that um I think most Americans would agree was not a good use of taxpayer dollars.
▶ 3:20:10Yeah, I think the list is replete, but every time you hear them, look that, you know, there are folks here that don't like the fact that we're trying to reduce the size of government and that you've been put in charge of it. But, you know, a 2023 OPM report revealed a 15% staffing increase since 2010.
▶ 3:20:29Yet a 2024 CSIS study found no corresponding uptip uptick in diplomatic outcomes such as trade agreements or counterterrorism success which leads American taxpayers who give up their hard-earned money for this to say what the heck are we paying Um you know program after program.
▶ 3:20:50So, I'm not going to ask you to go through them, but I think it's important that that we remind everybody that there is a limited amount of funds, that we do have to compete globally with an adversary like China, and that we have to spend our money wisely, not on on on stupid things and not wastefully. I mean, I'll turn to the 2021 Sigar report that revealed 1.2 2 billion in unaccounted for funds during the Afghanistan withdrawal which is a glaring which is a glaring failure.
▶ 3:21:21Um and you know if we talk about grants for cultural festivals in South Asia let me ask you that. So grants for a cultural festival in South does that where does that fit into aligning America's priorities with defeating our adversaries in South Asia? How does that is there something there that we're missing? It does not.
▶ 3:21:43No, I think that's probably a misguided attempt by folks to think that was an exercise of soft power, but I don't think anyone um could draw a line from how funding that uh enhances America's power or influence in in that part of the world. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Chair, now recognize Representative Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Um, I apologize if some of the questions have been asked to you uh previously because uh we've had overlapping committee hearings.
▶ 3:22:14Part of the meat and potatoes, I think, of a legislative office is helping our constituent services uh with issues of of passports, visa accounts, and um in middle of California and Fresno and those counties, we have a large Latino community that has family members uh in uh not only Mexico, but Central American countries, large Punjabi pun Punjabi population, large in India, and we deal with this daily.
▶ 3:22:45Um h how many um individuals within the consular affairs bureau were terminated? Uh my understanding is we did not make any cuts in the consular affairs bureau. They were not targeted for positions because I raised that issue with the as it related to some consular offices that had uh played a role within the um department. I I'll send you a letter forwarding that. Um so then what's your process here?
▶ 3:23:14You have enough staffing to maintain current processing for passports on timelines and there were no reductions to uh individuals who process passports or visas um in consular affairs. So um to the extent that we're able to implement you know technology solutions or other the technology solutions is you've made a transfer to computerization has had some some challenges. Has that not been the case?
▶ 3:23:42Um, well, I mean, there's there is a U modernization program underway, right, for for past and that makes sense. But it it it like any new program, it hasn't been implemented without would you say? Yeah, I I think that's fair to say.
▶ 3:24:01Um the um uh issue on uh terminations uh how many of the state department employees including foreign service officers served in rotational assignments do you know? Um so my understanding is with with respect to the foreign service is about 14,000 foreign service and yes or no were those uh part of those that were served uh termination there were um I think 239 foreign was an assessment
▶ 3:24:31conducted on their performances because I've had anidota stories where they had gotten glowing reports on their past performance and then they were summarily dismissed. So the reduction in force rules that um exist in the government are very prescriptive and so if you're what were the metrics?
▶ 3:24:50So if an office itself was eliminated and someone was in that office um if an entire you know we had offices that were eliminated and other offices that were combined or merged with other offices. If you were in an office that was completely eliminated, everyone in that office, foreign and civil service, we've got reports and we'll help hopefully get clarity on that. Those in consular services that were their jobs were eliminated and I'd like to have you respond to that and I'll get you the information. How's that sound?
▶ 3:25:21Um, were they simply fired by serving in the wrong post or what other considerations were using to reassigning employees who have some of the toughest posts in some of the areas that are not the plum political assignments that administrations also have the opportunity to provide. Sure. Thank you. So if it if a complete So the the reorganization affected domestic offices only.
