to raise concerns of. mr. kaelin seems like he's a really smart guy, really great guy, i'm sure. he earns -- aiken say about him, he aired sort of what he got. but my job was to ask him tough questions. they have 107 lobbyists on capitol hill.

there are swarming capitol hill, a lobbyist. i got 100,000 -- i had a hundred thousand people write me their objections. the first thing i would do is stop this deal. i would not let this go through. it's not up to me. it's up to the fcc in the doj. >> senator frank and weighs in on the proposed comcast time warner cable merger tonight on the communicator's at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> and over tonight at 8:00 eastern a debate between former director of the cia and the nsa. the nsa is data collection and surveillance program. here is some other debate. >> here is google data center one and two. here is the line between them.

the nsa goes in and sits on that. everything that it wants from that even though hundreds of millions, billions of those communications will be u.s. communications. >> so let me make sure i understand the premise you're suggesting. you believe that the mail should be as safe haven for legitimate for intelligence targets of the united states. and that is exactly how i translate your question. if i'm not on that and not collecting g mail users. now, this begins to hurt your head. wheat has been your whole evening in and knock them off of teefifteen. >> i know. >> the approach you use in collecting signals intelligence looks a bit like a funnel. so you can access your. in the next debt is you collect. and then you process. then you read or listen.

you analyze. you draw up a report, and then you disseminate. so you got -- get the picture you're. the final gets smaller. very often people use the number out here that describes the potential access and then compete that number way up the chain to the far more sophisticated and narrowly focused activities. that's not true. if i go back to my promise to e-mail is not a safe haven. kugel is an international company. a lot of people -- the u.s. person in certain circumstances. by the way, that is actually not their cable. it is a virtual cable that they use. again, i ask you the question, hot melt, and she male, safe havens?

these are global e-mail providers that are used by everyone. is your theory that you can't touch it. he will be mad. >> you can watch more of the debate at "washington post" reporter who just received a pulitzer prize for is work on the nsa story later tonight at 8:00 eastern. and here on c-span2 with the senate in recess we will have highlights from book tv in prime-time. tonight, a look at the world of banking and finance starting with meghan and her book the other side of down, while failing well is the key to success. and an interview with michael lewis the author of flash boys. then steven haber and charles telomere is on the fragile by design, the political origins of banking crises in scarce credit. book tv in prime time all this week on c-span2. last week the senate foreign relations committee looked at

the budget request for the u.s. agency for international development. usaid administrator testified for about an hour and a half. >> this committee will come to order. welcome back to the committee. you come and a time when u.s. aid is making headlines for in my mind doing nothing more than the job you were appointed to do let me say for the record when it comes to the issue of your work in any closed society, i do not believe the half-action is as clearly articulated in mission statement pat power been

put -- democratic societies they're able to realize their potential or in any way the economy idea. i believe it is exactly what the people of cuba, and ron, burma, belarus, north korea, and other authoritarian nations need to help them communicate with each other, to help them achieve u.s. aid is stated mission of a free, peaceful, and self-reliance society with an effective and legitimate government. i commend you for helping people have a less control platform to talk to each other, hoping to find a way to connect and to share their views. a global internet free and programs. u.s. international broadcasting and support for human rights activists are all fundamental components of our country's longstanding efforts to promote democracy overseas.

for more than 50 years the united states has had an unwavering commitment to promote freedom of information in the world. or work in cuba is no different than our efforts to promote freedom of expression and uncensored access to information in the ukraine, russia, belarus, ron, china, or north korea. it should be noted that in the fiscal year 14 senate foreign operations bill there is $76 million set aside to promote global internet freedom and democracy in closed societies like cuba where the regime allows no independent press and limits access to the internet. it also states that with respect to the provision of assistance for democracy, human rights, governance activities that these programs shall not be subject to the prior approval by the

government of any foreign country. it is common sense. we should not ask the government of iran or egypt or china for permission to support advocates of free speech, human rights or political pluralism or to provide uncensored access to the internet or social media. at the end of the day just giving people the opportunity to communicate with the outside world and with each other is, in my mind, a fundamental responsibility of any democracy program. as bill gates said, the internet is becoming the town square of the global village of tomorrow. and he's right. but to go one step further, the town square will become more free and inclusive thanks to the democracy efforts of organizations like usaid. let me just close on this one. i think it is down and even dumber to go ahead and suggest

that there can be freedom and we should seek freedom of internet access and freedom of expression globally but that somehow the people of cuba don't deserve the same freedom. and i will finally send this topic, there is only one entity responsible for the imprisonment that is the cuban regime him read it is not this government. it is not a anti. it is the cuban regime. and i am tired of blaming ourselves when the entity that should be blind is the regime that unlawfully holds an american in prison for doing nothing but having been a jewish community in cuba be able to communicate with each other. pretty outrageous. now, finally, with reference to the overall priorities of the

budget we look forward to your perspective on how we can make certain that u.s. development assistance is aligned with overall foreign policy and no authority hearing about your priorities for fiscal year 2015a and d budget. no i speak for all the members when i say how impressed i have been by your creativity and energy which as been the essential to reform and to your agency's pursuit of international development are reason was the focus on best practices and results. as we have discussed on numerous occasions before i do, however as i said the secretary, remain deeply concerned about the resources for the western hemisphere. there are insufficient to meet the challenges of the region, and its importance to our own economic prosperity, security, and shared interests and help the development. so that is something that we look forward to continuing to engage you one. while efforts to address the

challenges posed the greater short-term dressed as -- disability in the regional long-term strategy that boost economic growth and consolidates the rule of law is fundamental and is in my view currently lacking. so i believe we can do better in the hemisphere. i think we can do better in meeting within that context our international development perris with and then this year. look for to an ongoing conversation about how we get the best results were broadly, foreign assistance, donors, ngos, the taxpayers, and now i would like to recognize the senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for the passionate comments. we appreciate you being here and all the work you do around the world. my comments will be a little more brief. we look forward to your testimony, but i think it's -- we appreciate you being here to go over your budget request for

