[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> the committee on foreign affairs will come to order. i asked everybody in the room regardless of your position please rise enjoyment g the pledge of allegiance. >> ipledge 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. 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. >> the purpose of today's hearing is to discuss the misuse of public trust for usaid's woke programming and explore ideas for reorganization to promote a stronger, better and more prosperous united states. i now recognize myself for an opening statement on this hearing. i can tell you that we are here today very simply because many of the people in many of the programs in usaid have literally betrayed america. my colleagues to my left and say that i am lying about these programs, and another demo wish that i was lying. the programs that usaid and the state department have spent money on our indefensible.

they hurt america's standing around the globe, at a think the fact is clear that america would have been better off if your money had been simply thrown into a fireplace. instead the biden administration spent it imposing the far left wing ideology onto other nations. under them come usaid spent $2 million for sex change surgeries in guatemala, $22 million to increase tourism in tunisia and egypt. that's not lifesaving. 520 million to pay consultants to teach people in africa about climate change. that's not medicine. 4.5 million to teach people in kazakhstan how to fight back against internet trolls. that's not quite sitting. $20,000 to help lgbt individuals vote in hunter and elections. that's not medicine. $5.5 million to that's not

medicine. $5.5 million to improve the lives of lgbt individuals in uganda. $14 million to identify lgbt leaders in cambodia. $425,000 to train internation coffee companies how to be more gender friendly. 15 million for condoms for the taliban. and i have pages and pages more. that's not diplomacy. it's a a slap in the face to y american who got up this morning and went to work. to this moment you haven't seen or heard any of my colleagues apologizing for this being wrong or wasteful. instead, for the left their biggest concern is that the person assembling a team to make sure that these programs are not funded is a billionaire named elon musk. so out of touch that they actually believe these programs are bringing other countries closer to us, or that our adversaries are going to gain some kind of foothold if we don't continue doing these programs. that's not what competing looks like for the united states of

america. on the contrary, last month when i participate in a q&a with my college or to the left in the united states institute of these which will have to explain the funding, the ugandan ambassador stood up and said these programs were not doing anything to improve relations between our nation's. take a look at the video. >> maybe we'll get some audio. >> maybe we won't get audio. [inaudible] [inaudible] they were thanking us for not

continuing these programs. that's what took place and that's just one of the countless ambassadors that -- [inaudible] these programs will not continue, that the going to come to it in. yet my colleagues to the left are arguing for these programs to continue. arguing for the people who put these programs in place to go back to work, arguing that the agency that did this be allowed to continue wasting your money. they are going to argue that president trump doesn't have the authority to do this, but the fact is, of those who were in congress, all but three of them voted to give him the authority in 2024 and is is very specifically that the administration may potentially expand, , limit, consolidate or downside, departments or

agencies or organizations. that's the language of the authority. it's not just the content of usaid that is the vitriol. it's the larceny that usaid has conducted. cricket ngos around washington, d.c. swindling american taxpayers out of their money. a recent audit found use it s many partners were using upwards of 50% of their grants for overhead costs. not lifesaving measures. the administration has said the aide pause is temporary and they approve it. the recipients of usaid programs can apply for a waiver. the list with me. many have applied. many have been denied and some have received waivers that actually prove their work was lifesaving. let me give a warning to my colleagues. it will be shortsighted of you if you turn a blind eye to usaid's betrayal and more broadly the betrayal within the state department.

because we're going to bring in the people who put these programs in place. we are going to show to the american people exactly what they were doing. the videos, the documents, the everything, they are going to see. like $25,000 for a graduate seminar for venezuela migrants in ecuador. and we are going to show you that video. >> that's the usaid program spending your money. we will be writing these programs out of long as we conduct our first full state department review since 2002. i would say when done right, foreign aid can be one of the best tools. it can help strengthen our relationships with our allies

that need a hand up and they can help countries realize that america is the best partner. but it's only true if we understand a couple of things. what does america actually need from each country or region? what does that country or region actually want from the united states of america? because it's not a visa thinks. and it's only fair to americans if we can prove that a dollar is better spent going abroad than staying in the pocket of an american who is right now hustling and grinding it out at work. and i now recognize my colleague, ranking member granger remakes. >> want to welcome our witnesses to our first full committee hearing this congress. but i would be remiss if i didn't make clear my disappointment in them a mix of the chaos of creed by the trp

administration's unlawful attempt to shut off usaid and pause for assistance funds. we don't have anyone here today from the administration to explain, to appear and to explain their actions before this committee. it shouldn't be just private-sector individuals here. we are the oversight of the u.s. government, and we should have members from the state department, the secretary of state rubio present. and my democratic colleagues and i have asked the chairman to have a committee hearing with secretary rubio. and i urge that to be done as soon as possible.

