Transcripts For CSPAN2 Hearing On Coronavirus Response Global Pandemic Preparedness 20240712

Committee will come to order good good morning everyone. I want to think all of you who are attending this important hearing. Today we are going to discuss the International Response of the covid19 pandemic and the future pandemic preparedness prevention and response. The hearing will focus on senate bill 3829 with senator murphy and i have introduced, the Global Health diplomacy act. It is written on paper, not on stone which will we will talk about a little bit in the future here. This is an important endeavor that this committee will take up indeed, probably one of the weightiest matters that we will deal with as we attempt to create a new shield to prevent covid virus type attack from happening again. The covid19 Global Pandemic is reaffirmed what we long have known and that is Infectious Diseases particularly those of a viral nature do not respect borders but they are a threat, a threat anywhere is a threat everywhere. Weve been right here to focus on art of a sick responses to this pandemic but we ignore the spread overseas at our own apparel for obvious reasons but it is essential respond now to help our partners. They are not yet experiencing sniffing and spread to get testing, tracing and quarantine procedures in place and help our partners who already under siege overt or worst case scenario. We need to also focus on protecting access to food, livelihoods, water, sanitation and hygiene. Protecting an existing investments in immunizations, eternal and child health and other Infectious Diseases are important at this time also. We need to work with learners in the countries and organizations to ensure our aid reaches those who need it most without aiding and abetting corruption, Human Rights Violations and democratic backsliding which we all know frequently happens in the world when we start focusing on Something Else. At the same time we need to figure out how to get ahead of the next Global Pandemic. Indeed that is what the focus of this hearing will be on and again the vehicle we are talking about senate bill 3829 but is for discussion purposes and we look for every possible improvement to that bill that we can make. This hearing is one of a number that i will undertake as we construct senate bill 3829 to go forward. The purpose of it is too, as i said, construct a shield that is better than the shield that we have. I have repeatedly said what we need is a fire station and a Fire Department ready and able to put out a fire before it burns the entire world. It is then remarkable work in combating polio and eradicating smallpox but its response to fastmoving emergencies such as ebola and covid19 has exposed significant weaknesses that w. H. O. Has. But we are not here to demean or to criticize or condemn the w. H. O. Rather, what we are here to do is to have a fair analysis of what the response was and how their structure is constructed, that has caused the weaknesses we have. Dr. Tedros and his Management Team were very kind to spend some time with me early on, and they explained to be what the objectives were and how they were attempting to do. They make some very fair points, and it truly is obvious that they did things that couldve been done differently and they will be the first to admit that. In addition to reforming w. H. O. , jointer is reform that is needed, and it should be done as i said without demeaning, criticizing or containing, but rather in the kindest way possible to make it work better. We need an International Financing mechanism that will reenergize action under the Global Health security agenda so we can help countries with high commitment but low capacity to improve their pandemic preparedness and response. We need a longterm fix to the coordination problems that have long plagued u. S. Country teams operating overseas. We need a single accountable entity house at the department of state to lead diplomatic efforts and coordinate the efforts of the agencies implementing Global Health secured secret assistance overseas. This accountable entity would not, i repeat, would not reple the central of the nsc Incorporated Global Security Policy across the whole of government here in washington. Alternatively it would ensure the effectiveness of Global Health security programs at the mission level. We put these ideas forward in this bipartisan bill, the Global Health secured in the policy act, and have invited all those who wish to participate to do so. This has to be a bipartisan effort. Its not too late to get back on track and to restore longstanding tradition of bipartisanship that is characterized every Successful Use Global Health program of the past 20 years. And its not too late to focus our efforts on addressing the current covid19 pandemic overseas in a manner that saves lives and protects the United States from future waves of infection. But let there be no mistake about it. This bill is designed to look at the future. There is no doubt this is going to happen again. We have been told that the bad population, particularly in the wuhan area in china, contains about 2000 viruses. This of course, the pandemic was caused by one of these viruses jumping from one species to another, from a bat to a human being. What happened after that has been greatly debated, but we know what the result was and we know the result was not good and we know that there were failures along the line and we know we can do better. Theres no with a group more qualified than this committee, the United States Senate Foreign relations committee, to undertake this proposition. This is something that we owe america, we owe the world, and we can do this. Im committed to do that. I would hope that every member on the committee will help focus on this as one of the most important things that we do. It will