Oversight Hearing – National Endowment for Democracy

Yes, it is. Recognization, yes.

Nice.

Thank you.

We're gonna call the subcommittee on National Security, Department of State and related programs to order.

Yes, I am. Good morning. Sure.

Good morning everyone. Welcome to the NSRP subcommittee hearing on the National Endowment for Democracy. Our witness today is Damon Wilson, President and CEO of NED. Thank you, Mr. Wilson, for agreeing to testify here today.

Hello.

It should be no surprise to anyone why the subcommittee's first hearing of the year is to discuss oversight of the National Endowment for Democracy. At this moment in our country's history, under the tremendous leadership of President Trump, our foreign policy has been awakened and strengthened in an unprecedented manner. And the work of Ned is critical. It's a critical tool advancing the foreign policy priorities of the administration, including by defending international religious freedom in places like Nigeria. Nicaragua and Communist China, and supporting those struggling for freedom in places like Iran and North Korea and Cuba, just to name a few. But just as important as as the president is what's gonna happen in the future, what may happen in the future. Foreign policy changes from one administration to the next, we know that happens, yet the work of Ned remains consistent. As many of you know, uh, I'm a strong proponent of democracy and of human rights and of promotion uh of those things as a fundamental part of our foreign policy and our national security. Towards that goal, the NUD and accountable democracy programs in general are essential to countering adversaries advancing American national security interests and standing with those struggling for freedom regardless of who is in the White House. Now, Ned was President Reagan's, Ronald Reagan's idea, and was founded through an act of Congress in the nineteen eighties to counter the then evil empire of the Soviet Union.

Mm-hmm.

From its inception, it has enjoyed strong bipartisan support due to its uncontroversial mission of promoting freedom, freedom often within our most dangerous adversaries. Now, obviously, It works pretty well, right? As most of Europe of Eastern Europe is made up of free independent countries that are among some of our closest, strongest allies. So while the Soviet Union no longer exists, threats to freedom and our security remain, and frankly have evolved significantly since then. NED has adopted to to be responsive to those emerging trends and threats. They work in some of the most dangerous and adversarial nations like Iran, like China. They've also been laying the groundwork for peace and stability stability in places like the South Caucasus, which provides an opening uh for initiatives like the Trump route for international peace and prosperity connecting Armenia and Azerbaijan. Man.

Is it Trump, yeah,

Easy for me to say.

a Trump route.

That's right. So yes, let's be clear. NED has made mistakes in the past. But to NED's credit, they are extremely responsive and quick to recognize and rectify those mistakes. For example, when they found a problematic issue with a grantee they resolved it in a matter of days. They canceled it outright outright and got the money back. Um I wish that every other federally funded organization was that swift and that responsive to Congress and to when they make mistakes. So part of that responsiveness is the close engagement between Ned and the United States Congress. We continue that today with this oversight hearing to ask the tough questions and make sure make sure that Ned is carrying out its work, which is so critical to furthering US national security interests. Mister Wilson, again thanks for being here, I look forward to discussing these critical issues with you further. Uh let me now turn to my Florida colleague and friend the ranking member for her opening statement. You're recognized.

Th thank you. Well I I wanna start by first of all good to be with you and I I was a little late because I was picking up an award from my chairman which I'm gonna present to you right now. From malaria no more, malaria together here.

Great, thank you.

Enjoy it.

Thank you, thank you so much. Well that's cool.

And I'm glad I learned

And, yeah, I'm I'm not gonna take any of your time for that, but yeah.