the american people deserve to have their elected representatives question the administration about the decision to shut down a government agency established in law by congress. we don't have a keen. -- a king. we have a system. if the administration believes what they've done is legal, and merited, they should be before congress. they should be here. they should be talking to the american people directly. we should be summoning them here. i also want to do away with the myth that this exercise of doge and usaid is about addressing waste, fraud, and abuse. because if you really care about waste, fraud, and abuse, you don't illegally fire 21

independent inspectors general in the dark of night. you don't fire the head of the government ethics office. just this week president trump fired usaid's independent inspector generals, just one day after he issued a report showing that the administration's own effort to dismantle usaid is wasting taxpayer dollars and putting our national security at risk. that's what's happening. our national security is at risk. and then asking unanimous consent to enter that igs report into the record. this committee and the american people deserve to hear from the ig. i i would urge you to invite the inspector general to appear before this committee to tell us

about the actual work of addressing waste, fraud, and abuse, if that's what this is really about. now, many republicans, this has not been a partisan issue. many republicans have long championed u.s. for assistance as critical to our national security, as a source of united states soft power. and a key tool to outcompete china's growing global influence. despite my disappointment of not having trump administration panelists here, i am please among our witnesses that if we have a number of individuals who are republicans. i look at my former colleague ted yoho who i have traveled with on several times, several codels and we visited usaid programs.

i know when you go and travel and see firsthand the work of dedicated usaid foreign service officers, civil servants and local staff to whom we owe our gratitude and our thanks, not the dishonor shown to them by wealthy billionaires with a social media platform. now, , i only have a few minutes left side won't spend my time debunking every mischaracterization or outright lies we've heard from the republican distractors of usaid. these are distractions met to obscure the critical work usaid does. i instead submit into the record the stories of the "washington post," the "new york times," fact checking them dubious claims made by the republicans. [inaudible] >> yes. >> disordered.

>> and what i will use my time on is making clear that this hearing title, the usaid betrayal, is absolutely correct. because this is a betrayal. the trump administration is betraying our national security. it is betraying our allies. it is betraying the american to kerry at usaid mission and some of the world's most challenging and dangerous places. it is betraying the generosity of the american people and it is the training the investment americans have paid for decades to stop diseases before they spread to make sure girls have the same educational opportunities as boys and to make sure that the innocent victims ravaged by war and natural disasters have basic human necessities. it's betraying babies have been born with hiv in the last three weeks who could've been born a chubby free if only we continue to provide their mothers with the necessary medication that was sitting on the shelf. it has betrayed america's

victory nearly wiping out polio around the world by stopping the funding to stamp it out in the last two country on earth with the virus to present. or to know what happens when you stop running this type of her, just look at kansas with the outbreak of tuberculosis right now. so snout just about health programs. economic development programs in latin america build stronger committees and help reduce migration to the united states. good governance can independent media, civil society programs in developing countries help break debt trap some time and assure citizens can enjoy the god-given rights. bottom line, the winds will be pulled back from america's greatest threat? china wins. russia wins. our adversaries win. so yes, this is a betrayal. this is a betrayal of our national security and i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank the chairman for you. i think a cult this exactly right with the art with would be. other members or my opening statements may be submitted for the record. we are pleased to our panel witnesses here today.

max primorac senior research fellow at the margaret thatcher center for freedom at the heritage foundation. the honorable ted yoho, former u.s. representative from florida's third congressional district and the honorable andrew natsios conformer administers u.s. agency for international development. this committee recognizes the importance of the issues before us. we are grateful that you are to speak with us today. your full statements will be made a part of the record and i'll ask each of you to keep your comments spoken remarks to less than five minutes in order to allow time for member questions. hopefully you give us something more than what we can just read in your opening statements and it also ask unanimous consent the jump from georgia mr. mccaul would be allowed to sit on the dice that which is a in today's hearing. without objection, so ordered. i now recognize mr. primorac for your opening statements. mr. chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify before this committee. by next max primorac.