be a legacy that will be an incredibly important for future generations, and we know that the world cannot withstand much more of what we had seen, that we got from the covid 19 infections that went to the world. So with that i hope that we as a committee do what we tried to do, and that is focused with civility, kindest, understanding and tolerance as we hear from everyone. Where we will have a lot of different ideas, theres going to be a lot of ideas that people have strong feelings on. I hope people will do their best to listen carefully to what others have to say and listen to the fences the people make about what has happened but more important listen carefully to what people tell us they have learned that will help us in the future. And in the bipartisan fashion thats done with kindness and civility, i have every confidence we can develop a bill that can pass this congress, be signed by the president , become law and really be a tremendous benefit to our fellow human beings as we go forward. With that i will turn over to senator menendez. Thank you mr. Chairman for convening todays hearing. As you know, i have been seeking a series of hearings on covid for quite some time. I am pleased we are now having one. I understand you intend to hold more, and i strongly support that. But let me start by speaking to the larger concerns that the democratic minority recently wrote to you about. We must have serious and sustained focus on u. S. Foreign policy and a serious oversight agenda, and we want to work with you to make that happen. Mr. Chairman, we should be having more public hearings. We need to tackle the major challenges that confront us afghanistan, venezuela, and north korea just to mention some. And we need to ensure the secretary of state testifies before this committee. We should all be shocked and, frankly, offended, that the secretary is refusing to appear, refusing to defend the administrations Foreign Affairs budget; we should all be insisting on his appearance. This could be the first time in over twenty years that a secretary of state has not testified before this committee to explain administration priorities. After ambassador boltons book, we will never see him again. This lack of engagement fundamentally undermines our work. Not only does the secretary of state feel comfortable in refusing to come before us, that refusal apparently extends to other senateconfirmed officials, we have heard from only one senateconfirmed official this entire year. And the administration has repeatedly ignored oversight inquiries, many of them even bipartisan. We do not need to rehash the contentious vote on michael pack. But we should all be seriously concerned about what weve seen in the last ten days and 24 hours at the u. S. Agency for global media. Mr. Pack has gone on a wholesale firing spree, removing the heads of the networks, dissolving their corporate boards only to replace them with unqualified political people, fundamentally undermining the mission and work of the organization. Its now obvious why the white house wanted pack so badly, so they could transform the agency into their own personal mouthpiece. This is a blow from which it may never recover. Once the credibility is gone, nobody will ever trust a report from radio free europe, radio marti, nor trust the tools of the open technology fund. So mr. Chairman, i urge you to respond to the letter that we sent you in the spirit in which it was offered. On behalf of myself and all of the democratic members of the committee, i can tell you that we want to work with you. We want to find Common Ground. We want the state department to be successful and we want this committee to take on serious work and make a meaningful impact on the national and world stage. Lets Work Together to make this happen. Now, while i thank all of our witnesses for their service, it is disappointing the white house would not send a member of the Coronavirus Task force, or any of the Senate Confirmed individuals from the state department, health and Human Services, or the United States agency for International Development responsible for the administrations response. The American People deserve to hear from members of the president s handpicked team to understand what it is doing to address the worst pandemic the world has faced in 100 years, more than 8 million cases worldwide, and more than 115,000 american lives lost. In my own home state of new jersey, which is the second largest state in the nation in terms of covid deaths, i am vividly reminded of this consequence. This tragedy has assuredly been a wakeup call to those w. H. O. Question whether we should engage with and invest in the rest of the world. So i would like to use this hearing to understand how we got here, what we knew about the virus and when, and how we are leveraging our diplomatic relationships and leadership to best respond and protect the American People. So far most of what we have seen is a lot of bluster, finger pointing, and retrenchment. Yes, we should examine the World Health Organizations initial response. I wish we had someone from the state Departments Bureau of International Organizations here to do exactly that, but we also know that the u. S. Was regularly communicating with and receiving information from the w. H. O. , including through u. S. Government employees embedded at w. H. O. Headquarters in geneva. And rather than seriously consider how to best leverage our leadership and contributions, the president abruptly announced the u. S. Would simply pull out of the organization; threatening not just our ability to confront covid19, but risking decades of progress on other Global Health initiatives including combating polio and ebola. And yes, china has a lot to answer for, but the administrations use of racially stigmatizing language to describe covid19 in direct contradiction