▶ 3:25:45So if someone was serving in a domestic office and that office was uh was completely closed then the employees who were in that in that office in that competitive area would have been would have received a reduction in force notice. Okay. Well, we'll follow up with these other questions. Let me close on food for peace. Kansas state of Kansas sold half its annual wheat crop abroad representing significant income to Kansas farmers. I'm from California but 44% of our agriculture in California is exported.
▶ 3:26:14Uh the administration I think proposes to eliminate food for peace in fiscal year 26 budget. It's terminated many of the contracts meaning those same farmers have to find alternative markets for crops and many of them have lost incomes in the process and that doesn't even count the impacts in the hundreds and millions of dollars of USI aid. Uh how does cutting American farmers market access and international sales make America more prosperous?
▶ 3:26:41Well, I don't I I'd have to look into that particular um program you referenced, sir. I would like you to please and and and if you do, you might want to meet with some farmers uh or with recipients of the program to discuss the impacts of eliminating the program, not only food for peace, but what's been devastating in in US aid, I believe. Yeah, I'd be happy to look into that. I know the the president is a big fan of our farmers and wants to see them succeed. He tells it all the time, but this mass deportation is a real problem, let me tell you.
▶ 3:27:11And the Secretary of Agriculture talked about people on their work requirements are going to take those jobs. Give me a break. And automation, it's not there to be discussed. Continued. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Schneider. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and and Deputy Secretary. Thank you for being here today. I know it's been a a long day. And and just to refresh, what's the mission statement for the Department of State? Well, I can provide you with a copy of that, sir. I'll read it to you.
▶ 3:27:38It's to protect and promote US security, prosperity, and democratic values and shape an international environment in which all Americans can thrive. Do you support Sounds good to me. You think that works? Whether it's a Democratic president or Republican president across decades, across the century marks, that's the role of the State Department, right? Now, thinking of your role in this how will you measure success against that mission four years from now?
▶ 3:28:04So I think the secretary's articulated that that every action we take and every dollar we spend and every program we execute on should make America safer should make measure give me give me I mean you're organizing you're going through all these cuts and slashes and changes. How are you going to measure your success four years from now when your term is over? Well so I think what number one you can look at how the how we've engaged with our NATO allies. Number one that's making America stronger.
▶ 3:28:31They've all agreed to increase their spending from 2% of GDP to 5% something where numerous and I just we're we're short on time so I'm going to reclaim my time but um you said you've worked for three administrations and you mentioned that we've entered a new era of great power competition. Who who is who are our competitors in that? Well certainly I think China is at the top of that list. Anyone else? Um, well, we have both friendly competitors and unfriendly competitors.
▶ 3:29:01Okay, but the great power competition, it's China, it's Russia. How important are having and working with allies in determining who's going to win that great power competition? Well, I think it's important that we have allies um rather than clients, right? So, we have with I think and we've seen that with our NATO allies. They've gone they've they've gone from being kind of dependent. You know, people used to joke that NATO was a military alliance of countries without militaries, and now we've got them to agree to spend 5% of their GDP.
▶ 3:29:32What distinguishes, I would argue, the United States from China and certainly Russia is our allies. That relationship with NATO, the other alliances we've built and those alliances, certainly there's a military aspect to it, but the diplomatic aspect. Uh we had uh uh Defense Secretary Mattis testified before Congress. He said, you know, if we're not investing in in aid and diplomacy, development and diplomacy, we're going to have to invest more in in guns and bullets.
▶ 3:29:58Uh it's really important and the US because of our relationship with our allies, the work of all the people who serve us in the State Department, they may not wear the same uniforms as the military, but they go to places far, they go to places of danger, and they represent and promote and protect US interests. And that's critically uh important. Let me ask you, are the challenges confronting the US around the world shrinking or growing?
▶ 3:30:24Um, I would say certainly our awareness of them is growing and I I I think um they're probably growing more than they're shrinking. Okay. is the role the United States needs to take on the global stage in working with allies and expressing leadership as we did in World War II, as we did after World War II, as we did in in winning the Cold War. Is the importance of US leadership shrinking or I think it's it's growing. I think that the president has demonstrated that.
