The Administration is readying a proposal to rescind or cancel up to several billion dollars in congressionally approved funding for America’s development and diplomacy programs. Such an effort – targeting no more than 0.07% of the federal budget – is widely seen as a political move to draw down overseas resources leading up to the midterm election. The Administration’s proposal could be sent to Capitol Hill as soon as next week – just one month before the end of the fiscal year – though we understand legal, legislative, and political concerns may mean the Administration presses pause on the effort.
In February 2018, the USGLC released an analysis on the Administration’s “Groundhog Budget”, which for the second year in a row proposed to dangerously slash the International Affairs Budget. Fast forward to June—just a few months into the appropriations process on Capitol Hill—and a much brighter picture has emerged thanks to the strong bipartisan support for development and diplomacy programs among Members of Congress.
The House and Senate Appropriations Committees approved topline funding levels (known as 302(b) allocations) that help ensure our nation’s civilian tools can deliver results for
the American people. The Senate approved a modest increase (0.7%) for the total FY19 International Affairs Budget compared to current levels. Funding in the House is down just slightly (0.4%), largely due to a cut to Food for Peace (PL 480, Title II).
In addition to USGLC’s State Leaders Summit, Capitol Hill was abuzz this week with activity related to the International Affairs Budget. Action included both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees advancing their FY19 State-Foreign Operations bills, the introduction of a House FY19 Budget Resolution that would cut the International Affairs Budget by 7%, the Senate’s rejection of the Administration’s proposal to rescind billions of dollars in prior-year spending, and movement on the reform agenda – including Senate passage of the Global Food Security Reauthorization Act and the release of the Administration’s plan to reorganize the government.
USGLC’s President and CEO Liz Schrayer and Government Relations Director Lindsay Plack sent a letter to Congressional and Appropriations Leadership on the Administration’s proposed rescissions package, which included funding for the Millennium Challenge Corporation and Complex Crises Fund.
This week, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees approved topline spending levels, or 302(b) allocations, for FY19 – including for the State-Foreign Operations (SFOPS) bills, which fund the vast majority of the International Affairs Budget. The Senate Appropriations Committee also approved its FY19 Agriculture spending and the Administration’s rescissions package appears to be stalled in the House.
This week the Administration released a proposal to rescind $15.4 billion in prior-year unobligated funds, starting a process last used almost 20 years ago to cancel Congressional appropriations pursuant to the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Prior to the proposal’s release, it was reported that the International Affairs Budget could be disproportionately targeted. Instead, the proposal includes $334 million in rescissions to the International Affairs Budget, roughly 2% of the overall package.
Six months into the fiscal year, and after weeks of intense negotiations, Congress passed an omnibus appropriations bill for FY18 that will keep the government open through September 30, 2018.
When it comes to funding for development and diplomacy, the omnibus overwhelmingly rejects the deep and disproportionate cuts proposed by the Administration in FY18 – highlighting the strong bipartisan support in Congress for these critical programs. The International Affairs Budget receives a total of $55.9 billion, split between $43.9 billion in base funding and $12 billion in Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funding.
Reps. Ed Royce (R-CA) and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) in the House and Sens. Bob Corker (R-TN) and Chris Coons (D-DE) in the Senate introduce the Food for Peace Modernization Act (H.R. 5276, S. 2551) that would amend the Food for Peace Act to eliminate the requirement to monetize food aid and reduce the U.S purchased commodities preference to 25%, among other reforms.
Reps. Eliot Engel (D-NY), Ted Poe (R-TX), and Michael McCaul (R-TX) introduce the Global Fragility and Violence Reduction Act (H.R. 5273), which would improve the capacity of the United States to reduce and address the causes of violence, violent conflict, and fragility in pilot countries.