2015. we appreciate the reforms the you're trying to put in place around the world, but also within usaid itself. i think, you know, foreign aid is one of the most misunderstood concept that the american people have. the fact it used and 1 percent of our overall u.s. budget on foreign assistance and foreign aid and foreign activities, not kinetic i might add, but i would like for you to sort of heroism of those successes. at think it's also our responsibility to have some healthy skepticism regarding some of the programs. i appreciate what you're trying to do with food programs to make them much more efficient. al afford to talk with you about that. there's some other programs where we will be dealing 30 percent of local entities. while in one way that is a much appreciated concept, the and and and now we want to make sure we have results.

thank you for being here today. we look forward to the questions and your testimony. we thank you for your work. >> administrator shot, the floor is yours. we will enter your full statement and the record without objection. we ask is summarized and five minutes so that members can have the opportunity it dialogue. >> thank you. thank you, chairman, ranking member. i wanted thank you specifically for your very strong and your support for america's development programs around a world in insuring that there is a full reflection of values. want to thank all the members of the committee for your guidance, counsel, support, and oversight in these years. a moderate to be here to present the president's fiscal year 2015 budget request for u.s. aid would still was just about $20 million. this resource and this investment is a core part of keeping our country safe and secure over the long term and

improving our own domestic prosperity as the world prospers with us. our mission is to and extreme poverty and to promote resilience democratic societies. our efforts over the past few years with your support have constituted a serious rebuilding of this agency. during my tenure we hired more than 1100 staff, rebuilt the capacity manage budgets, project policy priorities and food and energy, education, water, health and expanded our partner base to include more local organizations , companies, faith based institutions, universities , scientists, students in addition to our valued traditional in zealand contacting partners. we have expanded our capacity to evaluate all of our major programs. when i started there were a few dozen evaluations before every year. this year we will have nearly 280 with more than 50 percent of

them used to make course corrections in how programs are implemented. with all of them being open and publicly available. our efforts have constituted a new model of development that engages the private sector, science, technology, fate institutions, and others in the types of partnerships. we believe these partnerships are delivering results. president obama's feed the future program which is represented with nearly $1 billion in his budget request now reaches 7 million small-scale farmers in 19 countries. this year 12 and a half million children will no longer be hungry because they are in families and the beneficiaries of the the future. our investment is matched and in some cases exceeded by private sector partners to have committed over three and a half billion dollars to this effort. want to thank the committee for its lead in supporting incremental food aid reforms that will help us reach an additional 800,000 children in

the context of disasters around the world this year. our efforts to support and save children's lives, especially children who die unnecessarily into the age of 5i supported in this budget. every year we save more than 5 billion children from dying under the age of five. we set for ourselves a similar goal of saving 6 million a year by 2030 and mobilize the global community to work with us to achieve those goals. in education, water, energy, and many other sectors of the economy we work and it results oriented way. last week was in the philippines with secretary hegel working with defense ministers on how we can coordinate humanitarian relief efforts more effectively and help them build the capacity to be great partners in dealing with disasters.

this budget request includes more than $3 billion for disaster assistance in places like syria, central african republic in south sudan. our investments in democracy, human rights, governments are an important part of what we do all-around world. this past weekend we noted with some initial success in the election in afghanistan that found nearly 60 percent voter turnout in a very large proportion, more than expected the women. those efforts are supported by the united states and other international partners and led by afghan institutions themselves. our work in our own hemisphere is of particular importance. while budgets have been tight and this budget does make trade-offs, we have now launched a u.s. global development lab that brings businesses, sciences , technologists, and universities together. i believe in the latin america region in particular we are starting to see some interesting results. we close to an interesting

leverage partnership in which we will spend $5 million to motivate local banks to commit $1,303,000,000 to small-scale farmers and producers and agricultural lands, colombia, peru, and guatemala. that kind of leverage in that kind of scale is what is possible if we do things in a more creative and effective way. let me close by saying thank you i had the opportunity this year and was honored to deliver the speech at the national prayer breakfast. reminded me that when we come together to serve the world's most vulnerable people this is an issue that can cut across partisan divides, bring us together as a nation and allow us to continue our proud heritage as the world's humanitarian development and global health leader. thinking. >> thank you, administrator. let me start off with the one

concern that i had, the western hemisphere. almost every major account in usa ad the f-1 15 budget for the western hemisphere will be cut relative to past years. venezuela will be cut by 14 percent, even amidst the current crisis. eighty, colombia, guatemala will all be cut by 20%. i don't underestimate the problems we face in the world, but i do think we underestimate the problems we face in our own hemisphere. we have enormous challenges for central america. one of the highest homicide rates in the world. we have challenged governments in terms of meeting that challenge. we have still in mexico some states that a relatively lawless near the frontier border with the united states.

we have a challenge of venezuela and a growing band of circumstances there where civil society is under siege. in ecuador we have basically because of the government's. i just see a wide range of issues. i understand that some of these countries have graduated. by the same token, what happens is instead of looking for other investment opportunities the money is sent through other parts of the world. we have now seen year over year over year double-digit cuts that from my perspective are not sustainable. so you commit to me that your work with us to see how we change this dynamic because i think it in our own hemisphere and our own front yard there are challenges that above in our

national interests on some many different questions from security to drug interdiction to economic opportunity to health care issues no borders when it comes to diseases. can you talk a little bit about that? >> yes. thank you, senator. i appreciate that point of view and agree with the essential nature and importance of the region. while we have made tough trade also will last many years, as secretary kerry noted that president obama has said, this region is of critical importance to our future from the trade commemoration, and partnership perspective. as a result we are trying to position our programs in such a way that especially as countries get wealthier and move into middle income and middle and upper income status of program shifts to engaging more public-private partnerships, and we are doing more creative and

