Member Day

Committee will come to order. Good morning, I want to welcome everyone to the subcommittee's fiscal year 2027 Member Day hearing. Member requests are the core of the appropriations process. Under the leadership of full committee Chairman Tom Cole and with the hard work of members of the Appropriations Committee and our colleagues in the House, in fiscal year 2026, we started, frankly, finally to return to regular order. We enacted 11 of the 12 full-year appropriation bills, including our National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs bill. Moreover, I am extremely proud that our bill was actually a 16 percent reduction in spending from the previous year, the largest spending reduction of any of the appropriation bills. And again, it as, as you know, all the appropriation bills, they have to be negotiated in a bipartisan way, and this one was done so as well. It got strong support from both Republicans and Democrats. Our bill took a serious look and serious action to ensure accountability and efficiency for taxpayer dollars while still funding our national security priorities. So even with those reductions, the NS-RP bill maintains a robust funding for our allies, allies like Israel, like Jordan, like Egypt, Taiwan, and countered adversaries like communist, the Communist People's Republic of China, Iran, Cuba, and the drug cartels, including those designated as foreign terrorist organizations. And today, with our fiscal year 27 process underway, well underway, we will hear testimony from members, members of the House, on their priorities reflecting the interests of the American people that will shape our fiscal year 27 bill. I want to thank my colleagues for testifying today, for taking time, the one thing none of us have enough of, right, is time, taking your time to present your views and priorities for the fiscal year 27 National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs appropriations bills. With your input, this bill will continue to work and will continue to work as we did in fiscal year 2026 to make our nation, frankly, safer, stronger, and more prosperous while using our constituents' taxpayer dollars more efficiently and effectively than ever. I want to thank, I don't think I could have a better person to work with than the distinguished ranking member. She says that's true. And so while we have differences, we trust each other. She is, she's a straight shooter. She's honorable and honest. It's a privilege to work with the ranking member. Now let me, let me yield to our distinguished ranking member, the gentlewoman from Florida, Madam Lois Frankel.

Thank you. I'm going to return the compliments and just welcome the members and just to tell you that this is a really, we do have our differences here and there, but we really try to be bipartisan on this committee and I thank the chairman for his generosity in that regard. Okay. So I'm going to just give a little different point of view, which you expect. Of course. So I'm going to first I want to do is just recap a little bit last year. 2025 was a year of crises, U.S. development and humanitarian infrastructure staff and for the communities around the world reeling from conflicts, disaster, poverty, and instability. And the Trump administration shuttered and dramatically downsized critical departments and agencies and froze urgently needed assistance. Most notably, the administration haphazardly dismantled USAID, terminating hundreds of programs and firing thousands of dedicated staff without consulting Congress. All the weather, all that, new mothers around the world lost life-saving healthcare, refugees were shut out of critical shelter services, food commodities were wasted on ships and in warehouses around the world, and we even had a shipment of birth control, I don't even know what happened to it, but that was the end of that. Meanwhile, DOGE threatened several more agencies under the subcommittee's jurisdiction and we still have several agencies tied up in court rather than focused on their missions. The aftershocks of cuts to foreign assistance will continue for years to come, but in an effort to stop the bleeding, Congress reasserted our power of the purse, came to a bipartisan compromise in fiscal year 2026 appropriations, and I am very again grateful to be a partner with Mario Diaz-Balart. In the end, our funding bill was far from perfect, but it relayed a message loud and clear. We cannot walk away from our international commitments and we must continue robust funding for humanitarian and development assistance to ensure stability, security, and prosperity. Because we know that foreign assistance is not simply a handout, it's a strategy. With less than 1 percent of our federal budget, it greatly advances our own security and prosperity. And I think this is something that's shared by both sides of the aisle. And now as the Trump administration rebuilds humanitarian infrastructure, shores up our commitments to multilateral institutions like the UN, and pursues new deals and agreements with international partners, Congress must continue to exercise oversight of these decisions because, look, we all want to make sure our tax dollars are spent in the most effective way possible and we want to make sure our funding at home and abroad benefits and represents the interests of the American people. And yes, really, when the world's healthier, we're healthier. When the world's more prosperous, we've got more trading partners. And when the communities around the world are more secure, we, that means less military intervention on our part. And so it's very important and I welcome to hear from you all today. Deciding how best to use resources requires that bipartisan approach. I'm glad we do have members from both sides of the aisle here today and I look forward to hearing from all you and I yield back.