to guidance issued by the centers for Disease Control and prevention has been deeply hurtful to americans at home, and utterly counterproductive in leading an International Response. The secretary of states insistence that the rest of the world agree to use such language has prevented us from reaching consensus at the g7 and in the security council. While the white house engages in divisive rhetoric, the rest of the world is stepping up without us. When chinese president xi jinping addressed the World Health Assembly in may, he pledged 2 billion over two years to combat covid19. In contrast, when secretary azar addressed the assembly, he attacked the w. H. O. And cast blame on china. The European Union held a pledging conference on vaccines last month, at which over 8 billion was raised. The white house declined the invitation to participate for reasons that are beyond me. Is this what the Administration Means by America First . If this Eu Consortium comes up with a vaccine before we do, it will mean america last. This approach is not only isolationist, shortsighted and foolish, it endangers american lives. Finally, as the old saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Im all for ensuring the u. S. Government is better organized to prevent, detect and respond to future pandemics both here are abroad, but some of the proposals coming out of the administration, eerily similar to those coming from some members of congress, are illthought, destructive and dangerous in so far as they would cripple usaid, and create a mechanism at the world bank through which the administration could channel all of the funding its withholding from the w. H. O. So i look forward to the first of what i hope are many thorough discussions. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. We will now proceed to do exactly what i said were going to do, that is examined this with an eye towards constructing a shield for the future here and, of course, that does require some discussion of what happened and how we got here. But nonetheless, i hoping we will continue to focus the discussion just as senator murphy and my bill has done in senate bill 2839 and that has moved forward. With that we have distinguished panel today. Certainly people with outstanding knowledge in this area, and who can help us understand the task at hand and how we cant accomplish that task. So first of all we have mr. James richardson who served as a director of the office of foreign assistance where he coordinates 35 billion in foreign in foreign assistance across the department of state and the u. S. Agency for International Development. Prior to this he coordinated usaid Transformation Task team and served as assistant to the administrator for policy planning and learning. He has 20 years of government experience and holds a bachelors of science in government, a masters in defense and strategic studies and is a graduate of the United States air force command at staff college. Mr. Richardson, thank you so much. Give us the benefit of your wisdom. Thank you, chairman risch, Ranking Member menendez, and members of this committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify on International Response to the covid19 pandemic. As a former staffer to a member on this committee its great to be back and i look forward to having this opportunity to have dialogue and answer any of your questions. First i need to acknowledge of of President Trump, Vice President pence, secretary pompeo, and really a yacht of teams we have all around the world at state and usaid were working together to defeat covid19. For those who may not be familiar on the correct of the office of foreign assistance which is a joint office between both state and usaid and we coordinate foreign assistance on half of the secretary. As the chairman mentioned, prior to that i was at usaid where i was an agency that the store transformation looking for ways to strengthen the power of development and improve the institution. As such i believe deeply in the power of both the development and diplomacy. But together i think they can be unstoppable. The United States is the worlds undisputed leader in foreign assistance. We have invested 500 billion over the past 20 years, 140 of that in Global Health alone. The United States has built and sustained Health Systems across the globe, trained millions of healthcare workers, and saved millions of lives. Covid has posed a unique challenge to the United States and the entire world, as you know. Impacting both high income and developing countries alike. The numbers speak for themselves. The state department has received nearly 1000 requests from almost every country in the world. In the face of covid the generosity of the American People has been on full display with more than 12 billion in financial, humanitarian, scientific, Technical Support to combat the crisis. Of that total, congress has appropriated 1. 6 billion to state and usaid come for the International Response. First, thank you for that. This money is being well spent. We have committed so far 1. 