Ted Deutch on Foreign Policy

Rebuild alliances to destroy and dismantle al Qaeda

Member of House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The House Committee on Foreign Affairs , also known as the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has jurisdiction over bills and investigations related to the foreign affairs of the United States. It is less powerful than its Senate counterpart, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, because the House committee does not consider the ratification of treaties or the confirmation of presidential appointments, such as are made for ambassador and Secretary of State.

Rated -1 by AAI, indicating a mixed Arab/Palestine voting record.

The Arab American Institute has compiled a Scorecard to catalogue the voting record of the 112th Congress on issues of importance to the Arab American community. For the House, we included 15 items: two bills on the Arab Spring, five bills and one letter on Palestine, two bills on Lebanon, three bills and a letter regarding civil liberties, and two bills on immigration.

1. H.Res. 88 (+): supporting democratic aspirations in Egypt
2. H.R. 2643 (+): penalizing the Bahraini government for attacking medical personnel
3. H.R. 1006 (-): the Jerusalem Embassy and Recognition Act
4. H.R. 1501 (-): withholding US contributions until the UN retracts accusations of Israeli war crimes.
5. H.Res. 268 (-): opposing any unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state
6. H.R. 2457 (-): prohibiting any US government document from referring to "Palestine"
7. H.R. 2829 (-): defunding the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. The bill's 141 co-sponsors receive a (-).
8. 8. (+). Rep. David Price (D-NC) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) issued a letter titled "Support Palestinian Aid and Israel's Security," in which they call upon Congress to continue aid to the Palestinian Authority.
9. H.R. 2215 (*) "to ensure that United States taxpayer dollars are not used to fund terrorist entities in Lebanon
10. H.R. 996 (+): to raise awareness of the use of cluster munitions where civilians are present
11. H.R. 140 (-): the "Birthright Citizenship Act, to eliminate "anchor babies" by changing the 14th Amendment.
12. H. Res. 283 (+): to counter violence and discrimination against Muslim, Arab, Sikh, and South Asian communities
13. H.R. 1805 (-): authorizing an extension of the USA PATRIOT Act until 2013, and amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
14. H.R. 1842 (+): the DREAM Act to protect undocumented minors pursuing higher education.
15. H.R. 1932 (-): the Keep our Communities Safe Act for greater power to detain undocumented immigrants.

$500M and 3,000 troops to Africa to fight Ebola.

Congressional Summary:

The current outbreak of Ebola in Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia is an international health crisis and is the most widespread outbreak of the disease ever recorded.

• RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives--
• calls on the international community to immediately provide additional resources to develop the capacity of affected nations to address current and future public health crises;
• requests that the US work in a coordinated capacity to develop a unified global health security plan to adequately respond to disease outbreaks globally;
• calls upon the US to work with international health authorities to assist endemic nations in the fielding of medical countermeasures.

Amid dire warnings from medical professionals and frantic calls from Congress for greater US intervention, Pres. Obama said he'll deploy 3,000 American troops to combat an African Ebola outbreak that he says is "spiraling out of control."

The announcement comes as the Ebola death toll officially has reached 2,400, though specialists say underreporting in affected nations means the true numbers likely are much higher.

The US effort will be funded by $500 million in overseas contingency funding that the Pentagon wants to redirect to humanitarian missions. Specifically, the mission will include the training of as many as 500 new doctors and health care workers each week; the construction of at least 17 health care facilities in the region; the establishment of a joint command center in Monrovia, Liberia; and the distribution of home health-care kits in affected areas.

Others blasted the administration for taking a bite out of the Pentagon budget. "You can't have it both ways. You can't slash our defense budget on one hand, while expecting our military to do it on the other," said Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Maintain World Bank funding as part of multilateralism.

Congressional Summary: HR 3326: World Bank Accountability Act: Requires withholding 15% of appropriation if countries borrowing from the World Bank's International Development Association are not implementing the UN Security Council resolution to impose sanctions on North Korea. Withholds an additional 15% if the World Bank approved a loan to a country designated by the US as a state sponsor of terrorism.