▶ 3:30:52I mean, that I think he's been the biggest actor when it comes to American soft power. And and and one last question, if if the US isn't leading, what country is in a position best to fill that void in that great power competition to protect US interests and protect Americans Sure. I think China is certainly making of our allies. Who's going to replace the US? Not we're competing with China. We don't want them to replace us. The US is indispensable.
▶ 3:31:15So here's the thing, and I know many of my colleagues have spoken passionately and and rightly about the damage this budget and reorganization would do to our diplomatic workforce in America's leadership in the world. And I agree with that. What strikes me though and where I'm stuck, it's not just a matter of misplaced priorities or ideology is that I don't see a theory of success behind what you are doing, what the department is doing.
▶ 3:31:40You said your reorganizations about streamlining and focus yet cutting thousands of skilled professionals without first developing a clear plan and having metrics for that plan and how the department will operate differently. It's not streamlining, it's amputating. You propose consolidating foreign assistance, but you haven't shown us how the department is prepared to manage these programs. What concerns me most is that there's no clear picture of how these actions position America to compete with China and respond to future crises.
▶ 3:32:09China is expanding their global diplomatic network. We're closing posts and reducing our people, losing expertise that took years, decades to develop, and we're not investing where we need to be. You'll say you manage foreign assistant like an investment program, but we're left wondering who's the portfolio manager. So my last question for you is Mr. SEC Deputy Secretary, you said the goal is a more nimble state department.
▶ 3:32:33Can you point to one example where another country has shrunk what they're doing, pulled back from their role in the world where they successfully achieved the goals they set out to protect their interests and and advance their their policies? Sir, thank you. Thank you for that question. So the reorganization affected only the domestic footprint of the state department. It did not affect our overseas posts and in fact it is designed to empower our ambassadors.
▶ 3:32:58It's almost like we've forgotten that we have ambassadors in regional bureaus who are engaging at post who are the you know the tip of the spear when it comes to how we engage with the rest of the world. This was focused on the bloated bureaucracy that was states side here. We've got 1400 offices in the United States alone. 700 I mean 1400 locations 700 bureaus and offices in the US. This is for well all I know and I'm over time thank you Mr.
▶ 3:33:23Chairman but uh I've gotten countless calls from constituents and families of constituents who have lost their job overseer. Thank you uh Mr. chair, you know, and thank you deputy secretary for staying. Um, I appreciate that. I serve as uh the ranking member for the South and Central Asia Subcommittee, so I want to focus on that bureau today.
▶ 3:33:49And I do know that two of my Republican colleagues uh asked questions about an issue that I'm also going to ask you about. Um, so you see that there's bipartisan concern. Um, would you agree with this statement? Uh, and it's a yes or no. The State Department should uphold our commitment to protect the Afghans who helped US service members stationed in Of course. Okay. Thank you.
▶ 3:34:17Um, are you aware then, and I think you are, but I'm going to ask it anyway. Are you aware of the law that a Republicanled Congress passed last year requiring a coordinator for the Afghan relocation efforts at the State Department or CARE? I I am aware of the uh the care office. Okay.
▶ 3:34:36So then you are aware of the law uh and you're clear on the congressional intent yet your reorganization plan eliminates the care office and the administration has refused to brief us on your plan for Afghan allies or even give us a straight answer about who the coordinator is. And earlier you said that you're briefing the Congress eight times a day.
▶ 3:35:02I don't know who you're briefing because as you can tell there are both Republicans and Democrats that care about this issue. So, can you reveal who the coordinator is? So, the functions for the care office have moved to the South Central Asia uh bureau at the Department of State and the um and to the and as a question about who the who the person is, who the coordinator is because there's a difference between a person who's doing the work and a function. I know you've folded everything into everything.
▶ 3:35:32It's like origami, but how come we don't know? How come you can't tell us? How come you won't tell us who the coordinator is? Well, that would I mean, the person who's in charge of the South Central Asia Bureau would be the assistant secretary for South Central Asia. So, that would be the first person I think. Okay. Well, that I would be interested. I think many of us would be interested in what that person is doing and have them answer some questions that we have, both Republicans and Democrats, about what's going on with our Afghan allies.