3 billion and our assistance is going to 120 countries, and its making true impact. Of note weve obligated 500 come over 500 million of that with the plan to quickly obligate the respite with provided muchneeded ventilators in el salvador. Weve trained 20,000 frontline workers in india. We have funded Public Health Service Announcements on how to fight the virus in more than 50 languages. State and usaid has undertaken unprecedented coordination in the covid response. That coordination has not slowed us down but insured alignment and effectiveness of our resources. For when peoples lives are at stake, we need to make sure we get this right. While the covid19 pandemic is not over, i firmly believe that we need to start thinking about today what systems the u. S. And the world needs to lessen the likelihood of another outbreak becoming a Global Pandemic. When looking across both this pandemic and epidemics and pandemics of the past, i think we can pull some important Lessons Learned. But the bottom line upfront is that moving forward i hope we can all agree that more data, more coordination, and more response functions are appropriate are necessary to respond to future outbreaks and prevent pandemics. The first Lesson Learned is that pandemics are not just a Development Challenge or a confined to the developing world. They are truly global in scope with the risk of Severe Health and Economic Impact across the globe. For instance, of the countries with the highest percentage of covid related deaths, almost none of them have u. S. Government bilateral Global Health programs. As such, u. S. Leadership needs to not just focus on the Development Peace which is critically important but also have broader scope focusing on obligingly countries own resources, burden sharing with likeminded donors and building true accountability into the global system. The second lesson is that the u. S. Government and the global system must be prepared to respond internationally and strengthen accountability. Coordination and the u. S. Government is key. We have two leverages the existing strengths of each departments and agency for maximum impact. As i often say come true coordination is not about control. Its about empowerment. We have to unleash the power of our diplomacy, of our development, of our Public Health efforts so in order to maximize our impact. We also need to ensure the Global Structures can effectively prevent and contain outbreaks from becoming epidemics and pandemics. The third lesson is the world needs more effective Early Warning systems in Data Tracking. Lastly, we need to think holistically about preparedness and be flexible. We understand the challenges we may face can come in many different forms and that our response will ultimately be multifaceted here we need to start thinking and planning for all those in the abilities today. In the age of globalization i fear that the next outbreak will look more like this one than it outbreaks that we have dealt with in the past. We have an opportunity to save lives can promote accountability and ensure that pandemics are prevented to the greatest extent possible. We need systems that are flexible, focus and a global peer we to fill the gaps in the system or coordinating and leveraging the respective preparative advantages and unique strengths of each aspect of the u. S. Government. Time and time again when there is a a Global Challenge, ameris lead. We are the worlds greatest humanitarians that the world has ever seen. Im committed to working with all of you to make, to strengthen this factor thank you for have me today and i look forward to your questions and this important conversation. Thank you so much. Great comments. Mr. Milligan serves as a counselor to usaid. Pray the service acting director in madagascar, Mission Directorate in burma comes unity of advisor for the first quadrennial diplomatic and development review, Senior Deputy assistant administrator for policy planning and learning. He has a bachelors degree from Georgetown School of Foreign Service, masterson Johns Hopkins and is a distinguished graduate of the national war college. With that, mr. Milligan, and you for coming. We want to hear what you have to say. Thank you, chairman, Ranking Member menendez, members of the committee. It is really an honor to be here today. Let me begin first by thanking you for your generosity which allowed the United States agency for International Development to mount a robust response to the covid19 pandemic. Ive been a Foreign Service officer at usaid for more than 30 years and i currently serve as the Agency Counselor which is a senior most career official at the agency. Throughout my career i have seen the United States respond to crises all over the world, and i let some of those responses themselves such as response to the haiti earthquake. Ive seen how the United States saves lives, how we support our partner countries and how we stand with them when disaster strikes. The scale of covid19 response is unprecedented, but the core American Values are constant. In the past ten years usaid has been on the front line to fight numerous conflicts and Health Emergencies including the outbreaks of ebola in west west africa, zika in latin america and the caribbean, and the bubonic plague in madagascar, what i know quite well. Continuing to fight ebola in the drc and we are in this fight for the long term because that is what we do and that is who we are as americans. Through these experiences usaid has developed deep operational and Technical Expertise to respond quickly, rapidly, and appropriately. The United States government is strongest when we are agile and flexible and well coordinated, particularly at the country level. I i know from my own experience out of control epidemics are a symptom of multiple complex causes and Health Emergencies have consequences that can rapidly require Broader Development assistance to address those deeper root causes of instability and poor governance. Controlling epidemics requires more than a standalone effort, and we seen when we do not address poor governance and conflict, we wipe out thE Investments in health and education and other basic social services. Usaid has Development Expense to address these issues and prevent outbreaks from becoming epidemics but we are hampered. Where hampered when countries such as the peoples republic of china and other maligned actors did not disclose the information transparently or share pathogen samples, and instead destroy samples and obfuscate facts come in prison medical personnel and silence journalists. In stark contrast, usaid builds capacity and strengthens Healthcare Systems and Democratic Institutions to enable countries themselves to respond better to Global Health crises, and that protects us back home. We appreciate your support for the independence independents E Investments ourselves based on data and the best available evidence. Today, faced with covid19 the United States is again demonstrated clear and decisive leadership. Usaid is investing 1. 