i'm a senior research fellow at the heritage foundation. i predecease her at the usaid -- [shouting] [background sounds] [chanting] pepfar save lives. [chanting] >> i guess these guys don't watch the news. they didn't realize that pepfar was one of the many programs that did prove to be lifesaving, so the funding was restored. somebody better give them a link to other note may be fox news or

something like that. he may resume your opening statement. >> mr. chairman, i prettily served as u.s. agency for international development and the u.s. department of state. i have dedicated 35 years to international relations work. the views of expression to a president trump's decision to shutter usaid reflects the agencies lost for bipartisan support in congress and the trust of the american people. it exposes a bureaucracy that went off the ideological rails. it no longer reflects the will or the values of the american people. what should be and must be an effective tool of u.s. foreign policy has turned into a partisan global -- focus on spending money rather than achieving concrete outcomes aligned with american interests and on imposing radical social ideas that divide us at home and spur resentment abroad. they refused to be held accountable to congress and

american taxpayers who fund them. advocates evoke dangerous to our national security siding programs that counter, jacob protect us from the global spread of infectious diseases, and provide life-saving humanitarian aid. i understand the importance of these programs. at usaid i cochaired the counter china interagency group, over seven containment of two ebola outbreaks, and led the bureau for humanitarian assistance. but usaid's obsession with identity politics, , gender fluidity, population control, and climate fanaticism undermined these goals. americans are now aware of massive waste, fraud, and abuse of their money. every single project was corrupted by this radical agenda. they are not happy. usaid's leadership failed in its most basic fiduciary responsibility. and that is to avoid the kinds of reputational risks that would

imperil the agencies legitimacy with congress and the american people. usaid's push developing countries rely on communist china for the green energy needs. two years ago, 130 african american lawmakers and religious leaders implored congress not used pepfar to promote abortion stating what to express our concerns and suspicions that this funding and supporting abortion, that it violates our core beliefs concerning life, family and religion. many africans have told me also from other places and world that chinese did not ask us to give up our religion to do this is with them. mr. chairman, our aid approach hasn't been harmed our global standing. usaid's humanitarian system is also broken. in gaza, american aid financed hamas campaigned to exterminate israel. similarly in afghanistan, yemen and syria where we lack presence

to ensure our aid is not diverted. our aid is sustaining these war economies. usaid failed to properly manage the billions of dollars in trust to it. this committee discovered that usaid partners were charging 50% or more for overhead. a government audit showed that usaid could not account for overhead charges concerning $142 billion worth of awards. these funds prove a boon for the congressional dominant foreign aid industry. president trump's leadership has created a unique opportunity to fast fast-track important reforms of our aid system. secretary rubio might look at the reforms made during the last trump administration. our starting point was that the purpose of foreign aid is to end the need for it. foreign aid is not an international welfare program. usaid is not an international

ngo. these must align with american interests and values. a final point. congress must also do its part. why should prolong us south africa, beijing's point country in africa, received billions of aid from us? we should support our friends instead. thank you, and i look forward to question. >> thank you guy now recognize mr. yoho for his opening statement. >> mr. chairman, ranking member meeks, the members of the committee, it's another to participant in this hearing regarding usaid. i'm a former member of congress serving from 2013-2020 would represent florida's third congressional district. during my years ago i served on the agricultural committee. i had the honor to serve as chairman of the subcommittee during the 115th congress. i entered congress -- >> could you move a a little closer to your mic? spur it will help turn it on to, voted?

[laughing] i lost that knowledge already. i entered congress with the goal of limiting foreign aid for various reasons. looking back, i was ignorant of what i thought foreign aid was come what it did and thought it was unnecessary. soon after my first foreign congressional delegation trip i realize that foreign aid when used properly can be a tool in soft opposing the strengthens the nation's economy, security, increases trade, decreases migration, creates strong partners and allies. when used improperly it has the opposite effect on both our friends and adversaries and waste taxpayer money to i became a strong proponent of reforming international assistance by working in a bipartisan and bicameral fashion with my cosponsors along with the first trump administration when introduced the bill to authorize the creation of the dfc. this was a largest reform in for foreign aid in over two decades and michael was to move countries from aid to trade with

use of effective tools managed correctly. i cheered along with adam smith the effective aid caucus and met with members and outside groups to improve efficiency and effectiveness on the system. this committee has had many hearings to do with usaid. it's frustrating that an agency set up to further our security prosperity, engaging he mention projects and work to prevent this become a spread of diseases, hunger and conflict has strayed so far from its original intent when it was created under president kennedy in 1961. usaid has lost the trust of a large portion of the american people and the international community. remember, president lincoln he said with public support you can do almost anything. without it you can't do anything. the redesigned u.s. foreign assistance entity will have to work hard to re-create that trust here and abroad. ..