technical partnerships in lieu of in some cases led the lower resources. in particular, i'm proud of the fact that our development credit toward a team has dramatically expanded the amount of loan guarantees be provided, whether it's in el salvador where we have allowed this the opening of $25 million for small-scale businesses or in nicaragua or in mexico where i will be next week to meet with some of these partners. we're making real progress in helping to on lock global finance using a credit guarantees in a highly leveraged way. similarly, as we have read prioritized science, technology, and innovation we have a host of new and improved partnership for businesses and research institutions throughout the region. one i would just now is an innovative partnership with starbucks to help them reach 25,000 small-scale farmers and columbia and previously affected

communities so that they can bring better prices to the farm gate economic value and build supply chains that enhance economic opportunity while also supporting their own presence there. we are trying to involve -- you called in to those types of partnerships. the region can become a model for development and development partnership, especially in countries that a moving up the income scale. >> well, i appreciate that innovative thought. i welcome it, but we are also looking at some of these other challenges. we will continue to engage with you in that respect. in the ukraine language passed by this committee and the senate and house signed by the president asks to reprogram assistance to ukraine. $50 million to the budget for the improvement and free elections among other things. a hundred million for security assistance spread over the next three fiscal years.

where are you in the process of reprogramming this assistance? when would you expect it to get to ukraine? when do you believe the u.s. aid mission director which will transfer the billion dollars in loan guarantees to take place? >> well, i appreciate the chance to come back to you on the specific question. and are acting deputy and assistant administrator in the ukraine right now working with civil society groups and groups of supporting the election process. i note that some of our partners were critical to document some of the human rights abuses that took place in the 45 day time friend and a protest. our economic portfolio is being restructured to support the implementation of and moving

forward with the imf agreement so that ukraine can get access to tens of billions of dollars of imf resources. or helping them with technical support to change the fewer subsidies in the future of their energy security policy and the number of other areas where that kind of economic technical assistance has been requested. we have a proud and significant history of working in the ukraine believe it delivered important results and look forward to continuing to do that at a high level now given some repositioning of resources and a very strong support of the committee. >> i understand that a at the plans to incentivize up to 100 million in on budget funding based on benchmarks, the tokyo mutual accountability framework. think that is an important initiative that deserves highlighting. time of constrained budget accountability for the funds in afghanistan will only grow in importance.

what are deliverable is will we be emphasizing in discussions with the incoming afghan government? what are some of our goals, what are some of the challenges that? >> thank you for your lead in supporting a programs in afghanistan. for 23 percent of the total cost of the will we think we can deliver tremendous an important result the create the basis of the more stable and secure society. we were part of an international conference effort and tokyo year-and-a-half ago to bring together all the international partners and create a set of conditions that the afghan government would have to meet of committed development assistance, not just from the united states but the u.k., australia, japan, of the international partners speaking with one voice. some of those benchmarks include anti-corruption activities that a clear and transparent and

effective, including the conduct of free and fair elections and a peaceful transition of power. they include collecting more customs revenue and using their domestic collection of revenue to replace developmental assistance of a long term, and mussina 360 percent increase on that benchmark. there's seven or eight other critical ones. access to school and education for young girls in particular. so our community needs to meet twice a year to assess the performance and we intend to make some shared determinations after an assessment conducted with the new government. >> senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. again, thank you for being here. you and i have talked a great deal about the food for peace program. i know that it has been partially implemented. think we all know that the parochial interests marlin not delivering food aid in a way that we need to as a country.

the goal is to alleviate suffering for people who are starving and now nourished. wonder if you could talk a little bit about that, you would like to see fully happen relative to our food programs? >> thank you, senator. thank you for your lead on this critical issue. america has, through food for peace which u.s. aid implements of the last 50 years serve more than 3 billion people and providing them food assistance when needed. because of -- nearly every other -- every other country that provides for the assistance has made a shift to producing food locally and to providing cash resources to institutions like the world food program so they can buy and deliver in the most efficient way. >> and that hours of local countries to be far more self-sufficient over the long haul. >> it absolutely does. >> it raises the standard of living. >> yes. >> how many more people could be actually served if we would move

fully to this kind of program which i think anybody would say from the standpoint of what we're trying to do makes more sense than we are now doing where we are shipping u.s. products overseas places and never building of that independence that we would like to see happen. how many more people would be served. >> this year's budget proposal calls for 25% flexibility. that 25 percent correlates to 2 million additional children who would receive food. those are kids and women and men inside syria, central african republic in south sudan and in afghanistan. >> and if we did it fully how many people, how many more people would be served? >> i have not made up 100 percent estimate. >> we have done an estimate. we think it seven twitter.com/booktv million more people each year would be served if we would move away from the constraints that we now have by ensuring that instead of, again,

building at the independence, helping the local economies which is what this is all about and, i guess, we also have preferred shippers. >> well, the way the shipping contacting system works relies on a handful of core partners. they have been important partners of the course of the program. the president's proposal which is an incremental proposal maintains an important role for american farmers, food producers, and shippers. ..

you are tracking how much money or spending but but you are not tracking outcomes as i understand it to say that only the money maybe 30% are we getting the same kind of results? this is a different kind of effort than the food aid for a-gram. this is actually contracting with people to carry out the work that usaid is underway with can you talk to us a little bit about that and you have similar concerns by the way that we are only measuring money out of not measuring results. >> i which is reframed out a little bit senator because usaid forward is intended to cover a range of reforms that allow us to be a better and more efficient hardware and ultimately and critically allows to be better at ordaining our core results. that is a package of reforms

that includes a lot of things to move us in that direction and we have been able to do that. i believe the gao review is focused specifically on this shift to including more local ngos and local institutions and i would have hoped that they might have brought the analysis because if you did broaden the analysis to the full set of reforms what you would find his unlike a few years ago today i could sit here and say we are reaching 7 million farmers for agriculture efforts and our child survival programs are saving millions of lives a year. that ability to quantify and report those results is also a part of usaid forward. i would also note that our progress against our goals and moving to local institutions has been -- is designed incremental and we think we are doing this at a pace that is responsible but the ultimate goal is to build enough institutional capacity locally so american aid and assistance is not needed over the long run and so we want