No. Well I learned about the the Trump route from you today. OK. So, uh, thank you. We actually this is a very I mostly bipartisan committee and we're very collegiate and it's it's a pleasure. Um, and thank you for being here. Uh, Mr. Wilson. So Uh, thi this hearing is really I know I know we're gonna talk about your organization, but it's more than that. It's whether the United States will continue to lead with strength, transparency and principle in supporting democratic institutions and defenders around the world. Supporting the National Endowment for Democracy is one of the ways we carry out this mission. And thank you for your leadership. The NIT was created by Congress, as my colleague has said, in nineteen eighty three during the Cold War at a time when Congress made a deliberate choice. If the United States is going to support democratic movements abroad, we should do it openly, transparently, and through civilian institutions, not covertly. And the NIT was designed to strengthen the institutions that now allow societies to conflict, to resolve conflict. peacefully, free and fair elections, independent media, accountable governments, rule of law, labor rights, and private enterprise. It is sometimes we say it's wishful thinking, right? Uh it operates as an independent congressionally funded non-profit receiving annual appropriations through this sub subcommittee but intentionally separate from the State Department and that independence gives it credibility abroad and reinforces congressional oversight at home and it does it through three through four core institutes and the net supports civil society in more than ninety countries i hope that's still true the work is not abstract it supports election observers who deter fraud journalists who expose corrupt corruption and labor leaders who defend workers rights and women i'm gonna stress this women who run for office in places where their participation was once unthinkable. And in places like Ukraine where organizations that or document war crimes, so maybe one day we can have accountability. And these efforts help prevent fragile societies from descending into violence. And uh supporters of net and as I said it's bipartisan have understood a simple truth, strong democratic institutions reduce instability, they reduce extremism, they reduce the likelihood that american troops will be called upon later and i will tell you that and i've i've said this so many times this meeting as a mother of a united states marine war veteran uh i have i i take this lesson very very personally the conflicts that cost american lives and tax payer dollars often emerge when democracy is weak or absent and supporting a democratic institutions is not just a charity it is a prevention it's for our own national security, and it's cost effective. The resources we devote to mu- democracy support are a fraction of what we spend when instability turns into war, mass displacement or humanitarian crisis. Now we know, we we've heard uh the critics who argue that democracy promotion interferes in sovereign affairs or advances US geopolitical interest, but Ned's work, which is independent, it's transparent, it's congressionally authorized and rooted in universal principles, a cannibal government, rule of law, and the right of people to shape their own future. And uh that is something that we are clear about. So from Tehran to Moscow to Beijing to Caracas, authoritarian regimes are tightening their grip. They're jailing journalists, they're silencing opposition voices, and they're hollowing out civil society, and actively working to undermine the norms worldwide and so we cannot step back, uh retreat doesn't create stability and uh that's why efforts, uh uh this disappointment's efforts to scale back election monitoring uh weaken the State Department's democracy, human rights and labor bureau. Uh I I thought Rose, I hope you're gonna talk about that. She doesn't know, OK. Um Anyway, Mister Chairman, I uh you know I ask you in honest extent to enter this into the fact sheet from Ned's core institutes the National uh Democratic uh just the core institutes and

Without objection, without objection.

you know all that, OK. And uh last one thing, I know you want me to wrap up here, I wanna uh address the constitutional dimension uh which is we appropriate the funds uh for Ned uh because we have determined that the work advances American interest the power of the press rests with congress and uh when congressionally appropriate funds are delayed or withheld without clear legal basis it raises serious concerns i'd like so i'd really be interested your take on that it's uh mister wilson i look forward to hearing you and again everybody here who's here today supporting democracy i thank you very much and uh