>> objectives of interaid very clearly moving forward. does it make america safer, stronger and more prosperous. it will serve our nation, our economy and as well as the developing nations and allies to get new reforms in place as soon as possible. not all aid is bad, nor is it all good. we should focus the programs that are good and make them better and more effective. programs misused and not aligned with the administration should be eliminated. congress should look to support programs that have a proven track record of success and there are many examples to look at and i'll be happy to discuss those. moving forward, i would recommend the trump

administration place aid into two categories, first, the hard infrastructure projects like road, water, energy, transportation. these are the projects that are necessary to build an economy in the recipient country so we can wean them off of aid. the u.s. government has instruments, dsc, m.c.c. tasked with the heavy lifting and phases of the project by providing risk insurance, technical assistance and expertise and brings in outside invests and other nations vfi's. second the humanitarian side of atans via repurpose usaid tape type agency, feed the future, african growth, and opportunity, effective health and security and food programs when enacted properly and generate much soft power goodwill. unfortunately, if mismanaged, we lose credibility, money and drive, the affected nations to

our adversaries. wii pausing u.s. international assistance, a vacuum is created. china, russia, or other are already moving in to fill those voids. the u.s. must quickly bring back the authorization, funding and a knowledgeable work force to implement those programs that align with the administration's goals, does it make america safer, stronger and more prosperousment one last point, by not being effectively present, can be arguably worse than pausing a program. all you have to do is look at south and central america, and look at how much we've cedeked to china, russia china and iran. that has to be dealt with immediately. that's a national security threat. mr. chairman and members of the committee, i yield my time. >> your opening statement. thank you very much, i spoke for myself today-- i speak for myself today, i've

been involved in humanitarian work-- >> let's try that microphone one more time and maybe pull it closer. >> how is that? >> much better. >> okay. i speak for myself, i do not represent anyone and in 1989 when i joined the bush administration, the first bush administration as the officer of foreign disaster assistance when the world was collapsing, and our little office along for food for peace saved tens of millions of lives around the world which they continue do did through the bha bureau, much larger than it was. if you're upset about going off course, so i am. let's course correct and not-- and when i took over in bush

administration, i began reviewing every single project, every single program in aid, line by line and we eliminated 80 programs over a month. and we moved that cash back into the program because there was a csaba, that was ruining east of the congo and risk of famine and we got difficultings in, and we stopped the pandemic, the disease pandemic for the csaba. my point is that i eliminated a lot of philosophically offensive programs that a conservative administration would not tolerate. and when the democrats took over, they moved the agency to the left. i moved it to the right. the obama people actually said i was very right wing, the most right wing administrator in the history of the agency and yet,

the career people followed what i wanted to do in the agency. we put heavy emphasis on economic growth. some of the things you've criticized, sir, with all due respect, are economic growth programs that have been highly successful. 10% of the work force in egypt is from tourism. aid is properly invested $100 million over the years and massively increased the number of jobs in egypt. they are our allies, don't we want people working instead of being unemployed? it's 12% of the gdp of egypt, tourism. we call it development tourism, we do it in lebanon, in tunisia, in kosovo and bosnia, we've done it in morocco, we've done it all over the world, it brings in revenue and employs people. it's an economic growth project. i believe in economic growth. i believe in the private sector, i believe in free markets. that's what aid does. the notion that aid is kind of

a marxist institution is ridiculous. i know the career officers, i worked with them. there is a career track called the private sector officers. what do they do? they work with the business community. i started a program which the democrats continued called the global development alliance. we started it very early on, 2001. what it does, it matches aid money with corporate money to supply, it's their supply chain. we did this -- we do this all over the world. we're working with hundreds of american corporations. we've raised $60 billion in private sector funding with the american business community to increase jobs all over the world. we've been doing this for 24 years, very successfully. the europeans and the canadians and the australians have taken our lead in this and tried to

replicate the public-private alliances, 25% of the money in those gda's is u.s. government money. 75% is private money. we invest together. we don't give them any money, they don't give us any money. we design the project, we co-invest and then we manage it. the notion that aid is irresponsible in terms of its oversight is utter nonsense. i wrote an essay 12 years ago called the clash of the bureaucracy and development it was pub published, the most cited thing i've written. and with my frustration of the level and level oversight, inspector general, why do we need two inspector generals in afghanistan and in iraq? then we have the gao, we have the omb, we have the congressional oversights committee. every line of what aid does is overseen by seven different levels of oversight.