to build that self-sufficiency so we don't have to be there forever. >> one of the important things we do as a nation is. capacity building and again these are along the lines that most people here would like to see and that is making sure we are doing on a daily basis every week -- everything we can to empower countries where working with to be sustainable on their own and not be dependent upon aid forever from united states. we looked on the web site to try to determine who is really in charge of trade capacity building. there are 24 u.s. agencies involved and i would just ask which one really is ultimately responsible for building trade capacity in countries we are dealing with? >> well senator first i think this is a critically important issue and i would know we would commit nearly 200 million dollars a year specifically to

trade capacity building and for more than that if you look at regions in africa and elsewhere. my goal as the u.s. trade ambassador and i are cohosting a discussion with a number of our partners to understand how we can together optimize the implementation of the new bali the new bali agreements that create a framework for improved intercountry. trade with many of the countries we work and president obama launched trade africa last year based on extraordinarily strong and in the penalty validated results that show for every dollar we invest in trade capacity building in transit we were at generating $40 of economic value to our east african trade african trade are. myself and the state department worked in close coordination. usaid provides most of the financing for these activities. >> i think the concern is and again you are one of the most reform minded leaders of this organization we have ever had and i think we all applaud those efforts but i think the concern

is there is not really one person or a small group of people that is driving driving this and as you mentioned it's incredibly important in there so much we can do without much money to really empower these countries to be involved in trade but again goes on forever versus what we are doing relative to aids. is there a way you think and maybe you can't answer in a answer in the setting but is there a way you can work with us to help figure out who actually is in charge and responsible and accountable for these activities so that it has a focus that gets us to a point we would all like to go? >> we absolutely would like to work with you. i would say the way it currently works as usaid takes responsibility for the implementation of these programs and reporting on the results make you sure they are effectively designed in the u.s. trade representative leads the. negotiations that create opportunities for these programs to be effective and deployed

where they are the most needed. it's critical we are working closely together and i can report to you with a high degree of confidence that i think that partnership is moving ever closer. >> thank you very much. i appreciate the hearing mr. chairman. >> thank you. mr. cardin. city administrator shah thank you for your leadership. the obama administration has made it clear that our national security budget includes the development assistance program. you are less than 1% of federal budget and a very small fraction of the total national security budget and it's very very important. i particularly want to acknowledge the budget support for east asia-pacific. the subcommittee i had an opportunity to chair. as i told you before the hearing started you are working under very tough budget on the overall budget growth is very much

reduced and you have had to make tough decisions i particularly appreciate the priority that has been given to east asia and the pacific consistent with the presence rebalancing in asia from the philippines and disaster assistance of funds to burma democratic institutions and i might say to senator corker your trade capacity improvement, there are many countries benefitinbenefitin g directly from what you are doing in east asia and the pacific. the recon initiative secretary clinton initiated evicting the countries in that region not just on the environment but also on health and infrastructure is a major initiative that i think we can be very proud of. having said what i did we want to make sure that aid is done in the most efficient way. that is why the food aid program reforms and i agree with senator corker are very valuable improvements that we can reach

more people and leverage our dollars further than we do today. this year you started a global development lab in i want to talk with you about that using a science and technology innovation and development to leverage the monies that we make available to our academic centers that have expertise in this area but that already are engaged in the countries that we are engaged in as well as private companies that also want markets in these countries so are prepared to make investments to work in a coordinated way to get a much more effective result and to achieve our development assistance objectives in a more efficient and hopefully a shorter time period. can you just share with the committee how this program using existing resources, how you

launch the development? >> thank you senator for your leadership on so many issues related to our work and for your personal commitment to food aid reform and the u.s. global development lab. we are excited to have recently launched the u.s. global development lab. in my time in this role, we have increased our spending on science and technology research and development from about $130 million previously to just over $600 million this year and we have done that entirely through programmatic trade-offs where we are making the tough choices to move money into this area. what this has allowed us to do is create developmedevelopme nt innovation laboratories on college campuses across this country and we are seeing groups of students and faculty and research create new technologies like new ways to allow babies to breathe through low cost continuous positive airway pressure devices that came from rice university the pouch that

came from the duke school of medical pioneer -- and bioengineering that is heat sensitive and safer up to two years so women can take that and go to their homes and take one dose before and one for the child after and prevent the transmission of aids from a mother to a child without being in an assisted medical environment. those kinds of technological breakthroughs reduce the cost of saving kids lives and saving mother's lives and improving the effectiveness. see also the cost we do and direct health services in these countries that deal with babies that are infected. >> that's exactly right and we have also found companies across our country and around the world have been eager to partner with us so now walmart has joined the lab and is working with us to reach farmers throughout sub-saharan africa. unilever and proctor & gamble

are -- proctor & gamble have provided packets that have allowed us to purify water in places like bermuda. they are also helping us reach the hard-to-reach communities where too many children die because the waters and here and still has microorganisms in it. these kinds of public by the partnerships coupled with a real professional science and technology capacity i think will allow usaid and u.s. development efforts around the world to have a darpa like capabilities to create new technologies, deploy them on they have the worlds poorest people and just as importantly allow young people in this country that want to create entrepreneurial businesses whether it's making and selling solar-powered flashlights in parts of rural africa where there is no energy access for commercializing this cpap positive airway pressure device which they now do for 20 or $30 a device that we are deploying throughout malawi. we found them malawian people

are inspired to become inventors and entrepreneurs and to use that business savvy skill to solve some of the world's most challenging problems. >> see i find it very exciting. you are leveraging the strength of america in our science and technology and we have been able to discover and share with the world as well as our entrepreneurial spirit and our private companies. leveraging that -- these are american values that are being used to help people do with your objectives and developmental systems. we are. >> we have requested a series of new authorities to help us be a little more flexible and modern in how we carry out this work and they include the ability to use program funds to hire specialized individuaindividua ls with science and business backgrounds. the ability to provide prizes. we have seen a lot of technological innovation comes out of prize competition and you

only spend money on those that are winning. you are able to motivate hundreds and sometimes thousands of new partners sony would never otherwise be able to find to compete are winning prizes on some of those innovation awards. some flexibilities and how we use development assistance which is critical to funding this effort and then of course fully funding usaid budget. those would be the request as it relates to this and i just want to thank members of the committee for the extraordinary efforts you've made to support this new way of working. >> just one final comment. as i understand it gets using basic resources in an efficient way to accomplishing and your results. >> that's correct. >> senator revealed. >> thank you for being here and for all of your work. mr. director usaid is not a charity. it's a u.s. agency that promotes humanitarian and development aid around the world that up as part of it also furthering u.s.

