Ending Supply Chain Dependency: Aligning Tools, Capital, and Partnerships

i know you all know about that but like how do you guys get to work at a restaurant and how do you guys get to work in a restaurant as well and how do you guys get to work at a restaurant as well yeah yeah yeah we don't have to worry about time it's a lot of fun we can go we we we were trying to get people to like, do we wanna do it, yeah, like, yeah, we wanna do it anyway. But, it's like, the day every, you know like when you're like when you're like when you're like when you're like oh when you're like when you're like when you're like when you were like like when you were oh like when you were like when you were like when you were like when you were like when you were like when you were like when you were like when you where like when you were like when you were like when you were like when you was like when you were like when you were like when you were like when you were like when your name was like and then you were like i think you were like you were like very true you were like you were like you were like i didn't know who you were like i remember like you were like i don't know i like i don't know what that was like but i was like you didn't you thought it was like it was all just like

Committee on foreign affairs will come to order, I would ask everybody to rise. Join me in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance. To the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Welcome everybody. The purpose of today's hearing is to examine how US economic statecraft can secure critical supply chains, strengthen America's industrial base, and support leadership in strategically important sectors, such as critical minerals, energy, advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence, and other emerging technologies. And I would now recognize myself for a brief opening statement. I wanna thank you, Mister Black, Mister Hardy, and Mister Petrie for being here today. This Congress, our committee has spent a great deal of time focused on a simple but urgent challenge. The United States cannot remain dependent on China on any front. It makes no sense at all. or any other adversary for that matter. For the materials, technologies, energy, and infrastructure that power our economy, keep our military ready, keep our supply chains going, it makes zero sense to have any one dependency. We have worked to reduce those dependencies, strengthen critical supply chains, and ensure that economic tools of the United States government are fit for purpose, in an era of strategic competition. That is what makes today's hearing so important, your work on the forefront of that. The US International Development Finance Corporation, the US Trade Development Agency, and the Millennium Challenge Corporation are among our most important tools of economic statecraft. Each has a distinct role. USTDA helps shape projects early on. DFC mobilizes capital and moves investments forward and MCC helps build the infrastructure, institutions. and enabling conditions that allow those investments to succeed. Together, these agencies are on the cutting edge of securing the supply chains that will define American strength in the decades ahead. Nowhere are the stakes more clear than in artificial intelligence and critical minerals. AI leadership depends on more than software. It depends on chips, minerals, reliable energy, data centers, secure telecommunications, and trusted technology. Critical minerals underpin our weapons systems, advanced manufacturing, energy infrastructure, and nearly every emerging technology that matters. China understands this well. The Chinese Communist Party has spent decades building control over mines, processing capacity, ports, logistic networks, technology platforms. Those dependencies were not created by accident. They were built to give Beijing leverage over the United States of America, over our allies, and over literally anybody. President Trump's agenda recognizes that economic security is national security. He is advancing energy dominance, secure critical mineral supplies, stronger American industry, and US leadership in technologies of the future. This committee is helping carry out that agenda. We passed the bipartisan dominance act unanimously through the House Foreign Affairs Committee taking bold action to align American diplomacy, financing, and partnerships around secure energy and critical mineral supply. The opportunity before us is to make these tools work better together, faster, more efficiently, and with clear results for the American people, the American taxpayers. American strength. China brings every tool to the fight. The United States of America will do the same and we will do it better. We will do this to win. As we all know, as Americans, we don't do anything to lose. And that, again, I welcome you all, and I look forward to hearing from each and every one of you in just a moment. Our ranking member is not quite here yet, uh but when he arrives we will give him the opportunity to give a statement, and we will be asking questions as well, as I'm sure you're all well aware. I would also remind everybody that other members of the committee, uh, may have opening statements that may be submitted for the record. We do have a distinguished panel of witnesses before us today on this important topic. Mister Ben Black, Chief Executive Officer of the US International Development Finance Corporation. Mister Thomas Hardy, Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer of US Trade and Development Agency. And Mister Dan Petrie, the Acting Chief of Staff of the Millennium Challenge Corporation. This committee recognizes the importance of the issues before us, and is grateful to have you here to speak with us today. Your full statements will be made a part of the record, and I will ask each of you to keep your spoken remarks to roughly five minutes to allow time for members' questions. And in that, Mister Black, you are recognized for any opening statement that you wish to give.

Thank you, Chairman Mast, Ranking Member Meeks, and members of the committee for this opportunity to discuss DFC's efforts to end supply chain dependency. I'm proud to be here today to represent the hundreds of committed professionals at DFC who work every day to advance our mission. I'd also like to thank you all for the bipartisan support of DFC's December reauthorization. Under President Trump's leadership, DFC is equipped to be a leading force for restoring US economic security. We now have two hundred and five billion dollars of investment capacity and a greater ability to deploy debt, equity, and insurance across the capital stack. DFC can invest in technology, energy, and critical minerals nearly anywhere in the world and address vulnerable supply chains wherever they exist. Since reauthorization, DFC has rebuilt our pipeline to more than three hundred and forty deal opportunities totaling seventy-eight billion dollars across agriculture, health care, financial services, energy, technology, and critical minerals. We are focused on regions vital to US economic security, like the Western Hemisphere, East Asia and the Pacific, Central Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, amongst others. As CEO of the DFC, I have made it my mission to transform DFC into a best-in-class financial institution. We have begun a rigorous process to value our entire portfolio dating back to the OPIC days and intend to dynamically share investment performance for all administrations both previous and future. I'm also pleased to report we have reduced investment timelines by an average of ten weeks. More importantly, I have sought to align DFC's investment strategy with the enduring principles of American economic statecraft. American economic statecraft, the use of our nation's economic and financial power to guarantee our strategic interests has guided America through its greatest moments. Alexander Hamilton understood that strong financial institutions and the ability to produce essential goods are vital to securing America's global position. That tradition gave rise to the Panama Canal and later inspired the Marshall Plan, which rebuilt war-torn Europe, anchored European markets to the American system, and delivered decades of stability and growth. Today, I wanna highlight how the DFC is building on that tradition of success. First, DFC will directly challenge our adversaries in the most strategically contested sectors, by financing transactions that diplomacy and private markets alone cannot deliver. Last month we announced a monumental agreement for one of Kazakhstan's largest telecom networks to expand access to US-aligned trusted service providers. We are committed to helping others adopt this model, especially in the Western hemisphere, where China's digital Silk Road cannot entrench its influence. Second, DFC will prioritize large capital-intensive projects. Our goal is to build holistic economic ecosystems, anchored to US capital markets, and structured to create returns for American taxpayers, and meaningful economic development for our allies. DFC's five hundred fifty-three million dollar loan to restore the Libido-Atlantic railway, exemplifies the one point five billion DFC has committed across Africa since my confirmation. This vital transportation corridor connects the mineral-rich Democratic Republic of Congo, through Zambia to the Port of Libido in Angola. DFC financing will help establish a Western-aligned source of critical minerals, and also strengthen local trade by reducing the cost of shipping by as much as thirty percent. Throughout human civilization, industrialization has been the single greatest force for lifting people out of poverty. Industrial disp- uh, industrialization depends on reliable energy, a sector vital to America's interests as the world's leading producer and exporter of oil and natural gas. In June, DFC's board approved one point five billion for energy infrastructure across South and Southeast Asia, ensuring US LNG and American equipment help power the energy needs of a strategic region. Finally, we are mobilizing private capital through sophisticated financial structures that reduce risk for investors and create enduring American influence in critical That approach underpins our six hundred million dollar contribution to the one point eight billion critical minerals consortium with Orion resource partners. DFC's board recently approved an additional nine hundred million of financing to support Orion CMC's rapidly expanding pipeline of mining and mineral as opportunities to help address China's strategic chokeholds. DFC's US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, or EUROPH, is another example. This a hundred fifty million joint fund is mobilizing private investment in Ukraine's recovery, and can provide a blueprint for DFC investment in other regions vital to America's long-term interests. Our partners wanna work with us because our model is better. America's most transformative economic partnerships were built through the power of private investment, the discipline of capital markets, and the laser focus of finance. The Trump administration's restoration of American economic statecraft will guarantee our country's success. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.

Thank you, Mr. Black. I now recognize Mr. Hardy for any opening statement.

Thank you, Chairman Mask, Ranking Member Meeks, and distinguished members of this committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear appear before you today. I appreciate the chance to discuss how US Trade and Development Agency works tirelessly to help end America's supply chain dependency, supply chain dependency, on malign, from malign actors. USTDA serves as the US government's catalyst for critical infrastructure development in emerging markets. By funding project preparation, including feasibility studies, technical assistance, and pilot projects, we transform infrastructure opportunities into investment-ready projects that attract financing, expand opportunities for US companies, and above all, advance America's strategic interest. We focus our work in the critical minerals, energy, transportation, and digital infrastructure sectors, because they are the backbone of resilient supply chains. Africa is central to this effort. Along the Libido corridor, USTDA is advancing projects that support critical minerals in Angola, Zambia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, while improving access to Angola's ports. Our activities span power generation, mineral processing, and transportation infrastructure, all helping to unlock investment, strengthen supply chains, and expand opportunities for American companies. We apply rigorous standards to our work, supporting trusted partners, while avoiding projects that fail to meet high environmental labor standards or that reinforce our strategic competitors. We are applying the same comprehensive approach in the Philippines, where our support for the Luzon Economic Corridor includes supporting the development of a hundred and thirty-two mi a mile railway to Subic Bay and the expansion of expansion of port infrastructure to accommodate larger vessels and improve ship repair operations. None of this h work happens in isolation though. USTDA prepares infrastructure projects for investments by coordinating with my colleagues here from DFC and MCC as well as XM to ensure our projects are structured to address these institutions' financing requirements from the outset. For example, we are currently working with MCC to prepare strategic digital infrastructure projects for potential financing, including mobile connectivity projects in Indonesia and national data center in Tonga. These efforts demonstrate how US tools, capital, and partnerships come together to offer trusted alternatives to strategic competitors. Two recent Ex- successes demonstrate how USTDA's partnership-based model delivers results. In Palau, the United States partnered with its quad allies to design the replacement of a Chinese-built mobile network with secure nationwide f- with a secure nationwide four G five G system, built with trusted US technologies. USTDA funded the project's technical preparation, laying the foundation for its implementation. In this geostrategic part of the world, this project has generated exports for American companies, while strengthening Palau's digital security and providing a model for nations across the Pacific seeking trusted telecommunications infrastructure. In Sierra Leone, USTDA funded the initial project preparation for the country's first ever natural gas-fired power project. That early work helped pave the way for four hundred and twelve million dollars financing insurance from the Development Finance Corporation, as well as complemented the work that MCC invested to modernize Sierra Leone's electricity grid. Together, these efforts again demonstrate how coordinated U. S. engagement can mobilize private capital, strengthen energy security, and deliver lasting economic ben- benefits. These examples reflect USTDA's broader role within the U. S. government. We worked closely with the Department of State, energy, and commerce, as well as my colleagues here to align America's national security, com- and commercial and foreign policy objectives. By bringing together project preparation, financing, and partnerships, we help reduce supply chain dependencies, strengthen America's industrial base, and importantly expand opportunities for American companies in emerging markets. Congress plays an indispensable role in this effort. We look forward to continuing to our partnership with this committee, to ensure the United States has the coordinated tools, capital, and part partnerships necessary to build resilient supply chains and reinforce America's leadership around the world. Thank you. I look forward to taking your questions.

Thank you, Mister Hardy. Mister Petrie.

Good morning. Chairman Mast, Ranking Member Meeks, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for holding this important hearing and thank you for your long-standing support of Millennium Challenge Corporation. MCC was founded in two thousand four with a single question in mind, and that is in a transparent and time-limited way, how do we work with well-governed partners to unlock growth, growth that is good for our partners and growth that is good for the United States. And we do this by building large infrastructure and advancing policy and institutional reforms that jumpstart key areas of an economy. In short, MCC lays the public sector foundation for private sector-led Growth. And the agency's core tenants, selectivity, accountability, greater cost sharing, increased self-reliance, are exactly what this moment calls for. This year, we're leveraging new authority from Congress to work in a wider set of countries. In recent months, our Board of Directors has selected five new partners across the Indo-Pacific and Western Hemisphere. We're excited to be back working closer to home in countries like Guatemala and Bolivia. and Ecuador. We're also leaning into certain sectors, such as securing our supply chains. The number one issue that we hear about in working with the private sector is that the surrounding operational and regulatory environment can make or break a deal. And this is what MCC does best. In Mozambique, for example, MCC is working to improve the roads in the Nicala transport corridor that's gonna reduce the time and the cost of getting goods to the port. things like graphite are being shipped to the United States and processed for batteries in Louisiana. I know USTDA and DFC are engaged here as well, as we're always seeking to leverage each other's work. All told, about one point three billion of MCC's portfolio is contributing to US critical minerals priorities. MCC's value-add isn't mining itself. Of course, we leave that to the private sector, but we build the infrastructure and regulatory environment necessary for these mining investments to be successful. And in this way, we can ensure American security and supply chains, while also generating economic growth in the countries where we work. Zambia, for example, has not been the easiest place to work for US firms in recent years, in part because the regulatory environment isn't there. As part of MCC's compact, The Zambian parliament recently passed a few laws to address uh constraints in the agricultural sector. We're seeking to replicate that approach with critical minerals. We're currently working with the Zambians to updating their mining cadastra, improve their minerals regulation commission, and pursue a policy that is gonna make data more transparent and accessible, which builds confidence for investors. The compact is also gonna upgrade hundreds of kilometers of roads, in the Libido corridor, that's supporting the work that our sister agencies are doing there. So this is a complete package. Beyond critical minerals, we're also being much more intentional and strategic about engaging with the US private sector, trying to address barriers that they face. Given MCC's focus on addressing systemic constraints to economic growth, the agency is uniquely suited uh to be helpful here. So why MCC? Why now? Uh, I had the opportunity to travel to Mongolia in May, where we just wrapped up a water security compact. This wasn't digging a few wells because it is a nice thing to do. We built a first of its kind advanced water purification plant, utilizing American manufactured tech from Florida that is set to increase the water supply in the capital Ulaanbaatar by up to eighty percent. This is a young democracy, sandwiched between Russia and China, that wants to partner with the United States. Our project is not only generating local jobs, but setting the table for private investment. Mongolia has skin in the game too. They contributed a hundred and twelve million dollars to this, as well as raised their water tariff by forty percent to make MCC and the US government's investment sustainable. And despite the unique challenges of delivering large infrastructure in an environment like Mongolia, the project was completed on time and on budget. So this is the MCC model in action. Uh, thank you for the opportunity to be here today. I look forward to your questions.