thank you

uh yield back

thank you thank you it's now my pleasure to uh recognize the Ranking Member of the full Committee of Appropriations, Mr. Lohr.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member. Uh, I wanted to start by you saw the the presentation of the award, uh, but I want to express my appreciation for the bipartisan work, uh, that Chairman Diaz-Balart and Ranking Member Frankel have um uh the the the relationship has been proved to accomplish much on this subcommittee, especially as it relates to the national endowment. for democracy or the net. Uh, I'm very proud they were able to come together earlier this year on a funding bill that rejects the cuts to the net, sending a strong signal to this White House and to the world that the United States, Congress remains committed, we are committed to supporting democracy around the globe. I thank you, Mister Wilson, for answering the questions before this subcommittee. Today I thank you for the work that you do as President and CEO of the endowment. And if you'll indulge me for a second, I see in the audience a young man who I worked with for years when I first came to the Congress, and that's Jerry Hartz, who's with NDI and we conspired and did many things together, including helping to bring about the end of the of the war uh in in uh Nicaragua. So hats off, Jerry. Um, all around the world, the National Endowment for Democracy provides indispensable support for advocates of the essential freedoms that we cherish here at home, freedom of speech, the press, religion, assembly, the freedom to choose our leaders, chase our dreams without the fear of oppression. In twenty twenty four alone, the NED made over nineteen hundred grants across ninety-one countries, providing over two hundred eighty-six million dollars in aid to organizations that work to advance democracy from the bottom up, and oftentimes risking their lives to do so. They are in dangerous areas. Sometimes we lose sight of that in the United States, of how dangerous the situations are that people that we send there are are are uh uh and and what their environment i is all about because we believe that we have a safe environment here in which to conduct our democracy, and we need to keep it so. Groups backed by the net have been instrumental in documenting the Chinese Communist Party's persecution of religious minorities, reporting en masse internment camps, abuse of Muslim women for wearing hijabs, and the imprisonment of Christian leaders. Mm-hmm. In Sudan, groups that received support from the net bore witness to the atrocities committed during the ongoing civil war and were key to the US government's determination last year that the rapid support forces are committing genocide. And in Russia, where Putin's regime has imprisoned countless dissidents for no crime other for their beliefs, the net was able to sustain legal support and advocacy for over fifteen hundred political prisoners. These are brave men and women. They stand up for their own freedom and for that of their country, carry forward the hope that is the foundation of any democracy. Unfortunately, the world is experiencing a resurgence of autocracy and authoritarianism. making support for freedom and democracy around the globe more important than ever. And as the world's wealthiest and most powerful democracy, we have an obligation to set an example here at home. We must model the values and practices that we push for internationally, free and fair elections, due process and the rule of law, essential and viable rights that protect our most essential freedoms. Sadly, this administration has set the wrong example and has modeled behavior we would historically have condemned had it occurred in another country. The president last week attacked in personal terms several Supreme Court justices for blocking his illegal taxes on American consumers, preventing him from raising costs on working families even more than he already has. Since President Trump took office, this administration has routinely ignored court orders, prompting judges across the country to threaten government lawyers for their abject failure to comply with the law. And just this week, President Trump revived his big lie that the twenty twenty election was stolen when it was not.

Mm-hmm.

This lie led to the greatest assault on American democracy since the Civil War, the insurrection of January sixth. I believe that America is exceptional, that we are the greatest nation on wor- on on earth, and we can achieve anything. anything that we set our minds to, if we put our differences aside and pursue it together. In a much narrower sense, the work of this subcommittee is evidence of that, that we can bridge our differences for the common good. But this exceptionalism comes with responsibility. Through our actions, we can either lend credibility to the corruption and oppression of dictatorships, or the abundance and freedom of democracy. It is my hope that through the good work of independent organizations like the NED, the United States may be able to reclaim some of the credibility this administration has squandered overseas. Thank you and I yield back.

Thank you. Mr. Wilson, your uh full written statement will be placed on the records. Obviously, feel free to summarize your testimony. You're now recognized, sir.