▶ 3:36:00Because I ask this because on Friday, you fired the entire care leadership team. So, anyone who would have had the experience and the expertise to efficiently manage Afghan relocations, which is complicated, you know, and I'm Senator Secretary Rubio came in here and we know he's doing 14 jobs. I do not think you should be giving 14 jobs to the 12 people that are left in the state department who are handling such a complicated issue.
▶ 3:36:28So, we have had, you know, uh we know that the care leadership team has been fired. We know that the care office has lost over 30 people since the beginning of the administration. Um, and we know that that does not give you the capacity that you need to sustain the same pace of processing. And then on top of that, the administration is trying to terminate temporary protective status for Afghans living in the United States.
▶ 3:36:55So, they're going to lose their work authorization and then they're going to be deported back to Afghanistan where the Taliban is waiting to get them. And these are people who actually work to protect US service members overseas. I bring it up because everyone wants to, you know, last Congress we had a hearing every week talking about Afghanistan. And now very hard to get people to come and talk about Afghanistan is what is happening to our allies.
▶ 3:37:21And we are doing a disservice to our US service members because what other country is going to say, I'm going to be willing to stick out my people's neck to help you when you're then going to sell my people down the river or back to the exact same people who are waiting to kill them. The second part of this is do you know what camp Asalia is? I do not know what campalia is.
▶ 3:37:48So the camp is a US facility in Doha where 1500 Afghan refugees are waiting to be resettled and the administration is considering closing down the camp and then forcibly repatriating these Afghans who have been in limbo in this facility waiting for years. They're going to repatriate them back to Afghanistan, back into the hands of the Taliban.
▶ 3:38:12So the question I asked you in the beginning about the US upholding its commitment to protecting these people who risk their lives to protect us. We have got to do better. And that's on you. That's the responsibility of you. That's the responsibility of the State Department. And I sent a letter to the chair of this committee asking us to continue to ask questions about this. And I'm going to continue to ask questions about this because it's about our credibility. You ain't talking about trade. You're a talking about aid.
▶ 3:38:42You're talking about reigging on your credibility to make sure that our service members are protected when they go overseas to fight for us. And with that, Mr. Chair, I thank you for giving me extra time and I yield back. Chair now recognized Representative Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 3:38:59Um, I want to um take just a moment to tack on to what uh Representative Klove was talking about because I was just in the homeland security hearing before this talking about Afghanistan and this very issue about all these Afghan folks who risk their lives to in service of our military while in Afghanistan and all their losing of their temporary protected status benefits.
▶ 3:39:25And I would just like to echo her concerns um Mr. Chairman about how unconscionable it is that we're turning our back on this group of people who risk their lives for our military. And Mr. Secretary, I would love for you to um take these concerns that we're having about the fact that you're closing the care office. You're closing the support um for this as just a dereliction of the United States duty. It's a breach of promises. It's a breach of agreements.
▶ 3:39:53and I am share my her concerns about what does this do for the US and future conflicts. Um have a lot of concerns about that. Um I wanted to um uh turn just to some just general issues about the the terminations of so many people. Um I'm concerned about the fact that were were the terminations of all these folks in USCID based on merit? Were they based on length of service? Were they based on reviews?
▶ 3:40:24How were you determining who stays and who goes? Uh, well, thank you for the question, uh, Congresswoman. Um, all everything that happened at USA happened before my tenure, so I I can't speak directly to, uh, what occurred there, but it seems to me it was an elimination of function. And what about ongoing riffs within the State Department? Are those being done based on tenure, reviews, performance, um, length of service? How are those being evaluated? Yeah.
▶ 3:40:51So the regulations surrounding reductions in force are very prescriptive and they are personnel u they are person agnostic. They are function specific. So you look at a particular office and what functions you want to retain. If you're merging two or three offices which happened you know over a hundred times we we were merging offices and you say what functions do we want to retain?