2 billion in emergency supplemental for assistant general sleep appropriate by congress to finance health care, humanitarian assistance, Economic Security and stabilization efforts worldwide. This finding is saving lives. Its also improving Public Health education and protecting health workers, strengthening Laboratory Systems and supporting disease surveillance and boosting Rapid Response capacity in over 100 countries around the world. We are leveraging our Development Programming to complement a global effort because we recognize that covid19 will have extensive secondary and tertiary order impacts. So taking health out of the Product Development approach and isolating it will not lead to success here we must empower our health and Development Experts to do what they do best in the field, to respond to dangers Infectious Diseases. It is imperative we act proactively address the many ways this crises has not only cost lives threatened defilement outcomes. We are very concerned about the secondary and tertiary impacts. We are concerned about the more than 113 Million People who will need emergency Food Assistance in the coming years, a 25 increase your coercing a disturbing trend of a rolling back of democratic reform and democratic backsliding, closing state society. We are investing not only in Food Security but also in combating the democratic backsliding. ThesE Investments build responsive transparent to govern. Usaid response to the cove bend and it contributes to the United States remaining a trusted and preferred partner in countries around the world. No other country can match our unparalleled generosity, are open and collaborative approach, our longterm commitment to helping others during the selfreliance. So that is what i greatly appreciate the ability to be here today and to testify in front of this committee. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thats good information. Mr. Garrett grigsby is a drug of the office of Global Affairs at the department of health and Human Services which leads u. S. Engagement with the World Health Organization and its regional offices. He previously served as usaid Deputy Assistant administrator for democracy, confidential military assistance. As usaids director of faithbased and community initiatives, and as deputy staff director for the Senate Foreign relations committee. With that, mr. Grigsby, we are anxious to your which had to say about our relationship with w. H. O. And looking forward. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member menendez and members of the committee its an honor to be with you to discuss the World Health Organization in the Global Health security agenda, or ghs a period last month secretary azar addressed World Health Assembly w. H. O. s governing body, expressing concerns with w. H. O. And member state response to the covid19 outbreak. The committee is aware of the president statements and letter expressing his concern and is may 29 statement that the United States is terminating its relationship with w. H. O. With respect to david cho allow me to go back even before the first recording of the outbreak in wuhan, china, and highlight the concerns and then i will address g g hsa. After the sars pandemic that also originated in china the International Health regulation, or by h. R. , were revised in 2005 to improve transparency and reinforce obligations of country to provide accurate, timely and complete information about outbreaks. After the 2014 west africa ebola crisis, that w. H. O. Health Emergencies Program was created and it had some success on the ground responded to complex emergencies like it has not met the goal, the Global Challenge of covid19. 14 years after sars, china failed again to provide accurate, timely and complete information to w. H. O. About its covid19 outbreak and, in fact, withheld information that couldve helped countries take actions earlier to protect Public Health. W. H. O. Did not call out the Chinese Government which we believe exacerbated the pandemic. Early statement from w. H. O. Leadership praised the Chinese Government while criticizing others. When missteps of china and w. H. O. Became apparent, our team compiled information to identify gaps in w. H. O. Outbreak response toolkit to this led to discusss with partner countries about reform of w. H. O. For example, the director general must demand compliance with ihr obligations. The director general and w. H. O. s Health Emergency program must be insulated from maligned political pressure. Improvements to the process for declaring a Public Health emergency of International Concern are overdue. And linking travel and trade restrictions together must be reexamined the countries can take proactive measures like the u. S. Did to protect our citizens without criticism or retaliation. Enacting these reforms, regardless of the United States relationship with w. H. O. , would be good for the world. The w. H. O. Will only live up to its mandates with increased transparency and accountability of all Member States. Switching to the Global Health security agenda, 18 months into phase two, called ghsa 2024, the need for a multisectoral approach for pandemic preparedness is greater now than ever ghsa was created in the midst of the 2014 west africa ebola crisis to help countries comply with the ihr is. Ghsa is a group of 67 countries, International Organizations, ngos and Companies Working together to prepare for Infectious