Statement in support by Rep. French Hill (R-AR-2): The World Bank's extravagant and unaccountable spending practices have been in conflict with the values of Americans for far too long. This bill helps put an end to sending hard-earned American dollars to despots and corrupt regimes. [We should instead] see these funds used how they were truly intended, which is to help lift individuals out of poverty and put them on the pathway to success.

Statement in opposition by IssueVoter.org: Opponents say that withholding funds may undercut the credibility and leverage the World Bank has to get reforms enacted and implemented. "America's leadership at the World Bank is 'one of the major tools in our soft power arsenal'". If the U.S. cuts obligations too much, it will cede that power.

Statement in opposition by Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA-6) on Medium.comJan 22, 2018: H.R. 3326 is taking a hammer approach to a multilateral organization that provides support for millions of people in the world's most impoverished countries. It is also concerning that this legislation is being considered at a time when the Trump Administration is actively seeking to back away from any and all international organizations. Additionally, the World Bank is already implementing a series of reforms.

Legislative outcome: Jan. 17, 2018 House Bill Passed 237-184 (Roll no. 24); bill died in Senate committee.

Two-state solution despite Israeli settlements on West Bank.

Congressional Summary: S.Res.6/H.Res.11 objects to U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334, which characterizes Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as illegal and demands cessation of settlement activities.

• Calls for such resolution to be repealed or fundamentally altered and allows all final status issues toward a two-state solution to be resolved through direct bilateral negotiations between the parties.
• Notes that granting membership and statehood standing to the Palestinians at the UN, its specialized agencies, and other international institutions outside of the context of a bilateral peace agreement with Israel would cause severe harm to the peace process.
• Urges upholding the U.S. practice of vetoing all Security Council resolutions that recognize unilateral Palestinian actions or dictate terms and a time line for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
• Reaffirms that it is U.S. policy to seek a sustainable, just, and secure two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Opposing argument: (Cato Institute, Dec. 19, 2003): In principle, separation seems the best answer to stop the killing. For this reason, a security fence makes sense--if it actually separates Jew from Arab. Unfortunately, to protect a number of disparate Israeli settlements erected in the midst of Palestinian communities, Israel currently is mixing Jew and Arab and separating Arab from Arab. Thus are sown the seeds for conflict. After 36 years of occupation, the land remains almost exclusively Arab. The limited Jewish presence is the result of conscious colonization. The settlements require a pervasive Israeli military occupation, imposing a de facto system of apartheid. Separation offers the only hope, but separation requires dismantling Israeli settlements.

Trump harmed US interest by delaying military aid to Ukraine.

The [Congressional report on Impeachment] examines the facts underlying the first charge against Pres. Trump: abuse of power. On July 25, 2019, when he spoke by telephone to Pres. Zelensky of Ukraine, Pres.Trump asked Pres. Zelensky to "do us a favor, though." He asked Ukraine to announce two bogus investigations: one into former Vice President Joseph Biden, then his leading opponent in the 2020 election, and another to advance a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, attacked our elections in 2016. One investigation was designed to help him gain an advantage in the 2020 election. The other was intended to help Pres. Trump conceal the truth about the 2016 election. Neither investigation was supported by the evidence or premised on any legitimate national security or foreign policy interest. After the call with Pres. Zelensky, Pres. Trump ratcheted up the pressure. He continued to dangle the offer of the Oval Office meeting and to withhold the $391 million in military aid.

To the founding generation, abuse of power was a specific, well-defined offense. It occurs when a President exercises the powers of his office to obtain an improper personal benefit while ignoring the national interest. The evidence shows that Pres. Trump leveraged his office to pressure Ukraine for a personal favor.

This unquestionably constitutes an impeachable offense, but the first article of impeachment also identifies two aggravating factors. When Pres. Trump asked Pres. Zelensky for a favor, he did so at the expense of both our national security--America has a vital national security interest in countering Russian aggression--and our election integrity--American democracy above all rests upon elections that are free and fair. When the President demands that a foreign government announce investigations targeting his domestic political rival, he corrupts our elections. To the Founders, this kind of corruption was especially pernicious, and plainly merited impeachment.