Chairman Diaz-Vallar. Ranking Member Franco, Ranking Member DeLauro, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. On behalf of our bipartisan board, our Vice Chairman and Chair who are with us, our staff, our remarkable staff, the core institutes, and thousands of democratic partners, we thank Congress for its bipartisan support and leadership in advancing freedom as a national security priority for our nation. I also wanna thank the chair, both ranking members, and all of the committee for their strong support during the last appropriation process. We do not take that support for granted, and that's why we welcome today's hearing. So more than four decades ago, President Ronald Reagan called for investing in fostering the infrastructure of democracy, the institutions, civic organizations and free media that allow societies to govern themselves. In nineteen eighty-three, Congress answered that call with the bipartisan Net Act, authorizing a public-private partnership to advance America's interests by supporting democracy abroad. And we were joined in that effort by the core institutes, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, Center for International Private Enterprise, and the Solidarity Center. Today, our mandate is urgent. Authoritarian regimes are coordinated, technologically capable, capable, and aggressive in stifling freedom at home and exporting repression across borders. We see this in Russia's unjust war against Ukraine, as today marks the fourth year of the full-scale invasion. Banked by Chinese technology, Iranian drones, and North Korean and Cuban combatants, Vladimir Putin aims to extinguish the appeal of liberty at home by ensuring that it does not flourish in Ukraine. Ned's work helps Ukrainians hold the line against Kremlin aggression. Ned counters America's rivals by helping partners build effective democracies and Despite intensifying repression, citizens are standing up for their rights from Iran and Venezuela to Cuba and across Africa. In freer societies, there are strategic opportunities to strengthen democratic institutions in free enterprise, as we see in Moldova, Armenia and Kenya and Bolivia. Young people are insisting on better futures, turning to technology to assert their voice and hold governments accountable. And all of this underscores a central truth. The demand for freedom is universal and persistent. But as President Reagan said, it requires sustained backing. Supporting those who seek freedom is a strategic investment in US national and economic security. Where democratic institutions and free markets are weak, conflict, drug and human trafficking, terrorism, refugee flows, and coercive economic practices take root. Where citizens have a say in their future, societies are more stable partners for the United States. NED advances this mission by stewarding taxpayer resources with discipline. Eighty-four cents of every dollar goes directly to the front lines, making NED one of the most cost-effective national security investments. Last year we delivered two hundred and seventy-one million dollars for more than fifteen hundred projects in ninety countries. grassroot organizations are under a hundred and fifty thousand dollars, we know exactly where that money goes. Our credibility rests on a commitment to transparency, accountability, and non-partisanship. We submit spending plans and annual reports and consult with Congress and the administration. We provide grant and financial reporting to the State Department and respond promptly to oversight requests. That is also subject to independent audits. gao in state inspector general oversight and foia we publicly disclose grants while protecting partners our programmatic priorities advance freedom in areas that are central to us interests our work provides a counterweight to china's authoritarian reach net supported researchers exposed more than a hundred c c p police stations across fifty-three countries working to silence dissidents our partners document c c p re-education camps, Uighur forced labor, and boarding schools seeking to erase Tibetan culture and faith. Net partners defend freedom of speech and belief. In Nigeria, partners document attacks on faith communities and pursue justice through the courts. In North Korea, our partners pierce authoritarian censorship. In countries that are emerging from conflict or authoritarian rules such as Bangladesh or Syria, We help translate political openings into durable institutions. Our work advances economic security by bolstering transparency and rule of law, reducing corruption, and promoting fair competition that benefits American workers and businesses. In Bolivia, NED partners helped prevent the world's largest lithium deposits from falling under Moscow's and Beijing's control. As the United States approaches its two hundred and fiftieth anniversary, We're reminded that our nation was founded on a universal idea, that liberty belongs to all. Congress created NED to advance that idea through partnership with those seeking freedom in their own societies. At a moment of geopolitical competition, supporting democracy and freedom is not only consistent with our values, it strengthens America's security, prosperity and global leadership. I look forward to your questions.

Thank you, sir. Mm. I will

I'll take that. Yeah.

Sure, thank you. I will call on members as usual, folks. Uh, based on seniority to those uh that were present when we gaveled uh the hearing, alternating between each side. Each member will have five minutes for questions and answer. Uh, but uh, I anticipate that we should have two rounds, uh, which is which is great. So we'll start the clock with me as well. Uh. You mentioned Nigeria in your opening statement. Yesterday I went to the White House to deliver the Appropriations Committee report requested by the President, uh, on the persecution of Christians in in Nigeria. Some of us traveled there. And Ned and the cores have been on this issue for quite some time. And you you actually mentioned Nigeria in your opening statement. Will you please share more about Ned's work in Nigeria? What what what what actually are is happening there with with you all?

Thank you, mis- thank you, Mister Chairman. Um, Nigeria is Ned's largest program in Africa, and I think that reflects its strategic significance to freedom as well, across the continent, as well as to US interests. Um, in fact, my first trip as Ned President to Africa was to Nigeria for that reason. So, uh, as you know very well, the administration recently designated Nigeria as a country of particular concern. Um, Ned has been supporting this work by bringing together Nigerian partners, uh, for example, at the International Religious Freedom Summits in N in Nairobi, as well as here in Washington, to help provide uh a sense of uh of ground truth about what's happening, connecting the stakeholders on the grounds with the advocates. And we brought a community of uh our organizations together in February to talk about these issues here in Washington. Um, if you think about how uh uh in Nigeria, our partners have been able to argue that religious freedom challenges are tied to the governance failures that you probably saw on your your visit as well. failures to provide security, uphold rule of law, respect broader rights, and by ensuring the Nigerian government's more accountable to the Nigerian people, how to help our partners advance the protection of religious freedom. So across the uh across the country, um, we're investing about five million dollars, six, our core institutes are there, sixteen projects, uh, a real target to the middle belt where there are our uh, where the uh particular violence against uh religious communities is taking place. in a way that enables citizens to defend their rights, especially freedom of expression and belief, but also to strengthen their participation in politics and governance, to help build, I think, a more competitive and democratic electoral system where we've seen some real challenges as Nigeria has gone through its elections. Um, and so in the aggregate, this work uh comes at the issues of religious freedom directly by supporting issues of of security and governance failures in the in in the country as well.