Disease threats. Under gss a, nations make commitments to elevate Health Security and improve capacity to prevent, detect and respond to Infectious Diseases as a national priority. G hsa members provide support for documentation through advocacy, collaboration and information sharing and technical advice. The u. S. Is the leading voice on the ghsa 2024 Steering Group as chair of the accountability and results task force, ensuring the focus on addressing gaps and challenges in countries core capacities. The target is to have more than 100 countries with improved capacities by 2024. It seeks to improve accountability and tracks Partner Commitments in a transparent manner. We also collaborate with partners as chair of the sustainable financing for preparedness action package to mobilize resources for preparedness. Hhs works with many countries to improve Health Security capacities pursuant to ghsa commitments. This includes helping complete a joint external evaluation to assess preparedness, developing National Action plans, mobilizing resources. As g hsa core capacities are based on the International Health regulations, both efforts i discussed, leading ghsa 2024, and forging ahead on w. H. O. Reforms focused on strengthening the ihr is ihrs are mutually reinforcing help bring about a safer world. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We look forward to working with the committee on Global Health security. Thank you. Thanks to all of you. It looks like we got the right panel here to give us information we need to try to go forward. Mr. Richardson, but is a personal thank you for running as a critical and pivotal role the United States is in any kind of a Global Challenge. And most important how generous americans are, the 330 million of us compared to the 8 billion in the world contribute an incredibly High Percentage of the aid that is given to less fortunate people. You made one statement i would like to focus on a little bit, and im going to follow up on this with mr. Grigsby also but you said you feared future pandemics will look up like this covid19 than the ones that weve experienced in the past. Could you drill down about a little bit, why you say that and what do you mean by that . I appreciate the question, senator. I think when we started looking at what is the real differences between this pandemic and whether its a bowl or sars both of those were fairly localized in scope. The challenges that they presented were probably overwhelmingly focused on the developing world. This pandemic and i think given the globalization realities that we find, the fact that we can easily travel around the world and that is continuing to accelerate, i fear that that mobility will drive epidemics, outbreaks somewhere to then be able to be spread more easily to the developed world, in addition to the developing world. Let me stop you there. Is that as a look at these things, the differences, take a bowl and compare to covid. The transmission mechanism is very different take ebola it seems to me, and the contagious nests of the disease seem to be very different. With 2000 viruses kicking around out there, they were probably all have media sync or seasons that others. Is that what youre making reference to . Yeah, absolutely. When you really look at what the challenge we are presented with, the likelihood of transmission, the globalization of this world and the ability for viruses to quickly move outside of containment area, thats a game changer. And again given the fact its been able to impact the high Income Countries like the way it has, i think what makes us want to rethink how we approach this. Thats what were trying to do right year and thats exactly the focus of what we are doing. I think your identification there is important. In a im going to ask mr. Grigsby a little bit more about that because of the system we need to put in place. It seems to me that covid19, because of the way it transmitted and the record in which it transmitted is so different and his other things weve had in the past. And in the defense of these systems were trying to respond to this, they werent ready for that. They didnt expect they expected it would be a like sars or like ebola or Something Like that. What we found out is it behave very differently and required a very different response, and that didnt happen. Is that a correct characterization . Absolutely. When you look at we were not really sure what the next outbreak our next virus will look like or what it will do. I think ill leave it to the scientists to talk about how it transmitted or how much more they can move easily. But i think our systems are not built for this type of outbreak. Clearly, it didnt work, right . It did not stop the ability for this to become a Global Pandemic. So really we need to think about what kind of flexible mechanisms both in the International System and then the u. S. Government that we can put in place now that allows us to be able to respond both at an outbreak and at a pandemic level that is able to say, regardless of what the virus is a regardless of where the outbreak starts, and where it goes, we need to have an ability to respond. This idea of a worldwide ability to respond is incredibly critical. Thats what senator murphy and i and this committee are focused on as far as trying to develop this is an ethics are being part it. Mr. Grigsby, in my conversations with dr. Tedros and his team, they were defensive in one respect, i think was legitimate evidence they said they didnt have enough power. Regardless of our criticism of them, we do have to realize that they are not a sovereign entity and they cant really tell a sovereign entity what to do. They can encourage them and try to press them to do the right thing. But it struck me along with his conversation i was just having with mr. Richardson, that they as much