Let me thank the distinguished ranking member. Without objection, the full written statements of all members will be included in the record. In order to keep our schedule, I would ask each member to limit your oral testimony to five minutes. Let me start by recognizing Ms. Hageman for her testimony and also for working very closely with me on FY 26. So you're recognized, ma'am.

Thank you, Chairman Diaz-Balart, Ranking Member Frankel, and members of this subcommittee. I am grateful for the opportunity to testify before you today for the subcommittee's Member Day hearing regarding the issue of the Chinese Communist Party's growing influence in the United Nations specialized agencies. Maybe put it a little bit closer if you can. Okay. How's, is this a little bit better? Yeah. Wonderful. The Chinese Communist Party or CCP is waging a multilateral influence operation with the intent to undermine the U.S. as a world power while reorienting the global system in its favor. In order to achieve these ends, the CCP is seeking to gain legitimacy inside the UN through its specialized agencies. The CCP is targeting elections for leadership positions within these specialized agencies and then seeking to shift the agencies' policies in the CCP's favor. Simultaneously, the party is working to stack the rank and file employees of the specialized agencies with Chinese nationals and party-affiliated individuals. A CCP bureaucrat, Qu Dongyu, leads the Food and Agriculture Organization and over the last 15 years, China has led the World Health Organization, UN Industrial Development Organization, International Civil Aviation Organization, and International Telecommunications Union. In 2020, China nearly succeeded in its bid to lead the World Intellectual Property Organization. I do not ring alarm bells without just cause. The FAO under the leadership of CCP bureaucrat Qu Dongyu has been marked by allegations and criticism, including from UN officials, for mismanagement, failing to properly respond to global food shortages, and promoting an agenda that aligns with the CCP's global development initiative. For example, when Russia's invasion of Ukraine crippled Ukrainian food and agricultural exports, the FAO actually refused to act despite the authority to do so until U.S. and EU officials forced an emergency meeting of the FAO Council. This trend is not unique to the FAO. For example, in 2019, another CCP bureaucrat, Secretary General Fang Liu of the ICAO, advanced policies dictated by Beijing, including new air routes for Chinese flights that encroached on Taiwanese airspace, instituted in violation of ICAO procedures. Liu also concealed cybersecurity breaches linked to China that threatened the security of ICAO, its member states, and the aviation industry. The FAO, ICAO, WIPO, and many of the other specialized agencies coordinate in major sectors crucial for development and modern life. Yet I am concerned that the State Department is not taking these threats seriously and only engaging with countering China's ascension to these leadership positions when elections get down to the wire or if there is media scrutiny. Despite being the largest funder of the UN, U.S. employment numbers within the UN consistently fall below target levels per the GAO. If we are going to foot the bill at international organizations, we should not do so by promoting the CCP. We can increase U.S. leadership and I want to commend this subcommittee for providing $5 million for the placement of U.S. citizens in the Junior Professional Officer program and not less than $750,000 to enhance the competitiveness of U.S. citizens for leadership positions within the UN system in fiscal year 26. But we must also ensure that U.S. taxpayer funds are not being used to advance the CCP's malign influence through the UN specialized agencies. Therefore, I respectfully urge this subcommittee use the fiscal year 27 appropriations bill to take two actions. First, direct the State Department to routinely and strategically prepare for UN elections and second, to prohibit funding to UN specialized agencies that are chaired or otherwise under the leadership of a CCP-affiliated individual. I believe that the United States can and should play a larger role in the leadership of these specialized agencies based on our funding levels. But until that happens, we should not continue to bankroll the CCP's agenda. Doing so constitutes a flagrant waste of taxpayer money. Once again, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to testify and I look forward to working with each of you as we begin the ever-important process of drafting our appropriations bills for fiscal year 27.