So, l let me ask you this. Um, and, and this really kind of applies almost system-wide. How do you protect local partners, and those individuals that are doing some frankly delicate work, or dangerous work in delicate places, from retaliation while still maintaining transparency? How do you do that? How can you do that? And,

Mm-hmm.

and what lessons have you learned from, from past program failures? Cuz uh, you know, on, or, or even security breaches.

Mister Chairman, that's a extremely important question for the way the endowment operates. For us, uh, we think of the transparency, accountability, non-partisanship. These are foundational principles for the endowment, um, but they're also really embedded practices. At the same time, we marry that with a a duty of care to ensure that those partners that are working on behalf of their fundamental freedoms are protected. And as you can imagine, this work is particularly challenging in a place Cuba and China or Russia, um, this work is the kind of work that can end up getting folks not just harassed, intimidated, but imprisoned and in some cases face consequences of of death. I think one of the challenges we have had in this new environment is that even in places that were once considered open we've seen challenges arise for partners. Uh, Tunisia after their spring of very open society and yet we've seen a crackdown on partners that really were operating completely transparently publicly uh with Ned's support. We've seen the same play out in Georgia. I was faced with a challenge when I came to the endowment, that all of our partners in Ukraine opened operated very openly, uh everything was public, and yet on the eve of the invasion, uh we were briefed by officials that our Ned partners were on quote kill and capture lists that the Russians maintained and in the event of an occupation of Ukraine, that our partners would be targeted. We saw that in the opening days of the war, a partner in Kherson who ha left fled his apartment as Russian forces entered that southern city in Ukraine. And he left cameras in his apartment. And days later, it's filmed, uh, Baklavod covered, m face mask covered Russian forces busting down the doors to their apartment, uh, coming to seek to hold them accountable. So what we tried to do, Mister Chairman, is lean in on the transparency that we are committed to do with Congress and the administration. We do that in real practice. By submitting detailed annual spending plans, how are we gonna spend the funds that are appropriated. By providing an annual report to the executive branch in Congress, then explains where those funds went, the impact of those funds, provides a full grant listings. We provide monthly obligations of our grant payments to the State Department as well as quarterly financial reports. And we consult regularly both with the State Department and with Congress on our programs on our priorities. And on top of that, I think we welcome oversight hearings. We are responsive when members have questions or uh uh administration officials. Um, we've provided over twenty-two thousand pages and documents to the latest request of information from the State Department, for example. We also have built into the statute our responsiveness to the State Inspector General to Freedom of Information Act uh to GAO review of the work that we undertake and we submit independent audits that we go through, to the State Department for review as well.

Let me, let me, let me cut you off there,

Please.

and by the way, impressive answer. all these measures that you've been taking, but I wanna keep myself too as much as much as possible the time, Please. to to the ranking member of course you'll recognize that.

Thank you very much. I wanna uh talk to you about the women of the world. Uh, women are often the key to ensuring long-lasting and resilient democracies and countries where women do and will tend to be countries with fair elections, vibrant civil societies and independent and accountable institutions. Well, I guess I'm making you agree, I guess. You'll shake your head yes. Alright. That's not the question though.

Yes, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member.