Thank you for your testimonies. Uh, Ranking Member Meeks, would you like to give a statement?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I wanna thank the witnesses for joining us today. You know, the United States International Development Finance Corporation and the Millennium Challenge Corporation as well as the US Trade and Development Agency are important development tools. But unfortunately, the Trump Administration's decimation of foreign assistance is doing long-term damage to the United States's ability to compete for critical minerals and diversify supply chains. US AID's democracy and governance programs, once fought corrupt resource management abroad, and prosper Africa, opened doors for US investment in natural resources. Gutting these programs doesn't save money, it simply seeds ground to China. Nothing has put greater focus on the need to diversify our supply chains and make them more resilient than Trump's disastrous trade war with China. When Beijing retaliated by imposing export controls on rare earths, shipments of rare earth magnets dropped by seventy-four percent to the United States, hamstringing our automakers and other industries. We're all in agreement that building resilience in in critical minerals, supply chains, and breaking China's chokehold on critical minerals is a national security imperative. But raw minerals won't fix this. China dominates processing, not just extraction, which is why the DFC must make processing a priority. Focusing on mineral extraction projects alone without resolving the rest of the pipeline will only send more profit to China. MCC and USTDA should be doing the same. So I'm concerned, as I made clear throughout the DFC reauthorization, that DFC's development mandate is being lost. More effort at DFC being spent on upper middle income countries rather than developing countries that need it most. It is contrary to DFC's mission. The DFC was not created to serve Donald Trump and or his family's credit line that advantages elites and brings no development benefit to those who need it. It is critical that we have transparency over DFC deals and oversight of US investments in critical minerals. Resource extraction is fraught work without good governance it can too easily lead to corruption and fails the very countries whose resources are being extracted. Every dollar of US assistance, whether through USTDA feasibility studies, MCC compacts, or DFC financing, must come with strong guardrails against corruption. That means ensuring that the president's family, or any cabinet official, cannot personally profit from taxpayer funded assistance dollars. That should not be because it is not a gray area. It is a clear conflict of interest, and it undermines the standards America expects the rest of the world to follow. The United States helps set high standards globally, and should not contribute to lowering them. The profiteering is especially galling given how much economic pain Americans are already absorbing as a result of this administration's disastrous foreign policies whether we are talking about tariffs or Trump's war of choice in Iran. So, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about the staffing and resources they are devoting to the very real development challenges their agencies were created to address and how their work concurrently serves US foreign policy interests and I yield back.

Ranking member yields back. We're gonna alternate uh between left and right for questions. Uh, I'm gonna begin with myself for some questions today. During my time as Chairman and previous to this, I have worked to expose wasteful spending in anti-American projects, funded under the previous administration, things that were just a waste of our dollars. Um, My ranking member has said we've gutted foreign assistance. We've gutted waste, fraud and abuse. And waste being the most important thing that, that I think could have been done to say, you're throwing away the taxpayer dollars in foreign countries, sometimes with foreign adversaries, uh, the American people have to know to what benefit does that take place. None is the answer when it's waste. Uh, I'm encouraged that under President Trump's leadership, the State Department has turned a new page and is putting America's interests number one. The agencies here today have to do the same. And I wanna hear about how you've turned that page. So, I would like to hear what specific changes has your agency made over the past year and a half to align its foreign investments. I'd begin with you, Mister Black. Tell me about some of the things that you've rooted out. And where you're doing it better compared to the stupidity of the past.

Thank you, Chairman Mast. So, as I was confirmed last October, um, we got reauthorized, uh, in December. Over the last six months, we've rebuilt the entire pipeline, uh, to be bigger deals that move the needle for development and really growth for our friends and allies. Uh, what's really important there is large industrial projects. And so we've realigned in that direction to do fewer deals that bring more growth across the table and bring supply chains that are focused on getting America access to minerals that need to be processed, as well as helping export US molecules, both LNG and oil around the world, as we are the largest producer.

Give me a country and an example.

So, one of my favorite deals that we've done uh most recently uh is uh an investment in Brazil uh for heavy rare earths called Cerro Verde. Um, the And result of that is it has already been a financial success for the American people, uh, as it was sold, but the most important thing is those heavy rare earths are a hundred percent going to the United States for processing.

So rare earths, creating a partner, successful, something that we need. I was briefed before about uh one of the other DFC projects that was done in Brazil that I believe was Bicycles. Is that accurate?

That's correct. It was a bike share project from twenty twenty three that, uh, unfortunately, uh, is a zero on returns.

So the American people didn't get their money back on it.

They did not.

So you're doing rare earths, something that we need, again, previous administration, let's do a bike share project in Brazil.

That is correct.

Very good. Uh, uh, unfor not very good, it's not good. I'm glad you're turning the page. This is an example of the the crap that we're gutting out of out of these entities. And uh I'm glad to see that Don. Why don't you give me another example? I was also briefed on uh apparently uh DFC uh decided to invest in Dunkin' Donuts. Where was that?

That was in Georgia. That would be Tbilisi, not Atlanta. Uh it was an older project that predates this administration. Uh that was also a zero.

What happened to the Dunkin' Donuts?

Uh, they were not a success in Georgia.

Uh, a lot of Americans love love Dunkin', maybe the people like Starbucks or Krispy Kreme or something like that instead, I don't know, but uh, are you doing something better in Georgia, have you replaced it with something else? Or else give me another example of somewhere else that you're working.

In the region, we are. So, the only deal that has crossed my desk and gone for approval in Central Asia, being Kazakhstan, is a very exciting deal in telecommunications. As you know, dating back to the first Trump administration, uh, it is our goal to bring Huawei and ZTE out of telecommunication networks worldwide. Uh, we are able, we were able to effectuate a rip and replace there with one of their largest telecommunications providers and put in Ericsson, one of the two international trusted providers that the US government likes to work with. And that leads to further opportunities because I will tell you this, we will not invest in AI and technology in countries that run on Huawei and ZTE pipes. We will do it only with countries that have trusted vendors in place that protect American interests.

Well done, Mister Black, ranking member meets.

Mister Black, I'm glad that the DFC was reauthorized last year and has a a a runway to engage in important projects. Uh but I have real concerns about the DFC losing its focus, as we discussed in my office and I appreciate you being there and having that dialogue and conversation. Uh but losing its focus on development and turn and turning it into a personal piggy bank. for the president. And I hope you can allow some of my concerns about that. So let me bring up, on February fourth, the DFC formally announced its interest in putting US taxpayer money into a Tungsten mining project in Kazakhstan. This is chronicled in the article titled, Trump Cut a Billion Dollar Mining Deal, His Sons Stand to Profit. And, Mister Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to enter this article into the record.

Without objection.

Mister Black, the article notes that following a September twenty a September twenty twenty five meeting between Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik and the President of Kazakhstan which President Trump joined by phone, and where this deal was discussed, a business venture partially owned by President Trump's sons brought a twenty percent stake in a company directly connected to the Kazakhstan Tunchsen project. So, Mr. Black, simple yes and no. Do you know about this project's ties to the President and Secretary of Commerce's family before submitting the DFC's letters of interest into it?

Ranking member Meeks, we have to take a step back. This project that you're discussing

I just wanted to know whether you know about, you know, this conversation before.

Remember, this project LOI,

Definitely not.

the LOI, which is in the public sector a letter of interest, not even as it's a non-binding interest, was in June twenty twenty five a conference prior to my confirmation by all careers, all career staff signed this LOI

Like I'm not accusing you of anything.

In July, twenty twenty five.

I'm just asking you to do know about this conversation and the connections, to the secretary, uh, and the president's family.

Sir,

This is

what I was trying to lay out is the DFC has a multi-pronged investment approach. It starts with careers. The LOI was in July of twenty twenty five.

I understand. I don't have to explain that to me. I only have five minutes. I understand all of that. The question is simply, did you know about the phone calls or the connections, uh, with the president's sons, uh, and the secretary, uh, uh, prior to, uh, submitting the letters of interest. Cuz you submitted the letters of interest, right?

Sir, I was confirmed in October of two thousand twenty five.

So you did not.

The letter of interest was in July of twenty twenty five.

So you did not submit the letters of interest. Is that what you're telling me?

Sir.

You, and you didn't know?

Sir, I was confirmed in October Twenty twenty five.

All it is is, if you didn't know, say you didn't know. And if you do know, say you know.

Sir, I think it does require some context here.

No, because either you did know or you don't know.

Sir, how could I have known what was going on prior to my confirmation?

OK, then you say you didn't know. And I would take that as an answer, that you didn't know. I told you, I'm not trying to accuse you of anything. If you did not know, then just simply say you did not know.

The letter of inqu

Now But now that you do know that this project will directly benefit the presidents and secretaries, Lutnik's sons. I'm asking you, will you commit to not putting any US taxpayer dollars at stake for the project unless and until this clears the conflict of interest that is addressed.

Sir, every single investment that goes through the DFC follows a fulsome and rigorous process,

Sir, I don't know.

including full ethics,

All I wanna know

know your customer,

All you have to say is yes,

empty money laundering.

I have f- don't try to run out my time, if you are going to make sure, I'm asking you, because what we're going to do is we're going to hold you to what you say here. So I'm not, you know, I just wanna know You said you did not know. It was before you were our guide, it before you were uh uh confirmed. And so now that you do know, and this is now on record, the question is, will you not uh, you know, until this is cleared, uh, we wanna make sure that we call you to that.

Every single investment will go through

Yeah.

the rigorous process that includes ethics, know your customer, aml and a four pronged process

we we're just gonna repeat because we gonna do our oversight responsibilities here and we're gonna make sure that we hold you you say you did not know before you know now you say you gonna make sure that ethics is upheld and we're gonna hold you to that we're not gonna just like we we're looking at it and we'll hold you to that

regular members time is expired representative smith

thank you chairman thank you very much mr. chairman and welcome to our distinguished uh leaders and panelists today. Let me ask you, I have a lot of questions but five minutes so I'll ask one basic one. For years I've been working on trying to get the DR Congo to end their horrific complicity and enabling of the Chinese Communist Party by sending cobalt that they extract through horrible means, child labor thirty five to forty thousand kids, uh two hundred There's no real um protections for those miners. I've chaired six hearings on the abuse uh in those mines. I've been to Galma myself. Um and and cobalt,

Best to survive.

especially for European cars, EVs, is exploding. So the the market is making the Chinese Communist Party huge amounts of money. I asked Tashikati, the president, uh please, if you're gonna mine it, do it under standards that are humane and make sure it's processed, and that's the key word here, uh in a democracy loving country, or in your own country, but not in Xinjiang, uh where the Uighurs are are being subjected to genocide. Um they listen and you know hopefully they're gonna do something, but I have a bill that I've introduced repeatedly, now it's H. R. twenty three ten. I did have a hearing uh in in March of last year, uh on this and I'm gonna do another one, uh but it's the bill is called the Kobol Supply Chain Act, and the essence of it is a rebuttable presumption like we did with the Uighur forced labor act to say, okay, if you can prove that you're not using forced labor, um then you can do it. But frankly, every Tesla I ever see now, and there's a lot of them, I know that the Cobalt that's driving that Tesla was was mined on the backs of children in DR Congo and on in a in a forced labor situation for uh for uh uh older uh people. So I'm asking you please, if you would take this back, um, uh, to me this is like right in our face. Again, it's growing, uh, you know, I've asked Musk and others to, what are you doing enabling this kind of exploitation? Uh, again, if your supply chain is not tainted, that okay. You know, whether you like or dislike EVs, you know, that's that's a whole another issue. But when it, when you talk about child labor. So I'm asking if you would take a look at the bill, uh, see if you can support it. We got part of it passed by Ways and Means. in the last congress uh my hope is that we can get it soon now yes there's all kinds of good things happening the president's peace treaty was certainly good uh with with rwanda and the air congo uh so that was an opening to finally get them out from under in promoting um uh or sending all of this cobalt to to xinjiang for processing so if you could speak to that because to me you know and again there's all kinds of other things where Africa is being fleeced by the Chinese Communist Party, uh but this is one that just jumps off the page and can be remedied rather quickly. Yes, please.