Well look, let me, let me first start by thanking you for your testimony, but also for your leadership on this issue. You and I have had the opportunity to talk about some of these issues sometimes on the floor and other, and so your focus on this is so crucial. Last week, I chaired again with the, with the distinguished ranking member a field hearing at the United Nations in New York with Ambassador Waltz. He testified, you know, what the president has said, that the U.S., that the UN has potential, particularly when it overlaps with our interests. But America has to show up in some of those areas. We have to have candidates. We have to have good and they have to be aggressive, good, solid, solid candidates that put America first. Also, we're incredibly fortunate to have on this subcommittee Mr. John Moolenaar, who you know is the chairs the Select Committee on the, on the Communist Party of China. And that committee has done extensive work on really the damaging role, bless you, the damaging role of that, that the CCP has played at the UN and how we should respond. As a matter of fact, the Select Committee's released their investigative report on the same day of our hearing in New York. So let me just assure the gentlelady that this subcommittee and the members, we're going to stay focused on accountability, on reform, and making sure that American leadership, not the Communist Party of China, shapes these institutions. I would ask you to please stay engaged with us as you have. I am exceedingly grateful. Your leadership and your voice has been hugely important, and just know that we share the concern and your interest in making sure that the U.S., that our priorities are first and foremost. I don't know if the ranking member has any.

I do. You know, very interesting. I was told to get this a little closer. I feel like I'm going to swallow it in a minute. Okay. First, I want to tell you, first of all, the trip to the UN was really terrific, wasn't it?

Yes, it was.

And I actually got to ask Ambassador Waltz, I said, "What programs would you like to see more money for, more funding, and so forth?" And he specifically talked about one of the programs that you had in your testimony today because he said that the, basically, the Chinese were infiltrating with these like junior members everywhere. And I guess that's the program that you talk about, which is the Junior Professional Officer Program. Just to let you know that he highlighted that when I spoke to him.

I've had the opportunity to visit with Ambassador Waltz, and I raised these issues with him as well.

Well, I guess you got a good message to him.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony, and we'll stay in touch as we put the bill together. Thank you. Now, Mr. Jackson, if you're ready, sir. Privileged to now recognize Mr. Jackson for his testimony. As you know, you have five minutes, and it's a pleasure to be able to recognize you today. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chairman Diaz-Balart. Thank you, Ranking Member Frankel, and members of the subcommittee. I come before you not only as a legislator, but as a witness to a moment in our nation's history that will be judged not by the strength of our rhetoric, but by the depth of our moral courage. There are times in the life of a nation when the question is not what we can afford, but who we are willing to become. This bill as it stands asks us to become smaller than we have been. It asks us to forget that American leadership has never been defined solely by the reach of its military, but by the breadth of its humanity. It asks us to turn away from the hungry child, from the sick mother, from the fragile democracy struggling to stand, and in doing so, to turn away from ourselves. I must say it plainly: this is a bad bill. It is bad not only because of what it cuts, but because of what it reveals. It reveals a retreat from responsibility, a shrinking of vision, a quiet but devastating abandonment of those who have long looked to this nation not as a savior, but as a partner in the long, difficult work of survival and dignity. We are told that these cuts are necessary, and I would ask: necessary for whom? Necessary for what? Because I can assure you there is nothing necessary about denying medicine to those living with HIV and AIDS. There is nothing inevitable about cutting programs that have saved millions of lives. There is nothing justified in weakening initiatives like PEPFAR and the Global Fund, which have stood as rare and shining examples of what this country can achieve when it chooses compassion over indifference. When we cut these programs, we do not simply balance a ledger; we are breaking a promise. And in breaking that promise, we do something far more dangerous than any foreign adversary could hope to do. We isolate ourselves. At a time when the challenges we face—pandemics, conflict, climate instability—demand partnerships, we are choosing withdrawal. At a time when our allies look to us for steadiness, we are offering uncertainty and being unstable. At a time when the world needs leadership rooted in shared humanity, we are offering something colder, something much smaller. This is not strength, I would say; this is surrender of principle, of purpose, and of our identity. And let us be honest about the consequences, because when we retreat from our obligations, when we decide that the suffering of others is no longer our concern, the results are not abstract. They are real; they are devastating. We have burned food while people have starved. We have denied medicine while people have suffered. We have turned systems of care into symbols of neglect. And we must ask ourselves: what does it mean for a nation so wealthy, so powerful, to choose such a path? Our moral traditions, yes, even those of us who claim to hold dear, teach us something very different. They teach us that what we do for the least of these, we do to each other. They remind us that our worth is measured not in dominance, but in mercy; not in how we protect our borders, but how we protect human life. If we abandon that teaching, then no budget can save us, no defense can shield us, because we have already lost something far more valuable and essential. I stand here today to say to you that our foreign policy must remain grounded in morality, not as an afterthought, not as a luxury, but as our very foundation. We must fully fund the programs that fight diseases, that reduce poverty, that strengthen democratic institutions, and that prevent conflict before it begins. We must invest in diplomacy not because it is easy, but because it is necessary. We must choose compassion not because it is sentimental, but also because it is strategic. Because let me be clear: when we save lives abroad, we strengthen our security at home. When we build stability elsewhere, we protect our own future. When we lead with humanity, we reaffirm our very ideals that give this nation its meaning. This is not charity; this is wisdom. This is not weakness; this is the power of the highest order. So I urge this subcommittee, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I urge my colleagues to reject the false choice between strength and compassion, and to remember that the United States has always been at its best when it refused the choice entirely. We can be a nation that leads with principle. We can be a nation that honors its commitments. We can be a nation that understands that its greatness lies not in how much it can take from the world, but in how much it is willing to give. But we must decide, and the world is watching. Thank you. I yield back.