So, one of the many casualties of the foreign assistance review by the uh Trump administration, programs centered on the unique role of women in society, economy or political life were terminated across USAID, uh the state's d r l bureau and the office of global women's issues um so what i would like to for you to do first is if you could comment on how uh empowering women uh is connected to democracy tell us about maybe some of the programs you are involved in in that regard and what concern should we have uh if you have an opinion in terms of the united states uh terminating some of the programs

Thank you for that question. Um, I'd say the the idea the concept of of NED's support for women is really political participation it's part of our broader mission to ensure um the strengthened democratic institutions reflect their people ensure equal access to civic life and public life for all citizens and so our work focuses on expanding opportunities for women that involve and and get get involved in public affairs, in public life, civil society, media and governance. You may have participated in programs, leadership programs that IRI and NDI often run with uh women parliamentarians. But we do this in a way that is reflective of how the endowment operates, refle appropriate for local context, what is appropriate in that culture, the demand that comes from those societies. So if you think about it, this leads to work where our partners are helping criminalizing violence against uh women in societies working for their inclusion in in public uh uh governance and oversight. Um, Saip and Solidarity are involved in women's business associations and the the economic opportunities for them as well. Um, there's a a way to think about this in a country like Morocco, that had a a a relatively new constitution, yet a family code that was really outdated. We have a partner there of an asset that really worked with uh a coalition of of civil society groups with the government, to update the family code, getting nineteen reforms passed through a pretty laborious uh process that had a fundamental impact on the lived experience of women in society consistent with the constitution by giving them rights to inheritance to custody to guardianship and freedom of movement. That's the type of partnership, the type of work that the endowment helps support.

OK, thank you. Um. Do you do an, I'm just curious, you do any work to try to stop genital mutilation in the world?

i don't know specifically the answer to that so i can come back to you on the details but we have strong programs across africa that involve

ok

women's leadership rights and and participation so i'll come back to you with a specific answer on that

and and it's just from your observation what are the what are the major risks that that the women that you're working with are facing

so in many places we see that uh uh uh Part of this has been having a a seat at the table, whether in political parties and and public parliaments, having a voice in shaping policies that impact them. In other cases we've seen uh uh uh uh there are real challenges to um to security, uh to uh personal well-being. We've seen, for example, in China, uh uh a targeting of Uighur women through sterilization practices to have an actual impact on the demographic composition. of the uh populations of of western china of xinjiang so it really ranges depending on the openness of the environment and the closed nature of that but it's been a i think a fundamental issue both in our support for democracy and in challenging authoritarian repression of of half of their society

what about uh sexual assault as a tool of war

this has been a big issue across our programs in the democratic republic of congo i've had a chance to visit with some of our partners in eastern congo south

What do the programs do?

Uh, you may know uh Dennis Mokegwe, who is one of our partners in the DRC, one of the Nobel Peace Prize winners, who is part of our portfolio. And part of what he has done is help treat and help communities prepare to help women that have been abused by sexual violence and the conflict in eastern Congo. But I think more than that, we're not a humanitarian organization, we have groups that are working in communities to help raise awareness, to help help stigmatize the practice of doing this in in Congo to create a sense of documentation of this so there is an accountability, and to create resilience both among women's groups but also among communities to support those who have been victimized by this violence. So the endowment comes at it not just from a humanitarian perspective, we come at it from a democracy, fundamental freedoms and governance perspective.

Thank you. You're the man.

Uh, thank you. Mr. Siskamani, your recognizer.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, and thank you for being here with us and answering our questions, and thank you for coming today. I I'm gonna get right to it, we have a short period of time, so hopefully we can get through a lot of these questions and I know we have a second round, but I wanna say a core criticism that I've heard from my constituents uh on this is that they feel that funding soft power initiatives like Ned and has not resulted in a geopolitical landscape more favorable to the US interest. Uh right now with your questions and testimony here today, I I hope we can help alleviate relevant criticisms uh about why continuing to fund that has uh been a bipartisan priority on that and why it aligns with, it can align if if done properly uh with a newly affirmed and streamlined national security priorities by the Trump administration and how that's aligning itself to that so let me get to my my first question in in light of this reality how do we how do you measure progress how do you measure success eh on the funds that are given and what metrics do you use if you can be specific here and and this is why i'm saying this because in your testimony you specifically emphasize how NED is one of the most cost effective long-term investments, the United States can make in global stability and specifically highlighted the countries that that you you fund these programs like China, like Cuba, Venezuela, Iran. Uh, we mentioned Russia as well, as I see it, these countries for decades have seen little to no progress in in democratic reform and have only recently actually have been seeing regime change when our military has gotten involved uh with pressure from the current administration. Furthermore, we have only seen democratic progress in or around uh China decrease actually, with uh Hong Kong being a prime example for that. So, uh I'm not seeing a trend specifically in these countries of progress. Can you share with us how you measure progress and what metrics you use?