you know why money disappears? i'll tell you why. where do we work? where do we work? christian ngo's are now delivering food to sudan in the famine, there are two million dead by the end of the year, those are the projections. there's government in sudan, no courts. thanks for your opening remarks this morning and i now recognize chairman emeritus, ranking member meeks. >> and-- >> when i was chair of the company i got notifications of the spending from usaid and the spending department and i put holds on the programs many listed by the chairman. instead of working with me, the administration, the prior biden administration decided to blow through those holds, bucking a

longstanding tradition and i want to go through some of those i put on hold. 1.5 million to promote lgbtq causes for immigrants in latin america allowing them to litigate against foreign governments primarily catholic nations. i don't know how that advances the u.s. interests abroad. as a catholic myself i find that very offensive. we've also heard about the 15 million for condoms and contraceptives to afghanistan. a country under sharia law, $15 million. what did usaid do? they blew through my holes and complete another disregard of this committee's oversight responsibilities. i also uncovered the department had spent $500,000 to advance

atheistin nepal where buddhists is the predominant religion. what does that have to do with u.s. abroad. the human international group that they gave money to, the $500,000, the ceo called the catholic church, an institution you should ashamed to be involved with. our taxpayer dollars to condemn the catholic church. again, as a catholic, i find that extremely offensive. and then the one we've heard so much about, $20,000 for drag shows and drag work shops in ecuador? whether chairman, i have seen the video you sent out. it is utterly disgusting to the american taxpayer that we are funding that kind of behavior. all of these programs gave

usaid a black eye. and that's unfortunate because you go back to the marshall plan, really, the genesis for thinking about usaid, the marshall plan was one of the most successful programs we endeavored in after world war ii to make sure that hitler never rose from the ashes again. the suit for peace program you discussed, the american farmer benefits from this, extremely successful. why was usaid created in the first place in 1961? it was to counter the soviet union during the cold war. i believe it still has a legitimate purpose to counter the rising threat of china and belt and road and our other foreign adversaries. it also has the ability to counterterrorism. lindsey graham and i passed the

global fragility act, state, dod, usaid all working together to stabilize destabilized nations which breeds terrorism. pepfar, one of the most successful global health programs ever developed under president bush, yet all of this is called into question because of the irresponsibility of the biden administration's woke agenda and policies. mr. yoho, we've been friends, we've worked together, colleagues. your greatest legacy is the build act and we need to reinforce that policy as well, but when you look at the core mission, all of these programs need to go and they will be gone. but as we look at program by program and strip down to the core mission, do you still believe this is a worthwhile

endeavor, the core mission of usaid? >> i do. i think what you see over a period of time is a mission creep. you know, these programs were designed with purity of purpose. this is what they're supposed to do and when you get mission creep you get these things that we're seeing and they're indefensible some of the programs that you guys mentioned and that loses trust, like you said, and in business what i've learned and i think everybody can agree with this, people like to do business with people they know, they like and they trust. if that's true when it's on a business setting, it's the same in nations. if other nations know us, they like us and they trust us, they're going to do business with us, and we've heard this over and over again and it's been brought up by other leaders. >> can i ask-- my time, is it in our national security interest to maintain the core mission? i would argue under the state department for proper supervision? >> yes, it is. if we don't do that, we see that leadership to other

people. >> i now recognize member meeks. >> i too am chairman emeritus of this committee, and i remember when president trump he blew past some and some in this term. and that's the well of what presidents do at times in that regard. but in this instance 93 missions, every one, has been closed. every one. that's not trying to fix something, that's destroying something. but let me stop there because one of the reasons why i asked to testify here, because he is a lifelong republican and he understands the inside and the