Sure, uh uh thank you uh Congressman Smith, I agree. Uh, it's grotesque what China is doing in the Congo. USTDA has been working in southern Congo. I think we have a rigorous due diligence process to ensure that the work we're doing upholds the highest labor and environmental standards, um and making sure as importantly that the offtake from that will be directed to the United States. Um I think that for USTDA that is a um that is a basic tenet of any investment we're going to make in critical infrastructure is looking at the labor situation, ensuring that we are excluding China from involvement in any form or fashion to make sure that uh the highest standards of labor uh can take uh are upheld uh in the critical mineral sector generally, but particularly in the Congo.

OK. If I if I could ask you to take a good look at the rebuttable presumption, cuz when we put that into the Uyghur Forced Labor Act, there was pushback with the previous administration, but he did sign it, uh and it does give us the ability to say, " Look, those products that are made with forced labor are inadmissible to the United States", uh and and this ought to apply to cobalt. And then when you add on just how horrible what it is, and you said grotesque, what they do, they meaning the Chinese Communist Party, they have most of the minds. Uh they've either bought them and they give the sub-standard labor practices, uh the sexual abuse of children. Uh I heard, we had in my hearing people who testify to that, that these kids are so vulnerable, and they're so destitute, and they're working in artisanal minds, and they're also working obviously in the other minds, and they die, or they get sick. They they They're not wearing apparatus that will keep the the dust and other uh debris from their lungs. Uh and again, Chinese Xi Jinping is laughing his his way to the bank uh as they make all of this money. Again, it's not as much that in terms of here, although there is a big uh b- uh uh uh market, I'm out of time, but in Europe, the EVs there are exploding in terms of how many are being bought, all on child labor and forced labor.

Mister Keating.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Mister Black, you said That you are, you know, your agency and yourself, you're involved in what you termed a rigorous review of all projects. Is that correct?

Currently, Congressman, we are reviewing all previous investments with the goal of being able to disseminate and

So you're a part of that review now.

So

You're there, you're there. So you're part of that now.

So, r review requires multiple

No, I wanted to know about you. You're the only one here. So uh, you're part of those re- re- rigorous reviews obviously, right?

Well, evaluation process and audit requires a third party firm to to review.

No, I I asked about you, sorry. I didn't ask about third parties, I just wanna know about you. You're part of it, right? You're the one that just told us it exists. You're in charge, so you're part of it.

Am I asking for a review and evaluation exercise?

No,

Yes, I am.

are you involved at all, or you just one of those people, hands off, you're not involved in anything?

Sir, I'm not an accountant, so we are going to hire

No, no. But you're involved in this, correct?

Yes, if I ask for

Okay, thank you. God help us. All right, so you're involved in this. So, with the uh, the Kaz resources, uh, the company that uh is deal with the uh Kazakhstan Tungsten deal, uh, you're aware of Kaz resources, that's the company involved, right? That's Pretty perfunctory

Well actually, sir,

preview.

we ha so I think you're conflating two different processes. Evaluation exercise, which involves accountants and valuation firms of all previous investments going back fifty five years. On top of which, we're talking about a four-pronged investment process, which we go through for every single investment.

Uh-huh, no, you you can detail that all you want. I'm just here, Kaz resources, you've heard of them, right? You've you personally have heard about them.

Only

Why is there a problem with this lately? Yesterday was ridiculous. Uh, today it continues with this administration. It's like the people in charge don't know anything. Uh, I mean, come on. So you're in charge. And you know about Kaz, you've heard the name Kaz resources, right?

Only in

Have you heard it?

Only in the context of people sending media reports. In the pro

All right, so you don't know, you don't, this rigorous reform. The company that's involved in this, you don't know only through media resources? That's really the kind of leadership you're bringing to this?

Congressman.

Let me, let me ask you another question, by the way.

Congressman, I don't think you're listening.

Have you heard of Domineering Securities?

Sir.

I don't think you're listening, sir. I don't think you're listening.

I don't think you're responding.

Uh, uh, I absolutely am responding, sir.

Yeah, I don't think you're responding to what I'm asking.

The reality is we have a multi,

So listen, I don't wanna be argumentative every time, listen to this.

sir, we have a multi-part investment process.

Answer this yes or no. You're just giving me a lot of Crap. Listen. You heard about the ma- the major company involved in this big deal with Kazakhstan. And all you've done is you've told me you heard about it through media sources. Have you heard of Dominaria Securities?

Sir, it has not reached the level of the investment process.

The

W sir, do you

The Dominaria Reserva, ask answer the question, have you heard of Dominaria Servi- Securities?

S- in what context, sir?

Have you heard the name?

Sir.

Have you heard the name?

Sir.

Have you heard the name? Don't stir me to death. Have you heard the name?

Sir,

Be respectful, I'll try and be respectful in response.

you you're not giving uh, sir, you're not allowing me to respond to any forms.

No, you're you're giving me offshoots of my direct answer. Look at Dominary Securities is owned in part, major part, by Donald Trump's sons. You didn't know that?

Sir, when an LOI is,

No, it

when an LOI is issued by career staff in the first part of a four

You said this is rigorous. Now listen, I have one minute left. Don't talk my time to death. You said it was rigorous. You said you only heard about cause resources. You told this committee under oath that you told them that you've only heard of cause resources through media res media accounts. You haven't heard of Domineering Securities. It's a Trump known investor in this. And did you know that uh according to uh federal security, federal filings, that both Cantor Fitzgerald, run by Leletnick's, and Domineering Securities, partly owned by the Trumps, have already earned fees for their work. They're both paid for their services already, helping executives involved in the series of transaction to raise new capital. So, when you're evaluating these things, you're not even looking at any function of how the companies in front of you raise their capital. You're not even looking at that?

That's not remotely true.

Yes or no?

It requires a KYC process. If you had allowed me to speak, I would have explained to you that there's a multi-part process.

I'm asking you as the guy in charge. You're the guy in charge.

Sir, there's a multi-part

You're the man at the wheel.

Sir, do you understand what know your customer obligations are?

Evidently, you don't. My time has expired, but I can't

Representative Wilson.

continue to put up with this non-answers from this administration on conflict of interest issues.

Thank you very much, Chairman, I ask for your leadership and uh indeed we're Appreciate all of you being here today. Additionally, uh, Mister Black, I encourage the Development Finance Corporation to operate in Syria, which at this stage could benefit from a trade, not aid model and technical assistance, which the DFC could capably provide. Uh, it's particularly, uh, important to me because I was honored in November, twenty twenty four, to be condemned personally by the Assad dictatorship as an enemy of the state. And then, three weeks later, Assad fled to Moscow. I was grateful eight months later to be in Assad's office in Damascus with the new president Ahmad al-Shura with Senator Jane Shaheen and Ambassador Tom Barak. As President Donald Trump has additionally has welcomed President al-Shura to the Oval Office the first Syrian leader in two hundred fifty years. And indeed, President Donald Trump is leading the world in his efforts to give Syria a chance. What is the status of the DFC in any effort to assist the people of Syria?

Thank you, Congressman. So, at the DFC, we are very much looking forward to getting involved with Syria. Um, two things that uh, one of which, and we work with Ambassador Baric closely for these purposes. One, uh, we have gotten a re-acknowledgment of the investment agreement with Syria. Uh, because, statutorily, that is required for us to be able to do that. We are also waiting for judgment by USTR on their investment and labor practices being OK for the, uh, for the DFC to be able to invest.

Well, indeed, I wish you didn't. Uh, I, again, to proceed, I was really happy that, uh, Senator Lindsey Graham on Wednesday, last Wednesday, met with President O'Sara in the past, uh, the senator had been, uh, really, uh, skeptical about the new government in Syria. But, uh, following that meeting, he said, uh, to join with, uh, President Trump, give Syria a chance and, uh, what opportunity you can help provide, uh, in honor of now the late Senator Lindsey Graham. And, Mister Petrie, the Middle Corridor is a critical area of interest in furthering President Trump's Central Asia agenda and the diversification diversification of the critical mineral supply chain. Chain, the, chain, the illegitimate Georgian dream government is an anti-American entity, promoting both radical Iranian Islamist and pro-war criminal agendas. In fact, elections were rigged in Georgia. With that, the tremendous people of the Republic of Georgia remained staunchly pro-American. Millennium Challenge is unique as its merit base. How does the Millennium Challenge Corporation maintain its current contacts with the Republic of Georgia, while ensuring that the Putinist government does not divert the assistance solely for the illegitimate government uh away from the people of the Republic of Georgia?

Thank you, uh, Congressman, for that question. MCC is not, uh, currently working in Georgia, we have worked there in the past.

Mm-hmm.

and have had successful uh programs there in the past. Uh, as we do with all countries, we would be eager to uh engage with them and understand uh what the concerns and opportunities are. We do take uh those broader governance challenges very seriously, and so as we're considering as our Board of Directors is considering new countries that might be selected i in a given year, those are factors that we'd be looking closely at.

Well, millennium challenge indeed, uh, is so helpful. different countries and can you the American people need to know uh what would uh some of the uh initiatives you have?

Absolutely, uh we are uh under the Trump administration focusing on a couple of areas, uh the first is critical minerals here today, of course we're taking a three hundred and sixty degree view of this, as I mentioned in Zambia and Mozambique, Sierra Leone and others. Individual deals and transactions are important of course, Uh, but it's gonna be about setting the foundation uh in working systemically if we're really gonna win this race. And so for US firms, that means clarity around the legal framework, uh streamlined permitting and licensing, access to quality data so that you can make informed business decisions. It's also about the operating environment. It's not just access to a particular mine or a site. You need water, you need roads, you need power, you need ports. And so this is what MCC does best. Uh, where we're not working everywhere, but where we are working, uh, we go big, and we focus on this unique combination of both infrastructure and policy reform.

And and you you've made a difference. Keep doing good work. Thank you. I yield back. Mr. Ocheski.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Mr. Black, I was here and and watching with great interest some of the back and forth about the the Kazakhstan deal that the ranking member and Representative Keating uh were asking about earlier. I'm gonna take your word that you're not really aware of the details of those deals other than what's been publicly reported. Um but I guess just from a values perspective, do you think that in these types of deals that I as a member of Congress should be able to personally benefit from those types of deals? Just from a your values perspective.

Sir, I do not govern the legislative body.

I'm not asking about the legislative, I'm asking about your personal values in your role, do you think that I should be able to benefit from the types of deals that we talked about here in Kazakhstan?

Sir, I believe that asset allocation and taxpayer funds and their allocation is a fiduciary duty. Uh, fiduciary duty is by the way in the private sector, much more stringent.

I This is not a complicated, I'm not trying, this is not a gotcha question, this is a do you think it's wrong for members of Congress to benefit from public actions.

Sir, you're

Is this the kind of stuff you gave when people were asking you about whether you wanted to serve in this role I think it's pretty straight forward. Anybody else can give a yes or no answer at the table, whether you think it's wrong. Your silence speaks volumes, guys. It's an easy yes. It's wrong. It shouldn't happen. Should Secretary Rubio be able to benefit from a deal like the one in Kazakhstan, Mister Black?

Sir, every inve- sir,

Yes or no?

every investment goes through a rigorous investment process at the DFC.

Guided hopefully by some values where public figures shouldn't benefit off of public projects. It's not hard to say.

Sir, an ethics overview is involved in this, it requires any opportunity

OK, I'm clearly not gonna get an answer, so I'm gonna reclaim my time.

going through the process.

I wanted to give you an opportunity there. I I think regardless of how important these projects are, taxpayers should not be paying to make members of Congress, to make members of the administration, to make the president or their family richer, nor should taxpayer funding be used to fuel the corruption of any other partner country. So, I'll pivot here, Mister Black, to in December the DFC announced a letter of interest for an equity investment between uh, Shea Kameen, the DRC's state-owned mining company, and another commodities group, the DFC later announced that one hundred thousand tons of minerals had been shipped to the US through this joint venture. A report last year showed that Shea Kameen was under investigation for allegedly embezzling more than three hundred million dollars. Earlier audits found hundreds of millions in unaccounted for tax prepayments, loans, and mining revenues that never reached the national treasury. So hopefully you can say that's wrong, in terms of values, and then I wanna know what guardrails you have in place to ensure DFC investments are not furthering this type of corruption.

Sir, I I I've been trying to explain process and can we take a step back here for a second? There is a four-part process. If anything is a letter of interest, that solely means the career staff had screened a project and announced interest. It has not gone to the underwriting committee. It has not had know your customer, which I've been trying to talk about, which is KYC and any monitoring uh checks, which are part of any ethics check. It then needs to go to investment committee. Only after that is the deal even eligible to be approved to be brought to the board of directors for approval. So frankly, when you bring up letters of interest, it is so early on in the process, there are no funds that have been dispersed at any point. Ethics checks have not even happened yet. It is so premature and early that is not reflective of any form of commitment from the DFC.

I I think what you're seeing from this committee is a concern though that based on what has happened in other places, and where President Trump and his family have lined their pockets with hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars in taxpayer-related projects at the Department of Defense, through mining deals, through cryptocurrency schemes. There's a reason these questions are coming forward, and I would hope that in all forms of corruption, with a local government partner or this administration, you all continue to have some moral conviction to say doing so is wrong, And the fact that no one could say it publicly is deeply concerning to me. But I hope that we can work to find a way forward together, and with that, Mister Chairman, I yield back.