Thank you very much for the question. I think it's important issue to consider. Um, the way we think about impact depends on how we define success. And so we'll do this at the level of an actual grant to make sure that an investment, a particular investment is producing results. at a country level or portfolio level, as well as thinking about it more broadly. And so let me just take a minute to explain that. So at the grant level, um, we will look and see what the uh, we uh, the benchmarks of what was set out to be achieved with that grant and how it delivered results. So in very specific cases, we can see that a hundred and fifteen thousand dollars has led to an effort that revealed a CCP police station in Manhattan has documented that, led to actions. We can see that partners in a place like China. have actually helped build an effort to repeal a type of prolonged uh, pretrial detention that had a palpable impact that was used and weaponized against a political activist in the country. We'll also look at it at a portfolio level. And so you can think over time, you're right, in China today, if you're a Uighur, uh, you're in a very difficult situation. And yet when the endowment gave its first grants, very modest grants to the Uighur community, they were either unknown globally, or believed to be China's Muslim terrorists. In part with modest endowment support over years, we've helped give the Uighur community its voice, by being able to document what's happening in them in the country, putting pressure on the regime to uh uh to address that behavior, and giving them a sense of human dignity in pursuing that. Um.

But what would so I'm sorry to interrupt, we're running out of time.

Sure.

So what what results have we seen in in examples like that one? I get the process, but But what have we seen and then on top of that you mentioned the the grantees and um what why is the grantee list still private? Uh eh you know it's always, is it always been that way or how often do you find grantees uh are not using tax dollars to their best of the effectiveness that they could be using it? So so now that you mentioned that and I got a minute twenty left so if you can take that time to answer you know what the exact progress that we've seen I get the process but also why is the grantee list private?

Sure. So in the Uyghur case, for example, it did lead to extensive uh genocide designations about what was happening in Uyghur, really raising the cost for uh the PRC, the CCP's behavior. We've seen in other areas of support where former uh military dictatorships with support of our core institutes, have become strong democratic allies of the United States, being able to contribute much more to US national security.

Like which one?

Uh, if you think historically about what happened from Chile. the Philippines, across Central and Eastern Europe. This was support that the endowment also helped provide in these transitions to consolidate their democracies. More recently in a country like Moldova and Bolivia, which have come through very contested elections, where we saw Bolivia slipping into authoritarianism, or Moldova subject potentially to Russian influence and domination. The work of the endowment has helped local partners be able to defend their own democracy through uh strengthening their democratic and through electoral processes. I think your point on the privacy, uh, on the public disclosure of partners is very important. Uh, we publish our grants publicly twice a year. We do provide, uh, the requests we provide with the administration, often in briefings on Hill Hill, uh, on Congress, the specific names and organizations that we will work with. Our board is, uh, privy to all of that. But we twice a year publish a grant listings, uh, of all of our grants, the activities that they undertake. without the personal identifying information. What we adapted was a few years ago, frankly it was in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, where we used to try to say these are closed, these are dangerous environments, these are more open environments. What happened is, formerly open environments, whether Tunisia or Ukraine, became quite dangerous for those names of the organizations that were out there. So publicly we don't disclose their information, we disclose the grant, the amount, where it goes, what the activities are, and privately, uh, we maintain full

Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Wilson, um, we're all familiar with Secretary Mattis' quote that if you don't fully fund the State Department, uh, you better buy me more ammunition. Your thoughts on investing in civil society, the rule of law, and democratic accountability, and how that reduces the likelihood of state collapse, migration, extremism, or conflict, that could ultimately require US military intervention. And the professor in me says, " Please include in your answer, uh, the role of cuts to USAID, um, and the US role in the world, and the threats of conflict."