interests around the world. it's a two-way street for us. we are doing what's right in the world and also furthering our national interest, right? >> yes, that's correct. >> as you get involved in the country to look at the specific needs. every country is a specific need. some countries have a lack of access to water or some -- usaid aims to go on to specific countries to determine what their needs are and promote those humanitarian causes but also in a way that furthers u.s. interests. is that an accurate description? >> our mission is to end extreme poverty because over the long-term accomplishing that mission makes us safer and more secure and you articulatarticulat ed that very well. >> with that mission mind you have programs in cuba that you have been engaged in the past and continue be. the clearly stated goals available for every member of this committee in the world to read is to break the information

blockade in cuba and promote information-sharing among other things. though the those are stated goals of our program corrects? >> we have notified congress and congressional budget notifications every year since 2008 on the goals of those programs and we run internet access and freedom of information programs in many parts of the world. including cuba. >> the reason why bring that up and rightfully so that you focus on information-sharing because cuba according to freedom houses a second most oppressivoppressiv e-government in the world only only after iran and as i understand a close second after iran in terms of denying access to information-sharing. people in cuba can't go on the internet. if you're close to the government you may be able to sneak in with internet access but the average person cannot go on the internet in cuba. it's prohibited and in fact i'm going to send out its weak right now. if i sent this tweet to cuba i would be put in jail.

i'm going to send it as an example of what people in cuba cannot do. as a result of that usaid has been revealed, usaid had a program called -- which is designed to provide the people of cuba access to information and to break the blockade and allow people to share information. i want to walk through this. there has been an an insinuation by some that this program that impact this program in my opinion and i think in yours as well was completely within the stated in the stated purpose of your programs in cuba to break the information blockade to promote information-sharing. that is accurate, right? >> that was the goal? >> we have publicly notified these programs are designed to enable open communications. >> the other argument i've heard is that it's a covert program but in fact is program was reviewed by the general

accounting office, right? >> they made no suggestions for changes. they had no criticism for the way the money was being spence. >> actually complemented the oversight. >> we weren't spying on the cuban government using this program. >> no. >> we weren't selling weapons on this program are arming elements on the ground in cuba with this program. >> no. >> this program was basically allowing cubans to be able to committee with other cubans because their government doesn't let them do that. in an advanced society in the 21st century people should at least be able to do that so with this program chose to do was to fulfill the mandate of this program to break the information blockade and promote information-sharing. i read this article and is said at its peak there were 40,000 users on the program. that's excellent not true. at its peak it had 68,000 users so here's my question. when was the last time we stopped a program because it was too successful?

this program in my mind is successful not only am i glad that we did this program what i'm upset about is that we stopped. i don't think we should stop the twitter like programs. maybe usaid is not the perfect agency for what i'm about to talk about but i believe we should do a thing we can to provide the people of cuba and other oppressive societies full access to the internet so they can go to any web site they want. if they want to read the communist drag they can or the cnn web site or "huffington post" or drudge or whatever they want to read they should be able to do that as well. for everyone that is outraged by this program when was the last time undermining tyranny counter to the stated purposes of the united states of america? when it was last time were outraged by a government program that provides access to people of a country for the free flow of information and ability to talk to each other? i read these quotes in the paper

people setting themselves on fire. we have radio broadcast -- broadcast to europe during the cold war and we have radio broadcasts to cuba that have content in them. all we want people to do is talk to each other and i want to know when was the last time he was against the stated purpose and goals of the united states of america to underline -- undermining tyranny by the way a tyranny that we heard testimony a few days ago involved in the single greatest violation of u.n. sanctions against north korea since they were imposed? a tyranny that was against us in every international forum a tyranny that is consistently on the side of every madman tyrant on the planet. if there was a vote on syria there was assad. if there was a vote on libya they were with gadhafi. if there was a vote on russia they were with putin. if there is a vote on human rights violations in china they are with china. when was the last time cuba ever lined up on the side of decency and human rights?

this is an anti-american government. that doesn't just undermine some people. it tries to a undermine our foreign-policy aims and of the free world. my question would be in the know this is a long-winded question when do we start this program again? what do we need to do to not just start this program but expand as the people in cuba can do what i just did and that is speak freely to the world and to each other about the reality of human life and about anything else they want including the raiders record from beyoncé or jay-z or what's on the award to the oscars? when do we start this again? >> senator i want to clarify usaid programs aren't designed to promote open access to information and facilitate communication. any programs that have further purposes are not implemented by usaid but rather by other parts of the state department of the national endowment for democracy. in terms of restarting these types of things you know, with

we have the fy14 fiscal guidance which is pretty clear as to which agencies will be pursuing these activities into the future. >> senator durbin. >> thank you mr. chairman. i guess i want to follow my colleague and friend senator rubio and i sure don't quarrel with the premise whether it's china or cuba opening up information free exchange of information that is so fundamental to our country and so fundamental to what i consider to be basic alleys of democracy. so the critics of this effort mr. shah i think ought to come up with a better idea but the notion behind it, the premise i think sound. i may go a little further than my colleagues on the committee when i say after over 50 years of what has been made dubious foreign policy in cuba by the united states, i've been in favor of opening up as much as we can, cuba to the ideas and