Representative Jackson.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. I have a question for each of you. Um, what do you consider to be the most significant issues to include things like infrastructure gaps, corruption, conflict, and ongoing security issues that are preventing African critical mineral producers from expanding their processing and refining capabilities, And what are you doing to solve these problems, promote investment by US companies, and address the national security uh concerns that these uh represent?

USTDA has taken a fairly substantial uh lean uh directed by the White House and the President to be focused on critical minerals. Um, when I look across Southern Africa, um, we're doing things differently than we've ever done before. For USTDA that includes now doing drilling uh test rules to determine the uh substrates of the critical minerals capacity. Doing testing here in the United States of those critical minerals, so local processing development can be designed using USTDA funds and led by American companies and American investors. So I think that is a significant change for USTDA, which is making that bigger investment to ensure that um these uh critical minerals are coming to the united states and we're working everything we do is designed for offtake into the united states

i mean that that sounds fine i mean that's that does explain kind of what you're trying to do to uh to to address some of these issues but the the the the reason i ask is because every time i go to africa i travel over there a lot i hear about the libido corridor all the time and you guys have mentioned it in your statements uh and uh but what is actually being done you know so far where are we at with the with the project like the libido corridor and my question is is like We we have a lot of great ideas and we we have uh great plans, but the problem is is there there are such basic issues that exist in a lot of these countries and DRC in particular with regards to corruption and the ongoing conflict and the security issues and stuff there that you know what are we doing to overcome that because we can talk about it all day long but I don't see much being done uh I don't see a lot of progress being made and I I just I mean I know that that's uh you know you you'd need you'd need help from a lot of uh a lot of outside organizations and other parts of the US government. uh to establish uh you know to get rid of the corruption and establish some of the security uh uh to overcome some of the security issues but are are are we doing things to actually to to to make this happen uh or we just talking about what we'd like to do

For USTDA we're working extremely closely with the uh Congolese private sector right and we found uh having good partners with the Congolese private sector has been a positive way to insure uh the uh that we have the right porters.

Has any work been done yet? Has has has anything happened with the Libido corridor yet?

For USTDA, we're on the front lines on the early project development side. For USTDA, that includes uh designing uh power projects, transmission networks into these p- uh power plants, as well as uh beginning the testing of critical minerals to design the processing so we can uh increase local processing capacity to get those products into the United States market.

Anybody else have a comment on that one?

On libido, uh MCC is working in Zambia. Uh, we are working on two fronts. One is the infrastructure side, the other is the policy and the institutional reform. Uh, we've seen some su- success in the agricultural sector, by getting Zambia to change some laws that's gonna open it up for more private sector investment. That's gonna be good for US companies and others. We're gonna replicate that in the mining sector. We're improving their mining cadastre, as well as their minerals regulation commission. And finally, making data more accessible and transparent, which of course builds confidence for investors. We're looking at hundreds of kilometers of roads that are gonna be upgraded, in and around uh the broader USG investments, including the railway and others. We're not currently working in the DRC, uh although um

Is is that because of the security situation?

Uh, currently they don't qualify for an MCC compact, which has uh kind of a rigorous standard that we want to uphold. That said, countries uh like to make progress on MCC's scorecard to qualify for MCC assistance. We call this the MCC effect. Without spending uh a penny of US taxpayer resources, countries are changing laws to become eligible for MCC. DRC has a unit set up within their government where they are trying to make progress in this regard. So uh we do engage with the government, although we are not working there currently.

But I mean obviously the uh the DRC is critical to the Libido corridor, it doesn't happen

So

Yeah. I think we we have a lot to address there. With that I yield back.

Other Representative Jackson.

Thank you so much, Chairman. Thank you, Chairman. Uh, may I ask thank you, Ranking Member Meeks. And this is a conver a question I would have to the um first of all to Mister Black. Mister Black, you state that um in um this areas of increasing global competition, President Trump and equipped our agency to be a leading force for restoring US economic security. Since its reauthorization, DFC has rebuilt our pipeline to more than three hundred and forty deals. Uh, I'm just concerned about Mister Trump's executive order, one zero nine nine eight, where he states that, um, he's put an increased visa restrictions on many of these African countries. As you know, there are fifty-four African countries, and what we saw during the uh events of the world cup is that twelve african countries had complete travel bans, another fourteen had partial travel bans, twenty-six almost fifty percent of the african uh countries have travel bans visas and restrictions where people couldn't even come over to play a game and could not bring their family members to watch soccer uh i've always maintained that africa's most valuable resource is above the ground, not beneath the ground, it's the people and having access to the people and will further ensure us that we can have access to some of their bounty and their resources. Would you be in support of us rescinding that executive order so that we can reduce, ease the amount of travel bans and restrictions so that we can communicate and invest in those African countries?

Sir, I I'm an asset allocator at the DFC. Uh Visas, travel, and domestic policy are not part of my purview.

OK. I understand. You don't wanna make this a political issue, but it is politics, the asset allocation, people are a valuable asset, a human capital, human assets. How do we get the assets to the people? You can't go on into a country and extract something from underneath the ground, if we can't talk to the people above the ground. If children can't play soccer together, you know in Zambia as well. where people have to pay five, ten thousand, fifteen thousand dollars. I met with people from the Global Health Institutes and other places. They can't even have their international meetings in the United States because they cannot convene their workers from the continent of Africa to come to United States because of travel vans and visas. Um, the second question I would probably have is to you, uh, our Deputy Secretary, Mister Harding, is that we have seen in Zambia, for example, USTDA has awarded funding to Metalax, an African Zambian limited subsidiary, of Texas-based uh commodities ink to support a feasibility study for expanding a facility that currently extracts and processes copper and cobalt. I've spoken with the with the uh excavators of copper in the country of Zambia, and they cannot get to the United States because they have to spend in excess of ten to fifteen thousand dollars per employee that needs to come over here to have a meeting uh and so for six people without buying the ticket without having any lodging. they have to post a bond anywhere between sixty and ninety thousand dollars. Would you be in favor of us rescinding that a travel ban restriction that the administration has placed?

I I am not aware that that has become been a problem for us ambient companies to be working with the dynasty.

You're not aware of it or you don't know that it exists?

I I have not heard that that exists.

It exists. You can look in the New York Times, you can go to anything, I would hope that your agency would apprise you and brief you a little bit better than that. Um, China has sixty diplomatic posts in Africa. The United States has fifty-six fifty-six diplomatic posts in Africa. The US has forty-one African vacancies currently. China has two hundred and seventy-four diplomatic posts globally, while the United States has two hundred and seventy-one. This is an alarming trend. So as we continue to talk about critical resources, we also have to talk about diplomatic resources. Out of the hundred and ninety-five total US ambassador positions, The US has a hundred and seven vacancies. So I am all about the extraction, all about the strengthening of the global supply chain. But unfortunately, at the same time, we are weakening our diplomatic core. And so those of you that are asset allocators, investors, and you're doing great work on the critical minerals, I am concerned about how we are conceding and retreating from our one-two punch, both of being uh economically feasible, but also being diplomatically are resourceful and resilient. And it all comes back to not being able to watch uh nations enjoy a soccer match together. If we can't play together, how we gonna work together, how we going to invest together? Mister Chairman, I yield back.

Thank you, Mister Jackson. Miss Kim.

Thank you, Chairman. Thank you to our witnesses for joining us today. Uh, you may know last month we passed the dominance act, and that was a bipartisan legislation. that empowers the united states to work with our allies to build alternative critical mineral sourcing processing refining capacity to power our economy and one of the key provisions in that bill was for the united states uh state department to negotiate the energy security pacts with our partner countries and that would establish country specific objectives to support key energy and mineral investments abroad and the idea also is to provide a one stop shop to align our diplomatic financing and technical tools from us t d a uh d f c axiom and commerce to strengthen our allied critical mineral supply chains and promote the energy security so the first question is to you mister hardy what are some of the gaps in inter-agency coordination and how might models like the energy security packs in the dominance act improve inter-agency coordination.

Thank you, Chairman Kim. I think for USTDA, um as an agency we have long uh looked to our partnership with the State Department, and our statute requires that we follow the foreign foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State. So, for any activity that the US Trade and Development Ag- agency takes on, we coordinate directly with the Regional Bureau or the Functional Bureau, to ensure that any investment we're making in infrastructure in the Indo-Pacific, around the world, is aligned with the Secretary of State's vision, the President's vision for a robust foreign policy agenda. I uh with respect to the Donbin's Act, I'll let State uh weigh in on that because that's their direction on creating the energy uh compacts. But I think what you can see here today is three agencies, along with EXIM, that work very well together and have the tools that complement each other and the staffing resources that make us in a great position to provide an alternative to the Chinese uh model of engagement. I think that the dominance act and the other engagements that are designed to bring us together are the ways that we're going to continue to strengthen uh uh our collective efforts to uh beat back the Chinese Communist Party.

Thank you. That's exactly the the main uh objective of the dominance act i mean each agencies are doing a great job but we wanted to make sure that there was that one agency that we can go to and our allies and partners can really depend on our coordinated efforts so i'm really glad that we are moving that along and hopefully the senate will also pass it quickly you know but uh mister black i wanna talk to you um and first commend your leadership at dfc and your focus on advancing President Trump's vision that energy security is national security. Uh, and I'm continuing to always explore what more ways that we can help to expand DFC's flexibility, including its ability to operate in Venezuela. Uh, I introduced the Fleets Now Act that will be focused on rebuilding America's shipbuilding capacity with our allies. And in that bill, there is a provision explicitly allowing for DFC to work in Venezuela as well as to invest in strategic ports and port infrastructure to facilitate economic growth. So, Mister Blag, can you talk about what role that Congress can continue to play in giving DFC and its partner agencies the durability to support allies and investors making long-term commitments to energy projects?

Representative Kim, thank you for your support, uh, and thank you for all you're doing there. Uh, I think you're doing a lot of important work, and look, at the DFC we fundamentally believe in how important ports internationally are, and the more work we can do there the better, and we appreciate, uh, the other's support and opening up. Look, we have our work cut out for us, uh, after our reauthorization, uh, and I think rebuilding the pipeline was just the first step to doing that. We are now in a position to execute more on more on these deals, and we are continuing to do so. And I welcome working with you, your colleagues, and your offices in laying out priorities and other projects that we can work on that helps advance the president's agenda and serves the American people.

So, recently, um, the FCA announced five billion investment in the in the pacific i believe that is the single largest investment in dfc history right um the philippines also has a plant a packed silica hub in new uh new clark city that would create four thousand acre economic security zone for ai semiconductor packaging and critical mineral uh processing so what would the dfc's role actually look like in that project and what else in the in the pacific do you see more opportunities for DFST to uh invest.

Congresswoman, there are a host of different projects in the region that are great opportunities. Uh, as I've said to your other colleagues, look when some deals are in their early stages, uh, first it is the vetting process, and we talk regularly with the State Department, uh, as well as the PAC silica team, uh, in building out opportunities and really getting into the details of where investments are important. We find that it's in the nitty-gritty, in the documents, and in the financing and the numbers where we do our best work. So we kind of pause before we get to the headlines because we wanna make sure everything works and runs properly.

Great. Hope to see more details.

Representative Amo.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to our witnesses for being here. Uh, from roads, to communications, infrastructure, to critical mineral development funding, supports American businesses and promotes American values while uplifting developing countries." At least that's what it's supposed to do. Unfortunately, under the Trump administration, just because something should be happening, doesn't mean that it is happening. I'm growing increasingly alarmed uh that uh under your leadership in particular, Mister Black, that there's a push to make DFC operate more like a sovereign wealth fund than the development program that it's supposed to be. It appears that much of DFC's efforts are focused on projects in upper and middle income countries rather than in developing countries that need them the most. I'm also worried that you don't really have a clear plan or strategy behind the projects that you're operating. Earlier, Chairman Mast asked you what projects you are most proud of, and you mentioned the Sara Verde project. This project will pour millions of taxpayer dollars to support nickel and cobalt production in Brazil. I agree, uh, that it's essential that we produ- protect the production of cobalt. But I don't believe that you're thinking of the entire picture. Mister Black, do you know where this cobalt will be processed?

Congressman, I think we need to take a step back for a second.

No, no. I asked you a question, sir.

I mean, it

Uh, we don't gotta take a step back.

Sir, s-

I need you to answer my question. Where is it processed?

Sir, Seraverde is a heavy rare earth smog.

It's w- Where where where is the cobalt processed?

Cobalt, cobalt is not a heavy rare earth, sir.

So where?

Sir, cobalt is not a heavy rare earth, Seraverde.

Uh, please don't serve me. I'm just asking you a question. What's the answer?

I I

If you don't know, I got it, I got it for you. It's China. So are you aware that China has a near uh monopoly on processing cobalt?

Sir.

Yes or no?

Sir, cobalt is not a heavy rare earth.

Are you aware that China has a near monopoly on processing cobalt? Don't an- answer my question.

Your question is a little confusing to me because

Yeah, the question's straight forward. Are you aware, yes or no? It's okay if it's no.

Cobalt is not a heavy rare earth.

You're not answering my question.

Cerro Verde is a heavy rare earth mine.