▶ 3:41:14And then based on that, if you've got 20 functions you want to retain or 20 positions you want to retain and you have a hundred people in the pool from the three offices that are being combined, there's a very prescribed process that is done by OPM and the state department actually hired OPM to conduct this process and they match people, you know, based on seniority, based on so length of service, performance. So it's it's a merit-based process at that point. Yes.
▶ 3:41:38So, I have a constituent in my district and her annual evaluation form says she's an expert in high demand across the office with the ability to balance numerous competing demands across portfolio and beyond. She is a rock star, a go-to person for technical knowledge, not afraid. Um, and she has over 15 years of service and was terminated. Uh, in my opinion, this is a huge disservice to the State Department and to the role. Um, and isn't this the kind of person I would think that you'd want to retain in our foreign service?
▶ 3:42:09Well, sure. I mean, so the process I described does not allow for us to reach in and grab a particular person that we would like to, you know, save from a riff. Um, it has to be done according to these prescribed regulations in the government that are are merit-based and track account for all of these other sort of requirements uh related to the position. Um and this is sort of what the law calls for and this is what been Yeah.
▶ 3:42:34But there's provisions in the law though for you to u make sure that um the purge is done based on not based on optics, not based on ideology but based on performance and the capacity to do the job. And the the reality of it is very experienced people are being depleted out of our foreign service at great peril to the United States of America and to our role in security in the world. I'm very concerned.
▶ 3:42:59We spent a lot of time talking about USAD, but I'm also very concerned about talking about the population refugee migration program. Um, I had the uh opportunity to be in some foreign countries where they were talking about how detrimental all the cuts are that the US had in these programs. And that's those programs are designed to retain migrants within these home countries.
▶ 3:43:22and yet we're cutting all of the employees, the personnel, and the resources to these countries to keep people from illegally entering the United States. That makes absolutely no sense. That seems to be in contradiction um to the goals here.
▶ 3:43:36And but I also want to highlight, you know, this employee that I referenced was doing amazing work in PEPAR, amazing work in HIV and AIDS to minimize the spread throughout this throughout the world and was doing incredible work in honor of program set by uh another Republican president, George Bush. And it's really tragic that this administration has targeting um in such a demonic way HIV and AIDS and PEPAR and what and its role in saving lives.
▶ 3:44:05And with that, I am out of time and I yield back. Chair recognizes Representative Anna. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On Friday, as you know, President Trump arbitrarily fired 1300 expert State Department staffers as part of his capriccious effort to slash 15% of the State Department's domestic workforce. Look, our allies around the world are feeling the true impact of these dangerous choices, and our adversaries are grinning from ear to ear.
▶ 3:44:34China is already stepping in to fill the void when we cut our foreign assistance seating the airwaves airwaves to their propaganda and uh retreating uh from the global stage. That is what's happening. And when you claim you want to prevent waste fraud and abuse, the foreign aid freed has led to the resources you oversee literally rotting at ports, medicine expiring, people dying.
▶ 3:45:00You know, as you heard from some of my colleagues earlier today, you know, we learned uh that nearly 500 metric tons of emergency food assistance, enough to feed over a million children for a week, will expire in 24 hours. In a few weeks, this rotten aid will be incinerated, costing taxpayers an additional This is a waste of taxpayer dollars.
▶ 3:45:26It's a loss of American jobs and it's hurting American farmers who cannot sell their farm products to aid organizations. This is under your oversight. In my home state of Rhode Island, 120,000 boxes of the emergency food aid known as readytouse therapeutic food or plumpy nut made by Adia Nutrition were stuck in a warehouse for months months before the State Department finally paid to transport them to treat the starving children in Sudan.
▶ 3:45:55Secretary Rubio announced US aid closing on July 1st and the remaining programs have been moved into the State Department, but it's been two weeks since then and 55 days since the secretary sat here, sat where you are now, and I've seen no real action to get this aid moving. As I told Secretary Rubio, every day around 8,000 children die from global hunger. So why is there no clear plan to continue this foreign assistance? How many children must die?
▶ 3:46:25How many jobs, American jobs are we going to see lost? We needed needed to get these contracts approved months ago. And while there are delays in creating new contracts, there are also no answers about what's happening to supplies purchased with taxpayer dollars. Earlier this month, I sent this letter to the State Department about reports that unused supplies from canceled foreign assistance programs will go to waste.