people of the world and the united states. that is how communism and the soviet union came to an end. they were overwhelmed by reality. i have been to cuba. they are isolated from reality. if we had more contacts at the social media level and beyond i don't think the current regime could survive as the communistic regimes did not survive in eastern europe or it i want to put in one point here and i'm sure it's been mentioned earlier. i've visited two years ago. what a heartbreaking situation. this poor man is being held because he may have brought in equipment that would have brought in more information to cuba. i don't know specifically whether he did or didn't but that is the charge. espionage. what they have done to this poor man is heartbreaking. when you visit with him and see what his life is like today or for meet his wife and family as

i have and i said to cuban officials i have kind of leaned your way in opening up relationships between the united states and cuba but you have lost me. what you have done to this man in closing out his small little effort to bring in some equipment to me is just outrageous. this poor guy is still in prison hospital prison or whatever had happens to be i don't know how he keeps his mind about him when he faces this every single day. i don't disagree with your premise is senator rubio. open it up. the more ideas we can pour into that island the better i think the chance that they will move toward values that we share in so those who are critical of this basic approach give me a better one. give me something else that will achieve this goal. mr. shah the two things that i focused on. one was the legacy from my predecessor senator paul simon about water for the world.

we have been appropriate in money. i know usaid has been focused on. the other one was child marriage and we finally passed that is part of the violence against women act and i know there's a program underway at usaid to try to discourage child marriage and all of the awful things which come as a result of it. i would like you to comment on those two areas if you could. >> thank you senator. first is thank you for your leadership on water and water for the poor. thanks in part to your leadership and your predecessors we have an extraordinary opportunity now to reach 32 million people who would otherwise not have access to clean and reliable sources of water and when we do when we succeed what that means is girls are usually sent into dangerous environments to fetch water, they avoid being abused and raped and hurt as they are going about those tasks and they can do things like go to school.

it's an extraordinary accomplishment that i think the senate and the entire congress should be very proud of. between 2009 in 2012 are spending on water relative to the prior four year period went up from $1.4 billion to $2.4 billion in the reason we were able to make that extraordinary increase at a time of tight budgets is that as we have focused on investing in those things that deliver the most cost-effective results, save the most lives and produce the most opportunities particularly for girls around the world, investments and walk or were near the top of the list and that is why you have seen that transition and ship. i just want to thank you for your leadership and i'm proud of the way the agency has focused on measuring results in terms of lives saved from water programs and disease reduction clean water access and the sanitation access as well. with respect to child marriage and gender-based violence you know we have new programs that

focus on these issues and particularly high-risk places but it's just extraordinary that challenges people face. i was just in eastern, a few months ago and saw the u.n. report last week that shows 15,000 girls that have been raped and it has been eight part of how war is conducted in that part of the world. i'm proud of the fact that thanks to your support and other members of the committee the united states leads the world in supporting health services for victims and helping girls get back on their feet and hoping people reintegrate into society in finding economic opportunity going back to school and the range of those programs has gone up significantly since secretary clinton made a visit to that region i think now five years ago it but i think it's something that america can be very very proud of. >> thank you very much. i might add too that i'm promoting a product made in

chicago and this is a shameless promotion. it's called port appeared. this man has made -- he's an engineer and what are sanitation. he has made a six-gallon or miss. whatever you pour into the top comes out clean drinking water at the bottom in two minutes. no chemicals involved. he uses nanofiber filters. it sells for 60 or $70. in haiti a family spends $3.50 a week for a jug of water. if we could take that into a microcredit situation in a few weeks they could buy this jug that for two years would provide them safe drinking water for their families. it is one idea and you have mentioned some others and i hope your folks will take a look at. puerto pier one word. i think you will be very impressed with this man who is trying to change the world one little bit of time and i think it's a good effort.

steve thank you senator. we set up the u.s. global plan to help commercialize and distribute those types of technologies so we would be eager to follow up. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> the promotion is one of the duties of the united states. >> by the way we have got pretty good water filtration technology center in milwaukee as well. you probably helped out with that company. mr. rajiv shah welcome. i really enjoyed your keynote at the national prayer breakfast where you made a think a very strong case for foreign aid. unfortunately not every american got to hear that case and i think it's also unfortunate when you take a look at our current budget situation and the enormous pressure we are under most americans go to foreign aid and that's the first place they want to cut. can you speak little bit in terms of making that case for

foreign aid? >> thank you senator and thank you for your leadership. what i learned from the opportunity to be at the prayer breakfast this year was that when we come together across different communities and partners republicans and democrats house and senate businesses and entrepreneurs and very importantly faith community members who carry out this mission with exactly the right attention and serving those that are the least fortunate amongst us. we present a picture to the world of an america that cares about paul orgel people. it cares about countries and societies that have been left out of the tremendous growth opportunity that has swept over the world over the last several decades, centuries. when we start to remind americans of just how much suffering there is out there that 860 million people will go to bed hungry tonight.

6.6 million children will die into the age of five, almost all from simple diseases that could be prevented with pennies per dose types of treatments. people begin to see the opportunity and actually ask us to do more, not less with their foreign assistance in our development investments so our priority at usaid has been to demonstrate the resources the congress and trust in us at a difficult fiscal time are deployed as effectively and efficiently as possible. .. actually ended a

program that has been unsuccessful and we have not been able to influence a county into better behavior. >> over my tenure we have shutdown 34% of the areas of investment areas around the world and that is what we needed to do to invest in feed the future that is in 19 countries with incredible results. i went with my team to afghanistan and did a review of everything planned out and it was called a sustainability review and we removed a number of projects we didn't think were

financial stable or regenerate the investment. i am glad we did that as i sit here >> provide my office with that list. that gives me information that says we have a good administrator and he is looking at the programs and these are 34 he has ended. let's keep going in terms of priorities. you have half a million toward global climate change. i think before the subcommittee appropriations that i serve on, we talked about man whose writing i respect that look at where you get the most bang for your buck. he wrote a book "cool it" that says we are better off spending

money on malaria, aids, fresh wat rer initiatives as opposed spending money on global warming. that is 3% of your budget that is being allocated to something some are saying you are far better off spending money elsewhere. >> we can. first so i am clear about our priorities the largest area is health at 2.7 billion and when you include the hiv program is a 8 million. food is 2 .5 billion and that cloughs the feed the future program that invest in agriculture. >> here is landfall -- half a billion that could be put toward the food.