Ch- uh, but Mister Black, you don't wanna answer questions, I'm gonna tell you facts. China has ninety five percent of the world's refined commercial grade cobalt chemical pr- processing capacity. So if you're looking at the entire picture of the cobalt supply chain, something that you are very proud of, it seems like the natural question is where is the cobalt being refined? So Knowing these facts, won't these projects ultimately, this pr- this project in particular, result in the US taxpayer subsidizing uh Chinese refiners?

Sir, you're talking about cobalt in a project that is heavy rare earths. Cobalt is not a heavy rare earth.

Sir, look, uh, you, it seems like you don't wanna answer the questions or deal with the facts. Earlier you said that you would not invest in AI projects that have Chinese components. And yet you said your greatest project is one that will subsidized Chinese refiners. This goes back to a question of competence. Nothing in this hearing has made me think that you know all of the details of what's happening in the DFC and what needs to be done to protect US interests. You've also repeatedly denied any knowledge of the many conflict of interest ish issues that we have raised, from the Trump family to the Lutnicks in the DFC. You're spending millions of dollars in taxpayer uh uh in programs with taxpayer dollars without the thought to the full supply chain of critical minerals. And, along the way, you've cited career staff, the the process, rather than your knowledge of what's going on. So, the the fact of the matter is, I I'm hoping that you will turn things around. DFC is essential. That's why I'm here. That's why my colleagues have so vigorously engaged. It's got a focus on its development mandate and taking a look at the full picture to improving lives of all Americans. not just the president and his family. And to, throughout your time here, you have not made it clear that you are standing for the values of this country, that no one should be benefiting, and certainly not in the Oval Office, not along the Cabinet, and not in the halls of Congress, from the investments from the DFC. So I hope that that's some place that you focus, and with that, I yield back.

Thank you, Mr. Almo. I think you missed the explanation that what you were asking about doesn't exist in the mind you were asking about, but, Mister Huizenga is recognized.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chairman. I was, I was gonna note I'm looking forward to my colleague leading the charge to, uh, expand processing here in the United States, especially if he has any contacts within the EPA so we can get these things permitted. Uh, that's been a major problem, uh, with, uh, with, uh, where, why the United States has become so overly dependent. on others in our supply chain. Uh, and I understand that that's exactly what this administration is trying to do. And once again, we see our colleagues throw bombs and leave the room. And they, they don't actually wanna know answers. Uh, I don't know, Mister Black, if you wanna take a second, have anything that you wanna address on what diatribe you just heard.

Thank you very much, Congressman. Look, I'm very proud of the work the whole building has been doing. What I would say is, look, I've always said that we have a dual mandate. It is serving US strategic interests and development. And what is development but creating growth. And, you know, just on the facts side, eighty percent of the deals we've approved to date are in low income or lower income countries. So, I'm not really sure about the facts that were being spewed at me,

Yeah.

but people can say what they like.

Um, I uh, people are inventing a lot of things these days as they are trying to score political points but you know I actually happen to be the chair of the South and Central Asia uh subcommittee to India to Bangladesh Bhutan Nepal and all the stands, including Kazakhstan, uh Uzbekistan, place where a number of of uh of agreements have been struck. Um, I also happen to be a uh the con uh part of the uh Congressional Strategic Advisory Group, uh for the uh DFC. Um, uh, also the Vice Chair of the Financial Services Committee, where we deal with all the sanctions and we deal with, um, jurisdiction on international development and finance agencies. So I've, I've got a fairly high level of interest in what you all are doing, and I just wanna commend you for what you are doing. Um, I'm gonna, I'm gonna jump to my area of responsibility with Kazakhstan, and I wanna, uh, talk about, uh, the recent announced, uh, proposed partnership to modernize Kazakhstan's telecommunications infrastructure by transitioning major networks uh to trusted vendors strengthening secure digital infrastructure. Uh the announcement has highlighted the strategic import importance of the Trans-Caspian corridor and the role trusted telecommunications networks play in supporting economic growth, critical mineral uh supply chains and regional connectivity. Um so again Mister Black uh how does proposed investment fit into the administration's broader strategy to compete with China and Central Asia.

Thank you, Representative. So, I think telecommunications are so incredibly important here because I view them as a gating item. You know, one of the most frequent questions I get asked around the world is will you invest in AI data centers here? And some of those countries, uh, you know, I have to ask first, do you have a power or energy source? Sometimes the answer is no, which makes it very testy. Then there's do you have a partner? Because we're not gonna invest billions of dollars and just hope that a partner appears. It has to be tied up ahead of time. And then finally, the question is what does your telecommunications depend on? Because we're not going to put a marvel of American innovation which is RAI tech stack, overseas, built on Chinese rails.

Yeah.

So the fact of the matter is, US Telecom and trusted vendors is absolutely vital. And

So, and that was gonna be kind of my follow-up, and I'm gonna change that a little bit, but uh how do you evaluate whether those those projects uh reduce reliance on high-risk vendors uh how do you how do you measure that?

Well, so straight up we approach them, and we look at these Telecom networks, and we say, what are you running on? And can we finance a rip and replace? And it's also a great test of the willingness of a government.

Well, I was just gonna ask about their willingness. What are you seeing as a willingness to do so?

I'm very pleased to say there is increased willingness, I think, and then we wanna lean in, particularly in the Western hemisphere, to make sure that there are not Chinese rails around.

And and Kazakhstan's been pretty clear that they're they're willing to um, eh, with a neighbor of China, Mongolia, and and uh and Russia, they're they are very much interested in talking to the United States, aren't they?

That is absolutely true.

Okay. I've got just moments here and maybe what we can do is transition this into some written responses, that would be helpful, but um I I wanted to know if our new objective is to build resilient supply chains, should Congress continue evaluating our foreign assistance agencies primarily by dollars obligated, and projects, uh or should we instead evaluate them by what i would think are you know, measuring items such as private capital mobilization, export growth, trusted train supply chains established, reductions in strategic dependence on china and those kinds of things. So if the chair will allow maybe a quick very brief uh answer from from each of you would be helpful.

Sir, what you listed is definitely things and metrics that we like to look at and Firmly agree with you.

Uh, Congressman Huizenga, uh USTDA has a robust modern evaluations programs. For every dollar we invested of our appropriate dollars, we're generating over two hundred dollars in US exports. Since the agency's inception in nineteen ninety two, we've generated a hundred and twenty seven billion dollars in US exports, to emerging markets around the world. I think those are all designed to open markets, but also create job uh job creation here in the United States. And that is how we measure ourselves, and that is what we report to Congress. as our measurement, not the dollars out the door.

With MCC, we're not just measuring outputs, we're measuring outcomes. And every single one of our projects is independently evaluated, including going back years after the fact and assessing whether we actually delivered on what we said we would. That information is actually then made public. Uh, the good, the bad, and the ugly, so that we can learn, uh, American taxpayers understand they're getting the bang for their buck. So this informs the measuring, informs every single aspect of MCC's work.

I appreciate it. Yield back.

Mister Castro.

Uh, thank you gentlemen for your testimony today. Uh, Mister Black, I had a question for you. Uh, section fourteen forty-four of the Build Act requires the DFC to publish detailed project level information on DFC's programs and during last year's reauthorization of DFC I authored a provision that strengthened this transparency requirement to also require the publication of project level performance metrics and anticipated and assessed impact of DFC projects. Uh, as of now, uh, that requirement seems to only be met for DFC's technical assistance programming, not for its broader portfolio. Uh, at a time when the DFC has more resources than ever, and is asking for even more, I believe that this is unacceptable. Uh, so I wanted to ask you, uh, what is your timeline for bringing DFC into full compliance with section fourteen forty four? And will you commit to public consultations with the development community? on how that data gets published.

Representative, thank you for your question. So, currently I think what you're referring to in part is foreign assistance and project development dollars because that is the only foreign assistance dollars that the DFC has as I said in my opening statement I am engaging in an entire valuation process of all DFC investments past, present, and that will hopefully include future, and we plan to fulsomely put that out there to see returns to the American taxpayer across the entire existence of the DFC by administration,

Uh,

uh,

I guess my question is,

pro

are you committing to full transparency and to compliance with that provision?

So we are in compliance with that provision. You're talking about foreignassistance.gov, to which I explained There is only a portion of DFC data that applies to that.

OK, well let me ask you, will you commit to consulting publicly with the development community on the format and content of that data before you finalize it?

Sir, we are working with best-in-class valuation firms and working with those who can assess and look at our numbers so that we can give that transparency to the American people.

All right, the reauthorization also included a requirement that DFC developed a new a quote-unquote impact quotient, uh, to assess the effectiveness of its programs. What's the status of this requirement in the law? And will you have a r- a public comment period as the first Trump administration allowed, when establishing the first impact quotient tool?

Sir, I will have to refer you to the Office of Development Policy, and get back to you there.

Uh, in the reauthorization, Congress deliberately capped DFC's high income country exposure at ten percent of your total contingent liability. and twenty-five percent of any project's cost. These limits exist because DFC's statutory purpose is to mobilize private capital into frontier markets where it would not otherwise go, not to do safe deals in wealthy countries that the private sector can finance or otherwise could finance on its own. Uh, legislation I authored, including the DFC's reauthorization, requires your annual report to include private capital mobilization data, anticipated natural amounts, investor types, and instruments used. Today, DFC reports neither a country income breakdown of its deal flow nor private capital mobilization data below regional aggregates, which means Congress cannot tell whether you crow- whether you are crowding private investors in or crowding them out. And so my my question on that is, will you commit to reporting deal flow by country income category and project level private capital mobilization data at least semi-annually, so Congress can verify DFC is staying inside the guardrails that we just recently said?

Sir, we provide a lot of that data already. And we follow all the structures of our reauthorization. Uh, as our pipeline comes to fruition and deals get to the point of congressional notification, all those details do come to Congress and we put it forward. I agree very much, we don't wanna do deals where we crowd out private capital. We exist to do deals all over the world. where private capital cannot meet the mark. If we're doing something in which private capital cannot enter, then we're not serving our purposes.

All right. Uh, I have one more question and we may have to take the answer for the record. Uh, last year's reauthorization of DMC included language I authored to strengthen the position of the Chief Development Officer, including by clarifying its position, integrating the role into the CEO's reporting structure. I authored the provision because I was concerned about the DMC's new emphasis on national security priorities, which I felt would come at the expense of its development mandate. I wanted to ensure that there was a senior institutional voice at DFC responsible for its development mandate. I'm concerned that in your testimony you've made repeated references to economic statecraft, and strategic competition, but few references to the DFC's development mandate, or the chief development officer's role. So my question is, what is the status of the chief development officer position? Have you implemented the changes required in the law? Have you appointed an individual to fill this role?

Representative, we do both the dual mandate on both development, which is really growth, as well as economic statecraft to further the country's strategic vision.

Uh, and what's the stati- what's the status of the Chief Development Officer position?

Currently, we have just hired a new independent accountability mechanism uh, head and we are currently interviewing for the chief development officer.

When do you think you'll have somebody hire?

I would have to refer you internally.

Representative Issa.

Thank you. Uh, Mister Hardy, is Brazil currently uh a country you're allowed to uh invest in uh with the your study programs?

Uh, it is, and we have um are working directly with Brazil as they look at small module reactor deployment.

And that's a good thing.

That's a great thing.

Now in your tenure, how many times has Brazil been in and out of that threshold?

Brazil has long been a priority market for us. Um, it's uh, it's gone up and down as far as the opportunities they exist, but I think as we look at the Brazilian market, we're looking at working with the private sector and developers who are wanting to make investments and support local economic development, but ultimately open up markets for the sale of US goods.

One thing that Congress didn't give in the latest round of reauthorization, uh, Mister Black has the ability to work in developed nations at ten percent, uh, particularly when in fact development and or strategic interests apply. You don't enjoy that same capability of even if a country comes above a threshold, you have to stop any further development. Isn't that true?

That is correct, and it's it's a significant hindrance. I think, uh, it falls into three different buckets. One is small island economies. You look across the Pacific island regions. Uh, these countries are small, have huge development uh uh s restrictions, but they're high income countries. Uh, likewise uh to your point on critical minerals, you look at Argentina, it's just below the threshold. It is sitting on massive amounts of critical minerals that were about ready to be excluded from working in because at some point in the coming year or two it will tip into a high income status, and without this ability, we're gonna be off the playing field and

And and so, following up on that, technically, isn't China still fully eligible for your helping them develop?

China is definitely in there, we are our job is to take on the Chinese, we really just

Our job is to take on the Chinese, but the Chinese technically, economically, on paper, qualify, well many countries you should be operating in, you're prohibited from. Is that a short way to put one of the limitations that Congress should look at changing?

That that is a fair way to describe it.

Mr. Black, would you say that it's fair that any place that you're looking at investing, you should have the arm of TDA helping making sure that that is an open, transparent and properly run process?

I would absolutely welcome that.

Well, uh hopefully that's something that will come out of this hearing. I wanna follow up, mister Black, you've you've taken a lot of heat and you've done very well, but let me just go right to the point on these allegations of of third parties buying into investments. Are your processes sufficiently open and transparent that everyone, including Mister Soros, might in fact jump on to what he thinks is a good investment because they see a process that is going on that is public?