▶ 3:46:52I asked you all to provide information by today on the process the State Department is using to review the status of supplies for now terminated foreign assistance programs and what your plan was to ensure that these supplies purchased with taxpayer dollars are not diverted, destroyed, or otherwise go to waste. I haven't heard a response. Right. We cannot continue to wait for answers while the food that could save these starving children rots and warehouses. That is not American leadership.
▶ 3:47:22So, Secretary Rodriguez, what is your plan to ensure that these supplies for now terminated foreign assistance programs do not go to waste? And what is your plan to take action now so we don't waste in the future? Because as you've said, you're a shepherd of taxpayer dollars. That's wasting taxpayer dollars. So, tell me what the plan is. Thank you for the question, Congressman. Um, I'd be happy to look into this particular issue about uh food that has passed its expiration date that's about to be incinerated.
▶ 3:47:51I think, you know, it's the policy to not distribute food or medicine that's past it expiration date. So, getting an understanding of uh Yeah. But it didn't have to get to the expiration date, right? Yeah. So, getting an understanding of how it uh how that came to be, you know, what the shelf life is of this food. Is it 6 months? Is it a year? Is it 5 years? Um who's tracking it and how it got to this situation?
▶ 3:48:11I think is uh is important and is really respectfully respectfully secretary and I don't mean to cut you off but I've heard this from the secretary I've asked inquired pleading because this should be an area of partnership. This is somewhere where we can shine and continue to shine in our leadership but I I can't take we're looking into it. That's unsatisfactory. So what's the plan? We're going to make sure it doesn't happen again is what the plan is.
▶ 3:48:41Well, arbitrarily firing 15% of the staff is not a plan because those people, those experts that you get rid of, I am sure would have some role in making sure that your plan was viable and that you could let American leadership shine. So, that's a failure. Do you agree? I do not agree. I think the 15% that So, so it's a success. The 15% that were let go.
▶ 3:49:06No, I'm talking about the the waste of American Well, you're you're you're tying that to a reduction in force that has nothing to do with that. Well, I I believe that you do not have the personnel to get the job done, and I would like to see a plan. So, I am going to request in writing your plan. My time Representative Castro. Uh thank you, uh Deputy Secretary Riggz.
▶ 3:49:30Uh last week the department laid off about 15% of its workforce and you said earlier and had made a statement about the fact that the decisions were personnel agnostic. Is that accurate? That's correct. And as you know members of the foreign service regularly rotate through different assignments. A number of such officers had started new positions in the last six weeks or have offers to start a position that the administration has not chosen to cut.
▶ 3:49:57but they received notices that they would be terminated based on their prior roles, those they held on May 29th, uh that they were no longer in. Some diplomats had even started new jobs in a foreign country, moved their family over there, enrolled their kids in school, and then received a notice that they would be terminated based on the job that they had on May 29th, not the job that they currently held. If these people are terminated, the United States still needs to fill those roles with diplomats.
▶ 3:50:27many of whom would need to undergo months of training or language learning before they can join the position. In other words, the country would have to spend millions and millions of dollars when these people were already in those jobs. Are you aware of this situation? And will you revise the decisions and allow individuals who were terminated based on their job two months ago but have joined a new position or have an agreement to join a new position, whether abroad or in the United States, to continue in those roles.
▶ 3:50:56So in order to conduct the reduction in force that and the reorganization that we did, it was necessary to have an effective date. Um that effective date was as of May 29th, which is when the secretary signed uh approved the reorganization plan. Unfortunately, you know, we we wanted to move very quickly on that. Unfortunately, a district court judge in California saw fit to intercede um and and hold up that reorganization, putting people in a tremendous amount of limbo.
▶ 3:51:24So people were taking uh in this case it sounds like individuals were u moving or taking other actions that were uh not tied to their current duties. Um you I mean they were they were they were reassigned consistent with what the state department does every year. Right. So they were in new roles but but you're not disagreeing with me that they are in these new roles and they're getting terminated or fired. the new roles are not being cut out.