outside of running usaid, more so than anybody, no disrespect to anybody that's on this panel, he's the one that has done it and i will admit we don't agree on certain things. democrats and republicans don't agree. some things that republicans do that i believe is full of waste, destructive, but if they win the election, they have a choice to try to move it in that direction. when democrats win, what we stand for, we move in our direction, that's part of having a free democratic society. we're not russia. so i want to put the politics aside for this discussion and ask, can you explain to the committee why you believe the foreign assistance and work of the usaid as you've done so is so essential and you feel so

passionately enough about it that you did respond because i've seen administrators, democrat and republicans alike, who have worked at usaid, alike, come out against closing usaid. can you tell us that today? >> well, let me tell you two stories. one story is my last month at aid, no one knew except my wife i was going to leave and teach at georgetown. and this was december of 2005 and i always would get a briefing from the director of counterterrorism at the cia and he came in to see me and he said the chatter is you're coming and they're going to attempt to assassinate you? i said who? they said obviously the taliban. why are they going to assassinate you because you're head of usaid.

they can't build health clinics, we got the maternity mortality rates down and textbooks to get the kids back in school and the taliban can't deal with that. they're going to try-- and we advise you not to go. i said, well, let me think about that. but if you do go, announce you've arrived as you're stepping on the plane to leave. i said what? he said announce you're -- when you're stepping on the plane to leave, announce you've arrived, they won't know you're there. i went, decided to go, and nothing happened and i did what he suggested. but what i found out was from talking to the mullahs in the village, the religious leaders who are pro democracy and pro america, that the taliban disregarded the greatest enemy of the taliban was usaid.

in kosovo they named their kids usaid. albanians are muslims in kosovo and made it into a muslim name. usaid. if you go to the refugee camps and displaced camps around the world, usaid is the image of the united states. we used to bring 20,000 students to the united states to get their advanced degrees during the cold war. you know what the chinese-- you know what we're doing now, 900 scholarships, we stopped doing it. the chinese, the chinese are spending huge amounts of money to bring 40,000 people from the developing world to get their degrees in china. we should be investing in that. we're not. and i think we're falling behind and we're focused on the wrong things. the amount of dei stuff. i started going through the rfa's it's a small percentage. it's not accurate to say that

this is-- and some of these things that have been shown that's are not aid projects, those are state department programs. why are you blaming aid for what the state department did. the f office controls all of this stuff. a second story, after the tsunami, we did a huge response. it's a part of indonesia had a muslim insurgency against the central government. we did a usage response and put the aid logo on everything and mission director carried away, 50,000 stickers, usaid for american people. and before the army, bin laden had an approval rating, largest muslim country. after it he collapsed, we went from 26% to 63%, now you say, americans like to be liked, we all like to be liked. what difference does it make.

the president of the country said i like president bush, i like the united states, but it's very hard to work with you because you're so unpopular. not after the tsunami. the indonesians said-- >> thank you for answering our questions today, sir, we agree a lot of waste, like $10 million through usaid, everything i listed was usaid. $10 million for circumcision in mozambique, there's another example. i recognize from new jersey. >> and repealing the mexico city policy expanded by president donald trump in 2017. the biden administration didn't stop there. they had a new radical decision, abortion on demand in pepfar called reimagining

pepfar, explicit guidance, dollars of taxpayer funds, to enact pro-abortion policies in pepfar companies. biden hijacked pepfar and shattered-- i did the reauthorization of pepfar for five years during the trump administration, the first one. i'm all for it. in this place here and on the floor of the house and all over africa as i traveled all for it, but then was hijacked. a strong rebuke, mr. matsios. 130 african religious and leaders said pepfar is supporting abortions and the ngo's we financed are hijacking their ideals by pushing it so aggressively in africa. as you testified today and i read your written statement that usaid needs to be refashioned and you said that, quote, you believe it is bad policy to transfer domestic

culture wars into politics to the developing world. do you believe that the biden administration was wrong to integrate abortion on demand as interglobal health? because they did it across the board, usaid and pepfar, much of that money is, you know, deployed through usaid. when you did say that the effort to protect the weakest and most vulnerable from extermination, i do believe that's trivialized when you somehow bottom lining saying it's a culture war. we believe in defending unborn children and their mothers from the violence of abortion. it's not a culture war, it is a fact when they're in these countries pushing it that unfortunately children will die. i and like minded pro-life advocates in congress and around the world seek to protect unborn baby girls and boys from abortion, including dismemberment, decaptation and the abortion pills pushed all over the world, including in the united states. how do they work?