I think we have best-in-class processes. It includes know your customer, any money laundering, it's a multi-step, multi-pronged

So So it's fair to say that whether you're Warren Buffett or somebody with a four letter last uh last name they keep using, that in fact the chicken and egg, what's coming first is your recognition that these are projects that deserve public-private uh dual investment. These are vetted projects and anyone is able to look and buy into those projects. So in fact, any claim of a nefarious, even if it does include a relative of a relative, is equally open to my democrat's friends' friends, right?

Sir, I think that's not only correct, but on top of which, we keep talking about processes that haven't gotten to the key ethics, know your customer, and everything else process on all our reviews. So if someone wants to talk about something that's only hit the very front end of the funnel, it doesn't speak to the very fulsome and rigorous approach and process we've created. That is correct.

Well, I wanna thank you both for what you've done there. Uh, I also wanna thank you for the work in Kazakhstan. Having Kazakhstan in a very short period of time have to get on a phone and call China if you want China to know what you're doing, rather they're already knowing it through the back door Huawei, will certainly be an improvement. Miss Petri, I've got one question for you, in round dollars since you've been there, How much wrong, fraudulent, if you will, how much money have you in eh found that the previous administration had spent, that in fact you're either clawing back or at least stopping pouring in?

We've looked uh carefully across our portfolio. Uh, we our portfolio has evolved uh over the last year. Uh, last August our board of directors did step away uh from twelve programs. Uh, we'll

Uh, totaling how much?

about one point five billion dollars.

So you found one point five billion from the previous administration that you had to shut down, uh, and they're worried about whether in an open transparent world, some third party might invest in a good investment when in fact, the public-private investment is what the uh, uh, DFC is responsible for doing. I wanna thank you, I don't I like you, thank you for cleaning up Millennium Challenge. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Thank you, Representative Issa, Representative Kamlager-Dove.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So we're here today to discuss the critical role that international development plays in advancing American interests and promoting global stability. It has now been over a year since the president illegally dismantled and shuttered USAID. For decades, USAID served as a cornerstone of US foreign policy, helping protect global health, counter violent extremism, strengthen democratic institutions, promote stable markets for American businesses, and improve education, economic development, and health care outcomes around the world. These investments not only saved lives abroad, but also enhanced US national security, expanded economic opportunities, and reinforced America's standing as a trusted global partner. Since USAID was illegally closed, the United States has faced significant setbacks in how we engage on the international stage. Critical development programs have been disrupted, long-standing partnerships have been weakened, and strategic competitors have sought to fill the vacuum left by America's retreat. These developments raise serious questions about the long-term consequences, for US leadership, our national security, and our ability to respond to global challenges. Today's hearing is an opportunity to examine those consequences and to discuss how the United States can restore an effective strategic and accountable approach to international development and you all represent corporations and agencies entrusted with the critical responsibility of operating and collaborating on an international stake scale. Now, Mister Black, we have heard a lot today about corruption and how the DFC is being misused by this administration. I believe the US International Development Finance Corporation must remain a cornerstone of American leadership on the global stage. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the DFC helped finance vaccine manufacturing, medical equipment production, and healthcare infrastructure, including expanding vaccine manufacturing capacity in regions such as Africa and India to improve access to life-saving vaccines. Beyond the pandemic, the DFC has invested in roads, ports, power plants, telecommunications, and digital infrastructure across developing countries. Its investments in renewable energy and electricity access projects throughout sub-Saharan Africa have brought reliable pow- power to communities and businesses, strengthening economic growth and improving quality of life. These efforts demonstrate how strategic American investment advances both our national interests and meaningful development outcomes for our friends and partners around the world and when Congress passed the DFC reauthorization at the end of the year we provided the agency with significant new authorities and resources to strengthen its dual mission of advancing U. S. foreign policy priorities while delivering meaningful development impact. Throughout the reauthorization process and negotiations with the administration, several of my colleagues and I emphasized the importance of expanding DFC's investment portfolio in low-income countries particularly through high-impact projects. And with these new tools now in place, we expect the DFC to increase investments in sectors such as health and agriculture, where the agency has the potential to improve millions of lives while advancing American strategic interests. So the pushback you are hearing, Mister Black, is because of the frustration we feel in not seeing that kind of work being done. What we are seeing, what we are reading, Sounds like Trump and his friends using the DFC for personal enrichment, using the DFC as a personal finance tool, which it is not. Damning revelations about the billion dollar Kazakhstan mining deal is just one example. And so you do have an obligation to share with us the kind of programs and projects that we want to continue to see. We gave you additional authority because we believe in the corporation. And we want to see the benefits helping the American people, and not friends and family of this president. We don't want a vetting process run by them. We do not want personal finance deals that help them only. We want to see a continuation of the work that we have supported over the years. These are tax paying dollars and faith that we are putting in the work that is happening under your authority. Thank you for that time that you've given me additionally, Mister Chair, and I yield back.

Representative Davidson.

Uh, thank you, Chairman, for highlighting this important issue. Uh, a- as Chairman for National Security and Illicit Finance, uh, in the Financial Services Committee, we're dealing with some of the same things that we're talking about here today in the foreign affairs committee. Uh, you know, when I look at uh, US uh, trade development agency, when I look at um, at the development finance corporation, two of the things that you all focus on are critical minerals with uh lending. And when you look at the Export-Import Bank, one of the real success stories under Chairman Jovanovich is Project Vault, which creates a strategic reserve for critical minerals. So maybe uh, you know, could should you guys uh talk a little bit about how uh DFC and uh USTDA operate together, uh to to maybe not duplicate efforts on critical minerals, but how does that interact with the uh kind of things we're doing, not just with XM but with uh the the Defense Production Act, because this administration's clearly made it a whole government initiative to de-risk our supply chain. So maybe, Mister Hardy, if you'd like to go first.

Thank you. Uh, the US trained development agencies first move around infrastructure development. Uh, Congress gave us the task of supporting early stage infrastructure, whether that's feasibility studies, piloting American technology, technical assistance, all of those early stage investments necessary to feed into a DFC, to feed into EXA. But I think what is unique about USTDA's statute is it looks at making sure that it's not just American taxpayers on the hook, we are looking at financial institutions globally, how can we bring more uh financing into these projects, get them uh to the table and get them financed. But I think for USTDA, the basis of every project I take on and look to approve is have my team met with the DFC? Have they met with XM? Is the scope of work worth funding meeting DFC's and XM's pri criteria? And if it is, what do we need to do to change that scope to make sure it is best suited to uh make it into the DFC and XM pipeline.

Yep. Thank you. How's that look over at DFC?

So I think it's an important thing when we talk about infrastructure and supply chains and critical minerals to first of all talk about how much President Trump is doing and through the White House to align all of us you know especially on critical minerals David Copley is doing a phenomenal job here we work very closely with him his team And with EXIM, again, we cannot invest inside the United States. So there is a whole host of things where we make sure we're handing things off to the appropriate agency.

How does that complement the work of Defense Production Act, for example? I mean, we need the critical minerals. We have to get them processed. You look at the the flow of the supply chain. How does how does your investment kind of mesh with the things that the rest of the administration is doing?

The fact of the matter is, we have to, what we do more often than not, across all critical minerals deals internationally is make sure the offtake is coming to the United States, that the buyer is the department of war.

Right. Thank you. Uh, you know, Millennium Challenge has got your own unique role, but when you look at de-risking the supply chain, um, how has uh that changed under President Trump's leadership? You mentioned uh when Mr. Issa was questioning you that you, we have to reprioritize one one point two billion dollars worth of projects. And I think that's kind of the the thing Secretary Rubio really did well uh by reorienting things that even USAID was doing. He's like, " Yeah, we're gonna do the things that make sense." But it's a crazy idea, apparently, to some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that America's resources should advance America's interest, instead of some oth- other ideology. How's that relate to what Millennium Challenge is doing in de-risking supply chain?

We're taking a three-sixty uh view here uh because money is gonna follow the best risk-adjusted return, and so what we hear is the operational and regulatory environment is key. That's MCC's role. We're trying to level the playing field for US firms, trusted allies, and others, uh, to help deliver on these critical minerals priorities. Uh, we have, uh, realigned, uh, some of our projects, um, in part because these countries want it. Uh, they know that it not only generates jobs, uh, locally, but there's opportunities for mutual prosperity here at home. So we're uh while we're

So so we have we have developing we have developing uh uh economies in our own hemisphere uh that we have strong relationships with and you know if you look at near shoring things like that is that something that fits across the spectrum for all three of you?

Absolutely.

Yeah.

Uh certainly we uh one of my biggest priorities is revitalizing our western hemisphere program uh including providing more staff resources and financial resources to make sure that uh we remain a leader in the region.

Thank you.

I would say most certainly, the Western hemisphere is a huge focus, President Trump has made it such as has Secretary Rubio.

Yeah, thank you, I think the national security strategy laid that out and hopefully it's a whole government approach it's an honor to be a part of it both in foreign affairs and financial services thank you for your service to our country. And you're back, Representative Sherman.

Thank you.

Uh, Mister Petrie, there are a number of countries that I think are important to be part of the Millennium Challenge account. Uh, they uh meet the uh criteria for personal freedom, inflation and governmental accountability. Um, so maybe you can tell me uh whether we're likely first to include Armenia as a Millennium Challenge account country.

Uh, our board of directors uh every year uh considers a range of countries that we'd be working in. As you noted, we're looking uh at our scorecard and whether or not these countries

If if you just w- I've got limited time. You're just saying your board's looking at it. Uh, can you convey to your board how important that is for American foreign policy and respond for the record as to why you haven't already included Armenia in the book.

We'd be happy to take a look at that.

Uh, likewise, uh, my father fought in the islands of the Pacific. We know how strategic they are. Uh, so where do we stand with the Salman Islands? Uh, Mike, uh, the Federated States of Micronesia and the other uh islands of the Pacific.

MCC has a growing presence within the Pacific. Uh, in August our board selected Fiji and Tonga. That builds on our presence in Solomon Islands and Kiribati. And so there's a strong national security element to all of that.

Eh, uh, wha- where are you with uh Vanuatu?

We've worked in Vanuatu previously. Uh,

But

I've met with their Prime Minister and others uh in recent months. partnering with mcc again

sounds like you're moving in the right direction but you're not there so please uh answer for the record uh where we stand with regard to uh all of the uh various uh uh countries in the uh in the pacific um uh mister chairman i know uh earlier we had an exchange on uh the uh usaid uh i'd like to contender the record an article from the new yorker uh uh titled the human cost of uh doge's war on usaid Without objection. And I would point out that uh it uh demonstrates that we've already had seven hundred thousand deaths as a result of um Elon Musk. And Mister Chairman, I would urge you and others on the committee to cosponsor our bill, the Evananzu uh Memorial Act uh named for the uh first child killed by Elon Musk uh and which requires a GAO report as to the uh a number of deaths caused by the slashing of USAID.

You may continue your ridiculous line of questioning.

Thank you for your comment, Mr. Chairman. Now, I've been involved with the DFC since uh for thirty years. Uh, wrote a bill that got through the House that was the reauthorization bill did not get through the Senate. Chaired the uh subcommittee that overseed the DFC. Uh, the DFC is supposed to be part of our international development effort, and yet it was announced that it would be in the oil tanker reinsurance uh insurance uh business. Uh, that i- Mister Black, did you ever consider coming to Congress and saying we'd like authorization to do something that was wildly unthought of when we either appropriated money for you, or uh wrote your reauthorization bill?

Congressman, as required under our statute, we did notify Congress.

Uh, not notify, did you come to Congress and ask? Yeah, we all read the newspapers, so we know what you were doing, but did you ask for a congressional uh authority to do something that was wildly outside what Congress uh envisioned you doing?

Congressman, our reinsurance project followed all the rules and structures of our reauthorization and including in that we came

I

And notified, you guys.

Well, no notify. We we we subscribe to the Wall Street Journal, so we rarely see anything in your notification that isn't there already. Uh, I would uh uh ask to unanimous consent to put in the record uh the uh CRS report uh on the DFC which says uh as to transparency DFC has reduced the uh public information it provides including removing or limiting details on its impact quotient, uh which is mandated by your reauthorization uh not uh disclosing as much about board meetings, board approved investments and annual port, public information on country level development impact uh does not appear on your website uh despite a statutory requirement uh Mister Black, can we count on you to uh meet higher standards of uh of disclosure?

Sir, we follow the highest standards, I would also say. Eighty percent of the investments under my tenure have been in lower and lower middle income countries, more than my predecessor.

Well, the DFC.

And those development impact quotients, sixty percent of them have been at the two very highest level of impact quotients.

Sir, I asked you a question about disclosure and you responded by bragging about performance, which may or may not be true, but is certainly not relevant to my question. Um, I believe my time has expired. Representative Perry.

Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Black, I didn't intend to ask this, but there's a lot of interest in in you and who invests in your projects, so I I need a level set so I know exactly how all this works. So once the investment's made, is that p is there a public notice of that?

So there is, so the way the process works, it can I take you through the process?

Yeah, just very quickly if you could, but

That works. Okay, so projects are screened. that is at staff level, career level, before anything before that moves forward, then it goes to underwriting committee. At underwriting committee things will move forward, you get your know your customer leg uh process, your ethics uh

Can anybody outside be investing in the project during this portion of the operation?

Just to be very clear, there is no money dispersed whatsoever. at these points. This is all a standard due diligence process.

