Where Does Congress Fit in the New Development Policy?

At a recent USGLC roundtable discussion on the President’s new development policy, Secretary Clinton rediscovered a pearl of a quote –

For no objective supporter of foreign aid can be satisfied with the existing program – actually a multiplicity of programs.  Bureaucratically fragmented, awkward and slow, its administration is diffused over a haphazard and irrational structure covering at least four departments and several other agencies.  The program is based on a series of legislative measures and administrative procedures conceived at different times and for different purposes, many of them now obsolete, inconsistent and unduly rigid and thus unsuited for our present needs and purposes.  Its weaknesses have begun to undermine confidence in our effort both here and abroad.

For those in the audience unfamiliar with this quote, Secretary Clinton took great delight in revealing that these words came from President Kennedy in 1961.  From my perspective, the source of this quote makes it even more intriguing – it is part of a “Special Message to the Congress on Foreign Aid” submitted by the President justifying a new approach to aid.Why is this even remotely relevant today?  If you read the full document, you will see how similar it is to the new development policy.  It calls for a new structure that is right for the times, development plans that are tailored for each country, and a focus on countries willing to “mobilize their own resources, make necessary social and economic reforms, engage in long-range planning…to reach the state of self-sustaining growth.”But, President Kennedy had two critical components that are unfortunately missing today.  The first is an understanding of the need to engage with Congress.  Soon after Kennedy’s special message to Congress was delivered, the White House sent up draft legislation for a new assistance framework that in due course became the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961—the same legislation that still guides U.S. assistance programs today.  By contrast, the impression given by administration officials is that they hope to implement the PPD and the yet-to-be-released QDDR via executive directives, which don’t require legislation or congressional approval.  Congress is seen as a last resort, perhaps even an untrustworthy partner.Yet there have been a number of well-positioned actors on the Hill who have been working hard to overcome aid bottlenecks and to improve aid effectiveness.  Senators Kerry and Lugar, Rep. Berman, and others have been not only supportive of aid reform, but frustrated by the lack of action in the executive branch. Critics of aid programs have long focused on the need to rewrite the Foreign Assistance Act, which has not been reauthorized since 1985.  Much of the legislation already drafted by the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is consistent with the principles put forth by the PPD.Admittedly, getting anything through Congress is not easy these days.  But there are benefits that outweigh the cost in time and effort.  The legislative stamp of approval creates congressional support that tends to endure over time. We are asking for recipient country buy-in, so isn’t it a good idea to have congressional buy-in?  Working with the Hill rather than around it also conveys legitimacy in the eyes of the public, both here and abroad.  Developing countries are sophisticated enough to know that promises made by U.S. administrations are hollow without congressional approval.  Secretary Clinton should be commended for understanding the need to create a constituency for global development.  Part of building that constituency is through Congress and the people they represent.Oh, and what else from Kennedy’s message is also missing from the Obama plan? JFK’s very first point:

Unified administration and operation – a single agency in Washington and the field, equipped with a flexible set of tools, in place of several competing and confusing aid units.

You gotta love history.P.S.  If you’ve not voted yet on the President’s new development policy, the poll is still open.