▶ 3:51:54So, you're going to have to go replace those people with new people that you're going to have to spend literally millions and millions of dollars to train when the purported reason for cutting out these folks is to save money. So, I guess I'm trying to work with you. Yeah. Will you reconsider what is relatively small group in the total reconsider the fact that these people are already trained and we're doing the work that you're going to need to now go fill?
▶ 3:52:18So, we have to abide by the reduction in force rules and they're they're very prescriptive in terms of uh once a position is eliminated and an incumbent is eliminated how they can return to federal service and who's on those retention registers um they could well I mean I guess let me the long and short of it will these people have a chance to go back to the jobs they were currently holding when they were terminated not the old ones that they held on May 29th yes or no yeah well we'd have to do it in accordance with the law in accordance,
▶ 3:52:48but will you give them a chance to go back to work? I have to do what the law calls for and Well, what well then I'm asking you, what does the law call for? Will you give this specific group of people in in this conundrum the chance to go into those roles that they were actually working at when they were terminated? If the law allows for that, certainly. So, we have your commitment that if the law allows for it that you will allow them back or consider them back for their roles? Yes.
▶ 3:53:16My but my my understanding is I don't think the law allows for it. I'd be happy to check with legal counsel again, but they've been pretty adamant the entire time that Okay. So, if the law doesn't allow for it, then we just wasted millions of dollars. The decisions that you made wasted millions of dollars. I I would not agree with that. Well, I mean, we just went through it, right? They were in a new job. They've received the training for this new job. The number of them would total such that it was millions of dollars spent.
▶ 3:53:41now because these positions that they were holding when they were terminated were not cut out, right? So, you're going to have to go and now hire new people for those roles. So, it's going to cost you millions and millions of dollars because of a decision that you made. No, I don't agree with it. So, we have about 14,000. How do you not agree with it? We have about 14,000 foreign service officers. 10,000 of those foreign service officers are deployed outside the US. We have about 4,000 foreign service officers. Yeah, this applies to people in the US and outside the US who are working conis in the United States of America.
▶ 3:54:12So, we need to get more of those 4,000 foreign service officers working in foreign places, which is what their mission is. I I guess I don't I don't see how that answers my question. You you you made a decision that affects a small group of people. Uh it's clearly a bad decision because it's going to cost us millions of dollars when you were trying to save a lot of money, but you you're saying that you're not going to do everything you can to rectify that. Well, I'm what I'm saying is we have foreign service officers already on the payroll who are working in the United States of America.
▶ 3:54:40I've gotten letters from two mayors who say, "Please give me back my foreign service officer." I'm wondering, "What do we why is a why is a foreign service officer working for a mayor in the United States of America?" Like, you don't join the foreign service to go work in, you know, Dearborn, Michigan or in, you know, Orange Cal wherever these folks are are working. They need to be working at post overseas or their diplomats and residents. But then why didn't you cut the jobs? You didn't cut the job. No, we canled those details.
▶ 3:55:08They were detailed to working for mayors over working for mayors in the United States of America. We recalled their details to come back to state. So make this one last point. But again, these they were working in these roles. These roles were not terminated has All members have had their opportunity to ask their questions. Want to thank you for your time today. I'm going to give you an opportunity to offer any closing statements, comments. You've been asked many questions. Any closing comments that you wish to make and we'll close out this hearing? No.
▶ 3:55:37Well, I just want to thank you uh chairman and the members of the committee for their questions. It was my, you know, honor to be here before today to answer for the members of the committee. I'm happy to do it anytime. I think it's an important function that you perform for the American people and I appreciate the questions, the hard ones, the easy ones. Um, and I'm happy to, you know, give as much transparency as I can about what we're doing and how we're doing it. uh so that your questions and concerns are satisfied. Thank you, Deputy Secretary.
▶ 3:56:05Pursuant to committee rules, all members may have five day to sub statements, questions, extraneous materials for the record subject to length limitations. And without objection, this committee stands
▶ 3:57:51That's fine. I was I didn't