Thank you for your question. Uh, this is why we fundamentally see the work that we do to support democracy and freedom as fundamental to America's national security interest. Um, the issues that bedevil, uh, as members of Congress, this committee, issues that stem from conflict, from refugee flows, illegal migration, uh from illegal uh drug trafficking, human trafficking. These are real issues that are threats to our society. The investments that the endowment ma makes complement other tools of America's foreign policy to help ensure that societies have the ability to resolve these issues themselves that we support those that take the initiative to solve problems in their own societies and when they succeed, it becomes very good for us. It helps resolve conflicts peacefully. It gives people a stake in their local communities, so that they don't feel that they have a a reason to have to leave because of persecution, or lack of opportunity. And so in many respects, the the investments that the endowment make at the uh support for democratic institutions, for inclusive governments, responsive to their peoples, is really a means to help ensure that those challenges and threats don't face the American people. I think this is an important uh, an important contribution to, to American national security and economic security.

Again, just to get full credit for your question, answer, um, USAID, how that is specifically plays, played a role, and what, if anything, are you hearing from our NGOs, allies, and others, uh, of how this has impacted, uh, the US status in the world? and uh local security issues.

Look, a fundamental difference is uh USAID had a broad development uh set of responsibilities and priorities that it had to address. The endowment has a narrow focus on freedom and democracy. In some cases that overlapped, we could see in the role.

They have to be interconnected though.

We could see in the role of elections in other areas there was an important role that that AID played at that moment. But we also saw the foundational effort that in the absence of having accountability, uh, addressing corruption, uh, uh, having responsive government, that many investments that you can make, uh, uh, across other other humanitarian and and development aspects, um, could be put at risk without the foundational issues of rule of law, of accountability. And so really there's a synergy there between ensuring that we are helping provide that fundamental uh democratic accountability. If you think about our work across Latin America or Ukraine, It has helped Ukrainians or Latin Americans ensure that assistance or ensure that public expenditures are not wasted or stolen, but are used for those in intentional purposes. And I think that has been sort of the the connections that's been quite important. Where we've noticed the biggest impact for us, where we've had to focus, uh, is funding, uh, around elections. Um, the endowment has emerged as a significant supporter of elections globally. We weren't in that position, uh, previously. As well as in support for independent media.

Very good. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Edwards, the uh Vice Chairman of the subcommittee, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, Mr. Wilson. Thanks for being with us this morning. Are you familiar with a Heritage Foundation report titled " The Undemocratic National Endowment for Democracy Needs Oversight and Reform"?

Yes, sir, I am.

couple of questions uh stemming from that report. Uh, it recommends folding NNED funding into the State Department, arguing that the endowment duplicates existing democracy assistance functions. Can you explain to this panel how NNED's private grant making grant making model differs operationally and legally from the state programming, particularly in politically sensitive environments where the United States government branding could be counter-productive and whether consolidation would reduce flexibility or effectiveness.

Thank you for that question. Um. Part of the the mandate that we follow, created by Congress, was to do this work of support for democracy and freedom through private means of private support for private actors. around the world in a way that was consistent with and complemented US foreign policy, but was supplemental and complementary. And so in many respects I would argue that we very much do not duplicate, we don't uh uh we don't undertake foreign policy, uh we consult with state, we consult with the Hill on these programs, uh but we remain focused on our congressional mission, which is to support fundamental freedoms and democratic rights. And so if you think about uh uh the way we operate, It's really built not on big projects or not for complicated foreign policy goals that we may need to be tracking which involve a military agreement, a trade agreement. The endowment has a laser focus on the congressional support for fundamental freedoms. Um, and what this allows us to do is to support American interests over the long term in a way that supplements and complements other tools that the United States has in its foreign policy tool kit. You can think about this in a couple of ways that um, uh, that um, how it complements sanctions policy, security assistance, diplomacy, by what we do on strengthening transparency, democratic institutions. And we've seen at times real complimentary uh work. In Ukraine, our work has helped ensure that American support uh on the defense side has not gone to corrupt uh has exposed corruption and helped protect American investment. Uh, we've seen uh, we've seen this in places Historically, even where uh the fact of Ned's private support, for example in a place like Cuba, allowed us to maintain our work in supporting Cuban dissidents, even when a previous administration was engaged in talks with the regime and Havana about restoring diplomatic relations, requesting that Ned, IRI and DI, that our programs cease in Cuba. We were able to continue those, I think at an important time, reflecting how it can complement American foreign policy, continue to advance our interests, and doing that in full consultation with Congress and the administration.