>> our energy programs are growing into the budget because access to clean energy in country after country is critical for development. i was in the democrating republic of congo. they have 9% energy access. they want hydro power and off grid solutions and we are working on those issues. and they are by the way going to be carbon reduction strategy. >> hydro power is good. solar and wind power is double the price. so i am asking the question where is this money being spent and is it wisely? >> i think it is wisely. i would like to point out when

we look in the communities, people pay a lot where there is no systemic access. and in that context off grade solutions that rely on wind and solar are cost-effective for those communities. but this is the math we do to make sure we are investing things that high the highest returns but we are making an initial investment and we want to be sustainable in how we carry out the work. i bring credit to the team for bringing analysis and thinking for how we do the work and in particular carrying out cost effectiveness. >> thank you for your answers. >> thank you, administrateer

shaw. good to be here. first a few questions around syria. senator carter talked about the global development lab. really excited on that project and congrats on the rollout. i was in palestine and met with people who are benefiting because of the work with usaid and it is creating strong regard for our countries and you are good ambassador in that way. i echo senator menendez concern about the latin budget. it is a comp combination of things. all are ten u.s. ambassador positions that are not filled for the latin area. is some -- some is on the whitehouse and some of that is on the senate. the south com part of defense

has been hit part and they are having to reduce drug intervention as a result. the combined message we seem to be sending, while each might have their own explanation, is that latin america isn't place of importance to us. and just because it isn't importance to us doesn't mean it isn't to cline china, iran, russia and russia is doing exercises in the caribbean for the first time in 20 years. i want to ask you about syria. the senate committee and full committee passed sr 34 dealing with aid in syria. and we are the largest provider to syrian refugees and much have been delivered to ngo's through the un to those who have fled.

we passed a resolution picking up on the un security council saying now is the time for cross-border aid. there is 9 million people in need of assistance inside syria. the un has indicated that unimpeded border is supported by the council and our resolution called to bring back a plan on how we will be more aggressive in the deliver of aid. what do you see is the role of usaid? >> thank you for your leadership, senator. on syria, i hope more americans can see the $1.7 billion we have

provided is reaching 4.2 million people inside syria, and reaching the 2.5 million refugee that is a tremendous and unsustainable crisis in jordan and lebanon in particular. and within syria, 3.5 million of the 9 million are not reachable because of the constraints on how aid is provided. in that context, usaid has been the word leader in providing cross border assistance. and we call for un agencies to do the same and was agreed to by the security council and per the report at the end of march shows that the syrian regime hasn't all allowed for the terms to be met at any scale. there has been a few convoys

across the border done with the syrians but that is a small and incremental step given 3.5 million people could be reached but are not because the terms are not being implemented as aggressive be the regime. it has allowed us to provide surgeries and medical support to 250,000 syrians. i want to recognize syrian and american doctors who are risked their lives to do amazing work in that context. we need to do more and we need the syrian regime to abide. >> i was at a meeting with save

the children this morning and we were talking about the fact that they are not allowing access in accord with the security council resolution. and an important thing for the administration to understand in terms of congress there is complicated feelings here in syria and that was shown in the vote foring authorization of military force but there is not conflicting concern votes on aid. it passed here and out of the senate and we would not provide the aid if it was controversy. so take advantage of the fact you have a congress that is u unanimous about the deliver of cross border aid. i think there is much more that

could be done >> that is wonderful because tomorrow i am convening my counterparts from donor countries to ask them to do more of this cross border work. it is good to know there is support. >> thank you, senator contain cane. >> senator flake? >> i will paraphrase here. it is dumb dumb and even dumb to shield cuba from the influences that we have on other regimes. i could not agree more. and that is why i have opposed our policy on cuba for very long. iran is the only country less

free than cuba but even in iran we don't shield the government of iran from the americans travelling there. if north korea allowed more of it we would encourage more americans to go there. not just dennis rodman. same with cuba. oliver stone going down there praising the public school system in cuba. where if we had bob from ohio they would say mow so much sing. so for the life of me, i cannot understand why when our goal is to expose cubans and the cuban government to american influence we cut off our arm and both feet here by denying ordinary americans and every day americans the ability to travel

freely there. i have no doubt if we eopened u the ban, the cubans would limit who can come in. but if someone is limiting by travelling it should be a communist. that is the whole problem i have with cuba. specifically on this one i have issues and not with the fact that we have programs like this going but the fact they are conducted by usaid. and you can see until you are blue in the face this is something we should have known about or it has been authorized. it is legal. we could argue if it covert or discreet. but it doesn't shield the fact

it is not advised for usaid to provide relief and encourage democratic growth around the world because it benefits the united states interest and them as well. when we have programs elsewhere in the world. we are providing relief to those in south sudan. we have supplies coming from nairobi to south sudan. we are working with partners inside syria. we may not have people on the ground but we do in neighboring countries. this is serious stuff. what are we doing to our usaid programs around the world when they hear there are discreet programs like this going on by usaid. do you have any concerns this

program in cuba jeopardizes our programs elsewhere in the world? i am not question if we should do this. i am not questioning where we are doing it. >> senator, i appreciate and i think your remarks illustrate there is a policy debate on the overall policy. with respect to implementation, i can assure your our implementation isn't covert and is consistent with programs we conduct as part of our efforts in a number of other countries around the world as part of supporting democratic and open governments in cites and civil society actors. at the end of the day, i believe our mission to end extreme