Uh, I understand that, but can anybody outside of the government, some private citizen, can they invest during this period, somebody with insider information, so to speak?

Uh, just to be very clear, people can bring projects, but then it has to go through an ethics, KYC and AML review, just like anything in the private sector.

OK.

So if people had inside information, it would come up in that review certainly more fulsome than anything

Is it advertised to the general public before congressional notification? general public before congressional notification.

Not in I'm sorry, the deal itself advertised?

Yeah, the project, the deal, yeah, the investment.

You wouldn't advertise a lot of these are very sensitive deals.

Yeah, I would imagine that.

You would not.

So so, you just kind of working through the rest of the scenario, once it's advertised and outside investment can come in, do you preclude individuals, entities from investing based on their name or anything else?

They need to pass The Ethics Review and

They need to pass the Ethics Review regardless of who they, so if my name was George Soros, if my name was Tom Steyer, if my name was Paul Pelosi and I passed the Ethics Review, I could invest in that.

If the Ethics Review said that there was no conflict and it is a properly run ethics and KYC review, this is how it works.

And just out of curiosity, are the investors pub- are they publicly named once they invest? Is that a, is that a

It would depend. Again, a lot of these can be sensitive projects. The actual entities, yes, but just in the same way in the private sector, sometimes you will know exactly who it is in terms of public reporting. But KYC, yes, you must know the ultimate ultimate investor here.

You must know and you must report that. So everybody can know who's invested, regardless of what side of the aisle they're on. so to speak.

Side of the aisle does not matter.

To side of the i- And your name doesn't matter as long as you pass the ethics ream- it doesn't matter what your name is. Certain certain of my colleagues appear to want to preclude certain people from investing solely based on their name.

Yes, a- also just very much so. They're, a process is a process.

Right, right, and look, I'm not for corruption on either side of the aisle, so I just wanna make sure I understand completely what the process is here so that we're all level setting and, and, and we understand who's, you know, I find it fascinating as well that members of the committee, this committee, we, we, this committee authorizes the payment of hundreds if not thousands, if not tens of thousands of NGOs. Of NGOs that have been specifically used politically. Well, we can't talk about that. That, that never happened. Right? That never happened. Uh, it's it's out- it's an outrage and it's absurd. Uh, in what little time I have remaining regarding the Mel- Millennium Challenge Corporation, Mister Petrie, um, since two thousand four, the MCC has awarded seventeen billion in grants across forty-six countries, some of them were terminated during the Doge reviews, of the con uh, Compacts and programs terminated, I'm wondering if they lapsed or if they were simply moved to somebody else so that we know that the projects, particularly with critical minerals, we know that the interest of this committee are being maintained, or if those things just fell by the wayside and the investment was lost. Were they were they lapsed and and and if so, did they go to somebody else like USTDA or somebody like that?

Gentlemen.

A gentleman from Pennsylvania's time expired, and I'll recognize a gentleman from Missouri. Mister Bell.

Thank you, Mister Chairman and Ranking Member, while I may be new to the Foreign Affairs Committee, I've been on the O- House Oversight Committee since day one, so I wanna bring those two committees together for a minute. Um, my job on the oversight committee has been to crack down on the powerful people that for years have protected each other, look the other way, and let Jeffrey Epstein operate because his access was useful to them. Survivors are still fighting today for the full truth, the real accountability, and for a government that doesn't keep protecting the people in his orbit. That fight isn't over, and it shouldn't be optional for any committee. Mister Black, the Department of Justice released records that show you were part of that orbit, a business partnership with Epstein, a seat at your birthday, real estate, advice, all items that you never disclosed. And to be clear, as a form former prosecutor, I do believe in due process. You haven't been accused of his crimes, but you are someone who benefited from proximity to him and said nothing about it, all the way past the point that you were confirmed to control a two hundred and five billion dollar two hundred and five billion dollars in public money. Before coming to Congress, I spent years as a prosecutor And in that job, you learn that the real question about someone entrusted with public money is never whether that the paperwork looks clean, it's whether they'll tell the truth about who they're connected to and who benefits from that. Mister Black, let's start simple. Prior to the being confirmed by the Senate or to this committee, did you disclose your relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, yes or no?

Representative, I had no relationship with that individual. I'm here today in my capacity as the CEO of the DFC at the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

No, no, I'm I'm gonna reclaim my time. I'm gonna reclaim my time. Mister Clagg, Mister Clagg, I know that you hear me and understand that this is my time. Um, did you disclose your shared investment with him, yes or no?

As I said, I had no relationship with that individual, I'm here in my capacity as the CEO.

Did you disclose That's the time you spent with your br- with him at your birthday.

Sir, I had no relationship with that individual.

Yes or no will suffice.

I had no relationship with that individual.

What about the real state of vice? Did you disclose that?

Sir, I had no relationship with that individual. I'm here today in my capacity as CEO of the DFC.

Mister Black, survivors have spent years asking one thing of this government. Stop protecting the people in Epstein's orbit and start being honest about who they are. You had years of contact with him, and the first the public heard of it was from DOJ records, not from you. What did you say, what do you say to survivors who hear that and wonder whether the same pattern of access, silence and protection is still playing out today?

Sir, I had no relationship with that individual. You claiming things doesn't make it so. I'm here in my capacity as the CEO of the DFC.

The DOJ reports are inaccurate. So the DOJ reports are inaccurate?

Sir, I had no relationship.

Are the DOJ reports inaccurate?

Sir, I had no relationship with that individual.

Sorry, that's not the question I'd ask. Are the DOJ records inaccurate?

Sir, I had no relationship with that individual.

That's great.

I'm here today.

That's great. You didn't have a relationship you say, were the DOJ records inaccurate?

Sir, I had no relationship with that individual.

Your job at DFC is to personally certify that deals aren't quietly benefiting people, because of who they know. You didn't disclose a real years-long relationship with Epstein until DOJ forced it into public view. So why should this committee or the American people trust your certifications or any well anyone else's conflicts when you didn't disclose your own? Thank you and I yield back.

Thank you and now I'll ask a question and uh first of all thank you for your service. You're an extraordinarily bright guy and you have a lot of choices in life. And thank you for making the choice of service. So, let's just shift to the critical minerals exchange, or critical minerals supply chain issue. Uh, I've talked to, you have Copley in the White House, you have, uh, you know, Burgum, you have Department of Energy, you have XM Bank. Uh, all of them are talking about a critical minerals exchange. I assume that exchange will have to be international because as a geologist deposits are where they are and not where we'd want them to be i assume it's gonna be government backed uh i assume that there's gonna be some command and control structure to it uh but you know follow the money i know you're deeply involved in it what's your vision on setting up a critical minerals exchange that i would assume would function like a bank or deposits and And withdrawals will be made, there would have to be some floor, I would assume, for critical minerals so you don't you don't get whacked by Russia with Palladium as an example. So what's your vision on going forward? And I've read the EO and I'm sure you have too, from the President. What's your vision on the organizational structure and how it would look and and uh operate for a critical minerals exchange? Uh, Mister Black, if I

Representative, it's a great question. So, look, I defer heavily here to both David Copley as well as my good friend, John Yovanovitch at EXIM. The reality of the situation is I think what he's doing with Project Vault is enormously helpful here. I think when we talk about an exchange in particular, the really, really important thing is to remember how many critical minerals around the world are now being quoted in Chinese yuan or RMB. That is something we cannot allow. continue and happen. So the value of an exchange, in my opinion, and we will help however we can, is to make sure that the dollar is dominant across commodities, especially critical minerals, as it is in the petrodollar.

And uh, Mr. Harding, do you have uh thoughts on that?

Uh, I will follow Ben's point of uh looking to uh ExxonBank and David Copley for direction. I think our job is to make sure more critical minerals make in the market, make in the market, that will be able to feed into the uh exchange when that's set up. Um, that is USTDA's role is that early project preparation, working countries cross uh, cross Africa, across the Indo-Pacific, to bring more critical minerals to market to feed the US economy and allied and partner countries' economies.

Yeah, and I think we're all in agreement, I think it's just it's just how to structure it. cause someone has to be in charge you have multiple departments you have multiple sub-agencies uh you have multiple expenditures who's in charge cause there has to be some overall plan whether it comes out of the czar or out of the white house but you also have personalities with secretaries uh the the the and so i just looking at looking forward you know who's gonna be in charge and who's they gonna report to uh yeah i think that's from our point of view on article one and to make sure we have oversight you know on it as as we do with most agencies and make sure the structure at least has some transparency oversight in a in a in a clear mission so we we can make sure we all work together on it so on shifting really quickly to the philippines um working with the department of war they're concerned uh very concerned about ammunition you know in the pacific the the and nitrous side of it we now have subic bay um back deep water port seems to be appropriate uh to develop a relationship on some of our ammunition storage i have some experience yeah earlier in my career in subic at one time they had made to have uh large ammunition storage facility that has largely atrophied away uh is there a project that is looking at at uh restoring and rebuilding some of our ammunition storage and perhaps production facilities in the Philippines.

I will start with, we are not working obviously on the ammunition side, but we are working extensively at SUBIC, uh on extending the dry dock for uh ship repair, ship replacement, um looking at rail links to bring critical metals to market, um and as importantly working extremely closely with Indopaycom and Admiral Poparo to understand what Indopaycom's interests are in front-line states in the region, to ensure that we're investing in critical infrastructure projects that will support the economic development of Philippines, but also play a strategic interest for the US uh natural security.

Again, I thank all three of you for serving, and I I appreciate everything you do.

Thank you, Congressman.

With that, uh I yield to the fine representative, Mister Mister Moskowitz from Illinois, I believe.

Um, thank you, Mr. Chairman. You're you're a fine gentleman also, Tim.

Definit definitions.

Um Degrees. Degrees.

Well said.

Um well well thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh appreciate the opportunity. I I wanna talk uh obviously I'll talk a little bit about critical minerals, cuz a lot of people have talked about that. Um because I actually think it's one of the most important things that we've not done a good job educating the American people on why it's important. And we continue to have hearings up here and a lot of people talk about it. Uh I had a subcommittee talking about it yesterday. But we are we are not spending the time to engage the American public on why critical minerals are important, what China has done over the last several years, uh, under various administrations, where China currently is now, and and what advantage China has as a result of this. And not just in the mines, but in the processing. Right? I mean, China, like, for the longest time, I know we're starting to get our act together. I don't think we're still doing enough in processing. China was like the only one who could even like process this stuff. They like, you know, like passed this down through like generations of people, um, on on how you actually refine and process it. Um. You know, this is gonna decide a lot of, you know, how much America can have independence from China. Because obviously any time we wanna do anything and China can flex on, you know, critical minerals, it puts us a little bit in a box, whether we want to admit it or not. Um, and that was obviously the China's, China's design. I, I wanna talk about, um, supply chains. And I know it's a little bit out of your wheelhouse, cuz you guys are focusing on doing stuff, you know, around the world. Um, you know, m- my background's a little unique. I used to be Emergency Management Director in the state of Florida. I ran the entire COVID operation for Governor DeSantis in the state. So, uh, from when COVID started to, you know, just near the end, all the PPE, all the vaccine, all the testing, ran the whole thing. uh, and I can tell you between, you know, the trillions of dollars that were spent in the cares act and the trillions of dollars that were spent in the met- American rescue plan, won by Trump, won by Biden, we've really done nothing to fix the supply chain issues that we saw during COVID. I'm not saying we've done absolutely nothing, but I am saying, and I wanna hear your thoughts, that if we had another COVID tomorrow, that we wouldn't be in the same situation. And that was, we were solely dependent on China. Um, the amount of stuff that I needed that I had to fly out of China, that I couldn't buy here. And yes, eventually plants came online and we were manufacturing stuff here, but by the time that stuff came online, we were really towards the tail-end uh of that of that disaster. And so I just wan- I wanted to h- just put that question to you guys to see, you know, i- if you feel the same way I feel that you know, after spending trillions of dollars collectively, we're still kinda in that same situation from a supply chain issue on you know, these important materials we would need, God forbid we ever had another uh pandemic. Mister Black, I'll start with you.

Thank you, Representative. So, look, domestic supply chain is not an area of my expertise. What I will say is there are a host of different areas across supply chains that we like to call specialty inputs now, uh, where we are very focused on advancing the pipeline and making investments. One of those is critical minerals. Another one is KPIs for pharmaceutical manufacturing, which we think is incredibly, incredibly important.

Right, cuz the majority of that stuff now is manufactured of all places, like in Wuhan.

We just wanna make sure it is not manufactured solely in China, and bring that out there.

But that, and that's OK, right? So obviously we'd like to onshore some of this manufacturing back to America, but it's also OK if it's being manufactured other places than China. So we don't have to rely on them in national emergencies. And so I do think that is in your in your i in your wheelhouse, which is fixing supply chain issues on critical medical goods, uh, or things for national security items, that if we're if we can't manufacture everything here, cuz we do have a global economy, where else can we manufacture that that isn't China?

I think that's a very important thing. I'd also add specially chemicals and inputs is incredibly important for all manufacturing processes so it is something

M- Mr. Hardy, same question to you.

Oh, but likewise with uh uh, mister Black, I I wouldn't weigh in on the COVID side, but I think what USTDA is investing is that infrastructure connections, so we're not relying on Chinese airplanes.