Yeah. Let me again thank you for your time and for your testimony. Just know that we do listen to it and we take it very seriously. You mentioned some, I just want to very briefly touch on, for example, on the AIDS issue. We spend a lot of time in this committee, we have hearings. We did so on PEPFAR specifically. We had a great hearing on PEPFAR, and while, and just so you know, we produced in that bill, we passed a bill that ensures robust PEPFAR funding. But we also want to make sure that we can eventually transition to get those countries to step up. And so, I just know that we listen, and I greatly appreciate your time and your testimony, and as always, please stay in touch with us as we're putting these bills together. Madam Ranking Member.

Thank you. Well, listen, I'm giving you five stars, applause for your testimony today. Listen, I think we probably both agree with what you said. Just keep in mind we don't decide our top line. We do the best we can. We got a severe cut, which was very disappointing, and did the best we could. You know, right now we're looking to see even if the administration implements what we've done with our funding. And just PEPFAR as an example, we're still hearing that there are problems with the implementation of PEPFAR. I would have liked to see more preventative education, which I think was, has been cut. But anyway, you were very articulate. I like exactly what you said, and I hope that the powers that be are listening.

Well, thank you so much, Chairman.

Thank you for, no, thank you for your time. Thanks for being here. Thank you. Thank you so much. The gentlewoman from the state of New Mexico. As you settle in, let me just also thank you for spending this time with us today. We do listen, and it is important when we put the bill together to have as much input as possible. So again, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Madam Ranking Member, and distinguished members of this committee. I thank you for the opportunity to present on my priorities for global security and international development, and it is always a joy to be in front of the Appropriations Committee, especially as an alum of OMB, and I actually worked with one of your staff here during my time at the Office of Management and Budget. But it goes without saying that we are at a profound moment of global instability. An unauthorized war in Iran is costing more than a billion dollars a day, placing a staggering burden on our country, on our national budget, on American lives, and fueling a global humanitarian crisis. In just its first week, this war cost $11 billion. Thirteen American service members have been killed, more than 200 injured, and thousands of civilians across the Middle East have lost their lives, including over 175 children and teachers in Iran. This is exactly why the programs under this subcommittee's jurisdiction were created: to prevent war, to promote peace, and to invest in global security as a foundation for diplomacy. And at a time when families in America are struggling to afford healthcare, housing, food, education, and the fundamental necessities that it is necessary for a dignified life, it is hard to understand why this administration has cut programs that promote global peace while pursuing a war that is costing lives and destabilizing global markets, food systems, and supply chains. And so I am here today to call for an end to this war, a restoration of the diplomatic and development programs funded under this bill, and to call for a restoration of American leadership to advance peace and stability around the world. As the current ranking member of the DOE subcommittee, over the last year I have had a front-row seat to see the devastating impacts cuts to these programs have had on global security. Cuts to USAID have had dire consequences globally, reducing humanitarian aid, disruptions to food and medical assistance, increasing vulnerability to famine and disease, weakening fragile democracies, and literally contributing to the deaths of thousands of children across the planet that were completely preventable. These cuts are a moral failure of our government. They are also a failure of our national security. The United States has retreated from its global leadership, and if we are serious about our role as a global leader, we must restore these programs. We must reverse course. We must invest in development programs. It is not only necessary for the peace and security of the planet, but every single dollar helps to prevent conflict, to save lives, and to strengthen our stability at home and abroad. That is why I am here today to advocate for the full restoration and funding of all USAID programs, reinvestment in international peacebuilding and conflict resolution programs, protection of critical humanitarian agencies including UNRWA, restoration of aid to regions where it has been cut, especially in places like Gaza where civilians are facing immense suffering and starvation, and also the restoration of U.S. leadership in UN peacekeeping