May 6, 1998
Brian Atwood
Administrator, USAID
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Ronald Reagan Building
Room 609
Washington, DC 20523
Dear Mr. Atwood:
We are greatly concerned about the steady decline in USAID support for international agriculture and rural development. Available estimates indicate that funding declined by about 75 percent in the past decade, without accounting for price inflation, which has further diminished available resources.
We believe that international agriculture and rural development is an area where U.S. investment is a win/win proposition -- it is not only a humane action, but is in the very best economic interest of the United States. By improving agricultural production and incomes in the predominant sector of developing countries, contributions are made to peace, political and institutional stability, and diversion of illicit commodity production. Experts have estimated that a one dollar increase in agricultural production multiplies itself four times for the overall economy. As well, that win for developing countries ultimately produces in a win here at home in the form of increased U.S. exports and opportunities for investment.
Concerned about the striking inconsistency between the Agency's budget trends for international agriculture and rural development and obvious benefits of this aspect of the U.S. foreign assistance portfolio, the Senate Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee included the following language in it Fiscal Year 1998 Conference Report:
The conferees agree with the language in the House report that expresses concern over the decline in recent years of budgetary resources that have been made available for international agricultural development assistance. The decline of this important segment of U.S. assistance, together with the corresponding decline in the number of agricultural experts at USAID and the State Department, should be reversed. The conferees also strongly support funding for Collaborative Research Support Projects (CRSPs).
We are inquiring about the Agency's response to this report language. Specifically, has the negative trend in USAIDUs spending on agriculture and rural development been reversed? Please provide an accounting of the Agency's plans for expenditures in this area for Fiscal Year 1998, as well as the proposed budget levels for Fiscal Year 1999.
Thank your for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Signed by the following Senators:
Harkin, IA Mikulski, MD
Kohl, WI
Leahy, VT
Cochran, MISS
Gorton, WA.
Lautenberg, NJ
Grassley, IA
Levin, MI
Abraham, MI
Dodd, Conn
Feingold, WI
Akaka, HI
Inouye, HI
DeWine, OH
Lugar, IND
Brian Atwood
Administrator, USAID
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Ronald Reagan Building
Room 609
Washington, DC 20523
Dear Mr. Atwood:
We are greatly concerned about the steady decline in USAID support for international agriculture and rural development. Available estimates indicate that funding declined by about 75 percent in the past decade, without accounting for price inflation, which has further diminished available resources.
We believe that international agriculture and rural development is an area where U.S. investment is a win/win proposition -- it is not only a humane action, but is in the very best economic interest of the United States. By improving agricultural production and incomes in the predominant sector of developing countries, contributions are made to peace, political and institutional stability, and diversion of illicit commodity production. Experts have estimated that a one dollar increase in agricultural production multiplies itself four times for the overall economy. As well, that win for developing countries ultimately produces in a win here at home in the form of increased U.S. exports and opportunities for investment.
Concerned about the striking inconsistency between the Agency's budget trends for international agriculture and rural development and obvious benefits of this aspect of the U.S. foreign assistance portfolio, the Senate Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee included the following language in it Fiscal Year 1998 Conference Report:
The conferees agree with the language in the House report that expresses concern over the decline in recent years of budgetary resources that have been made available for international agricultural development assistance. The decline of this important segment of U.S. assistance, together with the corresponding decline in the number of agricultural experts at USAID and the State Department, should be reversed. The conferees also strongly support funding for Collaborative Research Support Projects (CRSPs).
We are inquiring about the Agency's response to this report language. Specifically, has the negative trend in USAIDUs spending on agriculture and rural development been reversed? Please provide an accounting of the Agency's plans for expenditures in this area for Fiscal Year 1998, as well as the proposed budget levels for Fiscal Year 1999.
Thank your for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Signed by the following Senators:
Harkin, IA Mikulski, MD
Kohl, WI
Leahy, VT
Cochran, MISS
Gorton, WA.
Lautenberg, NJ
Grassley, IA
Levin, MI
Abraham, MI
Dodd, Conn
Feingold, WI
Akaka, HI
Inouye, HI
DeWine, OH
Lugar, IND