poverty requires a broad, open society to participate in that task. and i appreciate your mention of south sudan and syria where are people are conducting heroic work. >> we can argue if it is discreet or covert. look at the text messages we hired people to write. somewhere in south america to write these and i am reading a few we have access to. latest is a tweet sent out under this program -- >> may i just say and i am sorry to interrupt you i do think that this program is no longer

operati operational. i have asked my team to review the content we are seeing in the various ap stories. we know the intent of the program was to support open information. >> along those lines, will we have access to all of the tweets or the messages that were sent by usaid or its contractors in full so we can judge here? we have to provide oversight on if we authorize programs or fund them. >> i have asked my team to review the documents. most of the documents are not in our position. >> but surely -- >> they will gather them. review them. and we will make our findings available to you. >> i am not interested in your findings. i want to data. >> we will make the data

available. >> we will have access to the tweets sent out? >> you will have access to what we are able to gather. >> my concern is we had programs like this, dating back and i am not pointing fingers at this administration, i think this administration has done things with further broadening travel so i applaud this administration much better than the last administration. but the last administration had had ticker at the united states interest in cuba where messages were put up that were, really no better word, juvenile. it would get on to the cubans for not providing lunches when they were provided in miami. it was juvenile and didn't serve

anybody's purposes. >> sir, i cannot to past legislation. >> i am not making a political point republican verse democrat i am just saying the policy is wrong. let's allow americans to travel to cuba and we would achieve in my view and this isn't your call to make, it is ours in congress, but if we review this do we want to fund programs that might put usaid contractors or individuals from other countries, including cuba, that participate in this for danger for what? i am not sure what we get. allow americans to travel. allow them to take flash drives. allow them to do good.

i don't see american travel as a reward for good behavior on behalf of the cuban government. we are unlikely to see that. it is finally a get-tough policy. my time is well spent. if the chairman -- >> the fy14 language is clear about the language that is in the lead for implementation and we intend to follow the law and it will transfer some of the funds to the endowment. and there is a larger policy debate here, but i want to come back to ensuring you we believe the implementation that theories are not covert -- these -- and

they have been publically notified a number of times. >> administrator, do you conduct internet access programs in other counties in the world? >> we do. and at the direction of specific language. >> do you have any idea how many they are? >> i would not want to give you an inaccurate number, but part of what do and internet access is one part, is supporting civil society so you have an open and inclusive approach to development in a number of context. >> because a society that can come together and share what its goals are is part of information to what sustainable programs we might be able to support. i would like you to give the chair a list of all of the internet access programs you conduct and i might ask for all

of the those programs because it seems to me we are going to judge whether or not we are going to be supportive of internet access in the world or not. and i think it is consistently unfair that one set of democracy programs has the greatest scrutiny from the federal government to the absent of all others. so as the authorizing committee we want to see what is happening across the entire spectrum and i would for information about all of those programs and all of the programming of those programs and all of the tweets and all of the emails and everything so that we can make an informed judgment here. and the chair is of the view as the authorizing committee that either we believe in these programs collectively, which i

generally think i do and we will not pick and chose which countries deserve openness and don't in terms of internet. and whether aid is the right program. i think the demomeracy programs that have been run by them are critical. so i am not advocatiadvocateing stripped of their democracy programs because generally speaking maybe all -- there are societies we want to strengthen. at the end of the day, they are governments that are opposed and

just as the voice of american and a host of other broadcasting was made to create information for people in different parts of the world it seems like we trying to do just that. we have a global perspective, and a commitment to it. and those commitments shouldn't be decided by pick and choosing which country we somehow like and which countries we don't. if they failed to provide people access to the basic flow of information it seems to me we should be persuing that. and also, let me just say, i would like to get a full sense of all your democracy programs beyond the internet as well. because we are going to judge all of the those in context as well. and maybe i will ask for gao

inspector general reports on some of them. in my mine there is a siege mentality. i respect there is a difference of opinion as to what our policy should be. what i don't respect is the siege upon one part of your democracy programs to the exclusion of all others. that is something we will have a full spectrum analysis of. something else, senator? >> this program wasn't to provide internet access. it was social media content within the access that existed, right? >> this programs was designed to provide access to information and create communication. >> it didn't provide internet access to any cuban who didn't have it before? >> i will let my team respond

later because i don't want to misspeak but the program was intended to provide open access and a platform to communicate with each other. >> it was a bases that didn't exist because people flocked to it when they had the opportunity. if they had another venue they would use that. there is telephone access in spain. the problem is the regime blocks the access to the internet and these platforms so that is the challenge of a regime that doesn't want to allow their people to have information. then they may create protest or change in their government which generally in the world we look at turkey and what it is doing and the world is coming down on turkey for what is happening there. we look at iran and what has

happened there. we look at china and the challenges there. and we condemn those but the cuban people somehow don't deserve that flow of information. so we will have a broad range of judgment before we move on. i know senator flake and durbin have different views, but the problem is when you do travel to cuba, and millions of people are going to cuba, millions. europeans, latin americans, canadians and others. and the regime is more selective now. when you travel and go you end up feeding who? not the cuban people but the regime. the regime is the one who through their company, which is

owned by the military and castro's son. the entities that you go stay at and visit are a foreign partner on the other side or with e entities owned by the military so we feed the regime versus the people. so that is a legite debate. but the nature of our democracy programs and creating access to information anywhere in the world shouldn't be up for debate. with the thanks for the committee we will keep this record up open for questions until friday and this hearing is adjourned. >> on the next washington journal, politico tax worker looks at ways to fix the tax

code. and rebecca williams discusss the tax system and your facebook calls, comments and tweet on washington journal. live at 7 a.m. eastern on c-span. coming up, the "the communicators" with minnesota senator al franken on the propos proposed comcast-time warner merg merger. and then "the up side of down" and michael lewis on his most recent book called "flash boys" and later" fragile by the design" c-span created 35 years