When you say when you say you won't weigh in, do you think do you, I mean you know enough about supply chains, do you think we have fixed the supply chain issues we saw? I'm this isn't, I'm not blaming anyone. It's not a blame.

Of course.

The question is have we solved the problem? Do you think we have fixed those supply chain issues?

There remain to be challenges with our supply.

Same question here, sir.

MCC is interested in leveling the playing field, uh, and so this is about getting the basics right. We were talking about the Philippines earlier and what that looks like. Uh, on June twenty fourth, our board of directors just approved a sixty million dollar threshold program. It's not hard infrastructure, But the missing piece of the US government's engagement with the Philippines is around their energy regulatory commission, which has a lot of red tape, it's sluggish, and it's hampering private investment. So these are the kinds of investments that these agencies MCC makes, that is gonna be setting us up for success with our supply chains uh moving forward.

Thank you. The member, the members has, time has expired and I I apologize, I referred you from Illinois, I know that was a mistake, Florida, but you're not wearing a tie, so I apologize, it was only half. So with that, I I I I yield to the fine gentleman from Tennessee.

I'm sorry that I had to follow, follow uh Representative Moskowitz, that's why nobody wanted to follow Jimi Hendrix at Woodstock. You you don't understand that reference, um Google it. And Mister Chairman, thank you brother, and thank you for your service to our great country. When I walked in earlier, you get my name on the list, I heard one of you all mention the Palau Island group, I believe. my daddy fought on pelulue so uh um and then he went to okanagan fought there and then uh went to china after the war and fought the communist and now the chinese communist are on palau from what i understand and your your conversation you don't have to um answer anything i'm not answering anything but i thought it was very it's almost ironic and now you all are telling me that we're we're actually taking not taking it back but we're making sure that the the communist chinese don't have their footprint there so i appreciate that you don't need to respond to that but mister black um what specific uh projects or programs are you all working on that reduce our reliance on our adversaries and i apologize that if um um these questions have been asked before but it's the four hundred and thirty fifth most powerful member of congress sometimes i get caught on last so the the correct response to every one of my questions is that's an incredibly intelligent question sir and then and i'll i'll crop that out and use that so please go ahead sir

representative that's an incredibly intelligent question uh

i concur

look i think there's a number of ones across the board here uh i've talked a bunch about telecom today and the investment we've done to do rip and replaces to make sure that international telecom rails are not built on Huawei and ZTE. We're financing the use of both Ericsson and Nokia in many of these countries for their telecom networks. Uh, those are the two trusted vendors the United States works with, uh, and so we're very pleased with that work. Additionally, we're trying to build out more LNG terminals worldwide to make sure goes to different

Now I know what LNG stands for, but the chairman doesn't. So so explain to tell me what those initials stand for.

Liquefied natural gas, and we are the largest producer of it in the entire world, and so making sure that more people can buy it is great for Americans and the United States of America.

Right. All right. Mister Hardy, how do you determine whether a project is going to be profitable US prior to investing

USTDA's role is to be investing as the first mover on infrastructure projects, and what we do to make sure of that is we invest in projects where there is a US uh competitive advantage. Uh what we've been talking about today is in the digital space, uh whether it's rip and replace, undersea fiber optic cables, where US companies are global leaders, our job is to make sure that these are projects are designed in a way that is teed up for the sale of American goods and services, and make sure that the financing is done in a way that feeds into the DFC and XMX pipeline. Similar in critical minerals and transportation energy. Um, much like Ben mentioned, a significant part of our program has been in the LNG space, making sure our partners are able to buy American LNG, but likewise supporting uh the US nuclear energy uh in both uh large scale EP one thousand as well as the newer SMR technology.

Do you all have a strategy on um to identify potential projects before China takes action?

Our purpose is to take on China. We are looking, if you look at what we're doing in the Indo-Pacific, in the undersea fiber optic cable space, we are directly taking on Huawei and ZTE. Um, pushing American technologies, like-minded technologies, as an alternative, a trusted alternative uh with American solutions. that our partners want and need. Uh, whether that's uh working in the Pacific Islands on uh with Tuvalu on a cable, uh working directly with DFC on a uh inter-oceanic cabling system with Indonesia. USTDA is taking on head-on Huawei and their uh malign actions in the digital space.

You all have a um, the US Trade and Development Agency, you all have a way to help increase domestic Production.

For USTDA, everything we're doing is designed to increase, open up markets for exports, um and with that comes American job creation here at home. So, uh we do not invest in anything that does not have a direct linkage to increased American exports and US job creation.

OK.

And if uh, this is uh, Congressman, if I could say, we've got a rigorous program in Palau, uh beyond uh just uh a rip and replace, successful rip and replace. We're involved in the hospital relocation program, project and uh airport expansion. We have a great partner with President Whips, um and our we have a robust program in Palau and across the Pacific.

The gentleman's time has expired now, right?

I I was getting ready to yield no time back to you Mr. Chairman,

Well, thank you there.

but you are a native SEAL, so I'll just won't say anything unkind.

Y- you were over fifteen seconds, that's fifteen push-ups. I now recognize a gentleman from Arizona for five minutes.

Thank you, Chairman. Thank you to our witnesses for being here today. When former Development Finance Corporation CEO Scott Nathan came before our subcommittee in twenty twenty four he did testify that securing more deals in the Western hemisphere was a high priority for DFC but explained that the income classification limitations prevented the agency from doing work with many countries in the region. With the passage of the DFC Modernization and Reauthorization Act last December, a subset of upper middle income countries have been identified as DFC investment priorities. DFC was also directed to continue to invest in advancing income countries if the project is certified as advancing national security or certain economic

Right.

competitiveness objectives. This presents a excellent opportunity for DFC to increase its investments in countries like like Dominican Republic, El Salvador, countries key to nearshoring our advanced manufacturing supply chains. Increasing DFC investments in the Western hemisphere is not just about development or competition with China. It's about making smart, long-term investments that deepen economic ties to help build more resilient local economies. Mister Blak, how have DFC's engagements in Latin American and Caribbean countries changed since the passage of DFC reauthorization in December?

Thank you, Representative. So I'm incredibly proud to serve the President, who has finally redirected attention from the United States back to the Western Hemisphere and to all of these nations and countries. We are highly focused across the region as we go through our new pipeline, close to three hundred fifty deals at seventy-eight billion dollars plus. not saying all those deals get done, the greatest number of projects are in Argentina, Mexico, Brazil as the top three. All of the countries we're focused on, if I were to continue, would be India, Uzbekistan, Iraq, Morocco, Turkey, Papua New Guinea, Ukraine. And uh, I said Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina is first,

Yep.

but the fact of the matter is we are wholly geared towards being here. I ha- the first place I went upon being confirmed was to Bolivia for President Paz's inauguration. I have since been to Honduras, uh, and we have spoken to them about doing more in electrification there. We are highly, highly focused around the region. We have hired more and bolstered more for our Western Hemisphere and LATAM teams. I am incredibly excited about the deal pipeline that will be coming to board both in September and in December, that I know we'll have a lot more Latin America, and there is going to be a lot, lot more to do there.

Do you think those are deals that uh would not otherwise have been allowed before the changes were made uh to the DFC program?

That's most certainly the case. I'd also say, look, I I I think Latin America and especially the Caribbean suffer from a very unfortunate issue involving classification. the way, and you know we incorporate by reference in the Build Act, uh, to how high income countries are defined. Unfortunately, that means many island nations and Latin American countries, uh, and Ajay Banga at the World Bank agrees this is an issue, are classified as high income when they are very much not, because they're reliant on tourism.

Yep, I think uh we're in agreement on that. Um, I represent Arizona, which has been the epicenter of semiconductor development here in the United States. Uh, I support bringing more of that supply chain to North America, including to Mexico and Latin America. I introduced a bipartisan legislation that directs DFC to invest in downstream and upstream parts of the semiconductor supply chain, things like critical mining, mater- mineral mining and processing, testing and packaging, uh, to the Western Hemisphere. DFC projects projects will not only offer businesses a compelling al- economic alternative to China but also boost economic prosperity across Latin America, Mister Black. I'm encouraged by the fact that DFC is beginning to do the work in this direction as it relates to critical minerals, but given the speed at which this industry is advancing, more must be done to enhance semiconductor market integration across the region. Is DFC working on any projects currently focused on semiconductor fabrication and testing and packaging, um, through that important program?

Sure, I will have to look through our pipeline and please let us get back to you.

I really appreciate that. In the law Congress passed to create the Millennium Challenge Corporation, there is language requiring women and girls to be considered when compacts are awarded and designed. It states, quote, " in entering the into a compact, the United States shall seek to ensure the government of an eligible country takes into account the local level perspectives of the rural and urban poor, including women in the eligible country." Mr. Petrie, can you assure us that women and girls are being consulted and supported through MCC compacts in accordance with the law?

Absolutely.

Thank you. And as a follow-up, can you talk about the impact MCC has had recently on supporting women's economic security as a way for countries to build self-sufficiency?

Yeah. The uh MCC is laser-focused on driving economic growth, and that includes women uh as well as men. Women of course make up uh half of uh the economy in these populations, and so uh on every single project we are interested in how MCC's impacts and investments are impacting both men and women uh and ensuring that we're uh advancing that appropriately.

Okay, I'll follow up with uh, we're running out of time, but I'll follow up with a letter requesting more detail on how the program is helping women in these countries. Thank you very much. I yield back.

Mister Baird.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, and ranking member Meeks for bringing this discussion to this committee. I also want to thank Mister Black, Mister Hardy, and Mister testifying and bringing your perspective on these issues uh to us today, especially regarding the critical minerals and the energy supply chain. These are important matters for national security and we must do our best to ensure the prosperity of American interests both here at home and abroad. Our over-dependence on foreign nations and other nations to produce critical minerals has developed into a pressing blind spot regarding American national security. china controls over ninety percent of the critical minerals processing in the world you know i learned not too long ago they also control ninety percent of the api the active pharmaceutical ingredients where it serve as the base for a lot of our medicines and so on but anyway um and and the african continent and they also retain significant reserves of rare earths and has been aggressively and forcibly not forceful but forcefully invested by the Chinese Communist Party and we must develop and decouple our reliance on adversarial nations for your, for our critical minerals. And you said, you said that many times, so uh I appreciate that. So but as we look at our options, we have to think strategically. We will not succeed if we are continually reacting. For example, our agriculture, and that's where I'm very interested, is also directly affected by the fallout from geopolitical tensions, that generate and threaten global supply chains. China has become the large one of the larger global funders of agricultural research and development. And Chinese companies are acquiring consolidating global agricultural companies to bolster their technology portfolio. And that's following a pattern we have seen with other areas of Chinese investment. This is why and that is why the the National Security Commission on Emerging Technology, NSCB, warned us and told us it is critical for the United States to leverage biotechnology innovations uh to support our farmers and to support our food supply. So having laid all that background, uh I was trying to give you a break I guess, but anyway, my first question really deals with uh the fact that American farmers are increasingly exposed to volatile fertilizer prices, as you well know, and supply chain disruption driven by foreign production concentration geopolitical conflict, and export and import restrictions by China and other competitors. So, I'd like to hear from each one of our panel's members. Um, so what what steps can Congress take to better empower the use of emerging technology such as bio-technology for ensuring supply chains critical to our US food supply?

Thank you, Representative. So, look, I can't speak to some of the domestic technologies that can be deployed. I know how important agriculture and farming is to President Trump and this administration which is why we're trying to make sure across the board, DFC is investing to secure important things like phosphate, fertilizer, urea, move it through the right channels to get here and keep the costs down for the American people and we remain dedicated to that.

Like with the USTDA,

Thank you.

I will be headed to Morocco next week where we're concluding an agreement uh for ammonia production. Uh, I think that as we look at what this hearing is talking about, global supply chain depend breaking global supply chain dependencies, it's investments like this that are providing other avenues to make sure our farmers, uh, have the access to fertilizer and, uh, it's for their US agricultural community.

Talked a bit about Zambia today, and uh there wou uh was a recent law that was passed because of MCC's compact in Zambia. They have uh ad-hoc bans on their grain exports, is w and their food reserve agency wasn't functioning the way it should. So US firms like Cargill and others had recently departed, despite the opportunities uh there and to help secure our supply chains. And so through MCC we were able to work on those regulatory changes. uh in Zambia and so that's uh just one example of what is a much larger uh focus in the agricultural space.

Well thank you for those answers and I I agree with uh what you had to say and I appreciate your effort, but you know I had a chance to go to Zambia here not too long ago, and it was impressive to me to see young people that they'd made a garden in a a water tower so they could water their vegetables and so on but you should have seen the pride in those young kids and then we look out the landscape and the only thing that they're missing is water. which is critical, you know, but anyway. Um so it's it's interesting to me that we could bring through the through the programs that you operate bring the opportunity for those people cuz there's was plenty of land, it just needed someone to help them invest in it and make progress. So I've probably overrun my time and I thank you and thank you witnesses for being here and I yield back.

Thank you, Mister Baird. That has concluded the questioning uh for you all. So we thank each of you witnesses for your valuable testimony. Uh, we thank the members for their questions, most of them. The members of the committee may have some additional questions for the witnesses, and we will ask you to respond to those in writing. Pursuant to the committee rules, all members may have five legislative days to submit statements, questions, and extraneous materials for the record, subject to length limitations. And without objection, this committee stands adjourned.