missions, democracy-building initiatives, women's empowerment programs, and protections for the LGBTQ+ community across the world, because these efforts are essential to building stable, inclusive societies. Closer to home, here in the Western Hemisphere, we must also address urgent concerns within the jurisdiction of this committee. Congress must conduct robust, bipartisan oversight over this administration's approach to diplomacy, or lack thereof, and use of military force, especially in our hemisphere. That includes ensuring accountability for unauthorized military actions and safeguarding Congress's roles in matters of war, foreign policy, and appropriations. In Venezuela, serious concerns remain regarding the U.S. military actions in January and ongoing operations in the Caribbean and Pacific, including the need for a full investigation into the White House and State Department's handling of Venezuelan oil and financial transactions involving foreign banks. In Cuba, the humanitarian situation continues to deteriorate daily. Under the current administration's blockade and long-standing U.S. policies, there are widespread blackouts, starvation, and suffering. Across the board, Congress must exercise its constitutional authority and conduct oversight over the State Department and USAID, particularly regarding the dismantling of programs that have led us to the brink and this moment. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that the United States stands at a profound crossroads. We can continue down a path of conflict, weakened alliances, and diminished global leadership, or we can choose a path grounded in diplomacy, development, and democratic values. Investing in foreign aid and international cooperation is not just the right thing to do, it is essential to American security. So if we are serious about the future of this country and our national security, we must recognize that bombs do not make us safe, partnerships do, stability does, diplomacy does, and this budget, we must recommit to an approach that reflects our highest ideals as a nation and that makes us and the rest of the world more secure. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Thank you to the congresswoman for her testimony. The ranking member, do you have...

Yeah. Well, first of all, thank you so much. Listen, I just want to thank you for taking the time to give so much thought to so many different subjects. I can't unpack them all, but I do want to ask you about your role on oversight. Was, would the cuts to the our subject matter here, were they ever explained?

Yes, Ranking Member, Mr. Chairman. During the early days of the Oversight Subcommittee, there was explicitly an entire hearing in front of our subcommittee about USAID and what ultimately ended up in the decisions package that passed last year gutting USAID programs. As was explained to us, not by administration officials, in fact, they did not bring a single administration official in front of our subcommittee, but by outside groups, is that they believe that these cuts were removing "ideologically motivated" programs. But they certainly could not explain why they were gutting USAID overall, and I think if you look at the statements even of the president's own chief of staff and her dismay at the dismantling of USAID and how poorly it was handled, that this administration did not have a plan when they began to gut these programs.

Well, I think, you know, I am concerned that there's a lot of irreparable harm, especially with the cutting of the USAID programs. I mean, I think this committee, we're trying to do our best really in the health, with health, right, humanitarian assistance, but we lost lots and lots, thousands of very good people and thousands of very good programs. Anyway, thank you, I encourage, are you on a, are you on the Foreign Affairs Committee?

I am not.

What committees are you on?

I'm on the Oversight Committee and Natural Resources. And I do have a master's degree in development sociology, so...

In, in what?

Development sociology.

Oh, you do. Okay. No, because it was, I mean, I'm not going to unpack everything you said, but thank you, it was quite extensive and thoughtful.

And thank you for your time. Thank you so much. We are obviously again in the in the midst of putting together FY 27. Thank you for your time and we'll obviously your testimony will be in the record as well. Thank you. So to the distinguished ranking member, this concludes our hearings today, our member participation. I remind everybody that the United States by far is the largest contributor to humanitarian aid in the world. We will continue to do so. I look forward to continuing to work with the distinguished ranking member and the members of the committee. I think you would agree that we have very good members of this subcommittee, right? So again, with that, unless you have any further, this committee, the Committee on National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs stands adjourned. Thank you very much.