they starve the baby to death. that's how it work. i'm all for global-- we did bipartisan, a sponsor for it, global food and security act. i'm all for addressing hunger, but when you say we're going to starve you to death through the abortion pill. do you agree that ngo's should be by billions by the taxpayers for abortions and ask all three witnesses. >> you can check my voting record in massachusetts, massachusetts is massachusetts, pro-life voting record for 12 years in the house, so my position is very clear and i took a lot of heat from the feminist groups in massachusetts and my views have not changed. i called you once because we found them doing vaginal

scraping in bangladesh in a remote village and the mission director called me immediately and said we discovered this, put a stop to it, andrew, because if you do that and the woman is pregnant, the child dies. okay? and you're supposed to check before you do it, they weren't trained properly, they weren't doing it maliciously, they didn't understand and weren't trained. we fixed it, very quietly, told you what happened we were being transparent about it. other than that, that's the only violation we had in the five years that i was aid administrator. the career people will do what they're told to do. i'm appalled at what you're telling me that they have done and by dragging aid into these culture wars, the biden administration has undermined the need for bipartisan support for aid. we cannot tolerate in an agency with programs all over the world a war between parties,

which i'm seeing right now. in my view, it's a failure. all of the things i did at aid, i tried to do it in a way that would not alienate the democratic party when i left. if you look before they took apart the agency, everything i created is still there. was still there. they left it in place. >> thank you. i'm almost out of time, the other two. thank you. >> congressman, everything that we did during the first trump administration and i had the senior position, we worked very hard to make sure that everything we did had bipartisan support. what i've seen with the last administration was actually breaking the law because you're not-- by law you're not supposed to and i think the pepfar coordinator stressed that point, but when you fund international planned parenthood and u.n. agencies that openly promote it and when the africans themselves tell you it's happening, then the law is being broken. i hope that the second trump administration pursues the

pro-life policies that it had in the first one, but also to include humanitarian assistance, thank you. >> when we set these policies forward, it's going behoove all of us, and this is hard to do, these policies should be what's best for america. if it's best for america, it's going to be best for the rest of the world and those policies are based on our beliefs as a nation. if we're a christian nation as we always talk about, it's the right thing to do. and i think we need to stay that way. the hard part, with us in this body we have to keep the checks on that, if not, it goes away. i yield back. >> thank you, i'm glad to hear the conversation about university spending as well because there's a lot of that within usaid also, 42 million for johns hopkins to research and drive social behavior, $250,000 for fiu for dei training, $244,000 for stanford to do leadership training, not life saving programs. i now recognize mr. sherman from california.

>> foreign aid is a good thing. americans think that we spend 25% of the federal budget on foreign aid and want it reduced to 10%, but the fact is, it's way less than 1%. it helps us challenge china and the world. it reduces not only hunger, but migration to our borders and it helps us fight communicable diseases over there before they mutate and come here and that's why ronald reagan recognized the importance of foreign aid. mr. chairman, my fear, because i've been here for a long time. when i got here, it wasn't just democrats against republicans, it was the legislative branch against the executive branch. and we need to play that role, and as the ranking member points out, we need to have government witnesses here so we can talk about the future, rather than just be a cheering

squad for the executive branch, but i want to bring that your attention, mr. chairman, an action taken by the state department today that was too woke for sherman. they announced they're going to spend $400 million on zero greenhouse gas emitting armored cars. that's right, electric armored cars, $400 million to replace perfectly good gas driven armored cars. they said they were going to be tesla cyber truck armored cars. this administration will get too woke for sherman if it helps the shareholders of the tesla automobile. there have been a number of falsehoods stated, the biggest one is the $50 million for gaza condoms. musk admitted that it was just completely false. he apologized, so that he made-- doge made a mistake.

are we going to terminate doge? well, i'd like to, but terminate doge because it made one mistake, no, you identify mistakes less than $50 million people want to terminate usaid. musk statement, he should be apologizing for and public apologizing because the truth has a tough time catching up with the falsehood, but let's go through a few others. we're told that there are $6 million to fund tourism in egypt. >> the senate's coming in for more work on president trump's cabinet nominees both to confirm rfk, jr. to be health and human services secretary and brook rollins to be agriculture secretary begin at 10:30 eastern time. you're watching large coverage on c-span2.