as the rest of the world were taken aback by how covid19 reacted compared to the dealings with polio or a or ebola or Something Like that. Is that a Fair Assessment of where they were as far as being taken aback by what happened . Thank you, madam chairman. Its fair to say as jim was alluding to, covid19 was a novel virus, thats one that ts not been seen in human beings before this. Theyre still not were learning about it. By the way, we would be happy to come up and brief you or your staff, not myself but we have leading scientist in the world at hhs and they could answer some of these questions specifically for you. They are still learning about this. I think thats a fair comment. It is true that is a challenge, that the World Health Organization doesnt have a police force, it does not have a Standing Army to go in and force the International Health obligations, which is only one of two treaties that are in the w. H. O. , that countries that signed up to and are obliged to comply with. What i think what we all know is that rather than even calling china out, what was really going on is that the leadership of w. H. O. Was praising china. This has happened before. We have been in this movie before. If you go back to the sars situation in the early 2000s, the leadership of the w. H. O. Was a little more boulder when it was confronting china and it did call china out. There were significant problems that happened that led as i mentioned in my statement to a revision of the International Health regulations in 2005. But theres only so much of it they can do but it didnt even do a minimum they could have done as in calling out what was really going on, defamation that it needed that it was not receiving. That didnt happen at all unfortunately. Iq. Im going to get in here and turned over to it does. Before i do what i want you think that is we focus on what didnt happen and why it didnt and what i would like to hear from the come back and when i come back is i want your thoughts as what assistant would look like to come if were designing it now, which we are hopefully, for the next pandemic that has the transmission as rapid and easily as covid19. Because as we have now i think all agreed, this is entirely different than what we have dealt with in the past. We need a system entirely different than what with that in the past and we want your thoughts on that asked about we would go forward. Senator menendez. Thank you, madam chairman. Just a comment. I agree that we need to continue working on a bipartisan approach. Before the last business meeting we were working well on a bipartisan managers package, and i along with all the other democrats on the committee introduce the covid19 International Response and recovery act, and hope we can find Common Ground and a productive path forward and i look forward to that opportunity. Mr. Grigsby, i want to pick off on your last set of comets as well as your testimony that china did not share sufficient information about the virus, and you just said that the w. H. O. s words are praise for china actually exacerbated the pandemic because it did not pressure china to be more transparent. But President Trump himself praised chinas response multiple times in speeches, public statements, in tweets. Quite its mostly in one treat on june 24 he wrote china has been working very hard to contain the coronavirus, the United States really appreciates your efforts and transparency. Will all work out well. In particular on behalf of the American People i want to thank president xi. On february 6 at the w. H. O. Executive board meeting, ambassador bremer who represented the United States was similarly effusive saying quote we keep the appreciate all what china is doing a map of its own people in the world. Look for to continuing to Work Together as we move ahead in response to the coronavirus come close quote. Those are just some of the quotes. Was w. H. O. Praise for china the fatal flaw which assisted the u. S. Withdrawal from the w. H. O. . If so why did the United States make similar statements of praise and support for china at the same time if this was detrimental to the Global Pandemic response . Thank you, senator. The comment you made are absolutely correct. Early on the information we were receiving was that china was being cooperative. We were getting those reports from the World Health Organization or member having conversations early on at my level and members of w. H. O. Telling me how unbelievably transparent china was being, particularly compared to the sars problem in the early 2000s. What happened was we receive more information later as we all have come information and continue to come out, and as that information changed, the tone changed. Thats just a fair comment. Last month the World Health Assembly approved a resolution, cosponsored, a fact because it was a Virtual Assembly and much condensed as opposed to the normal meetings, were not able to do a lot of business. I had one item, and that was a resolution cosponsored by 140 countries expressing concern that also demanding that the be an independent review of what happened, including about the origins of the disease and its path the transmission to humans. A lot of countries were saying good things about chinas response early on, and as more information came out and will continue to come out with these independent speakers i look forward to the review and a believe its important, but the president praise continued even after the ones i mentioned. Let me ask you this. You listed several reforms the administrator would like to see at the w. H. O. Including pressure for better compliance of International Health regulation obligations at improving the process for declaring Public Health emergencies of International Concern. That would be good for the world but the director general is not the person who decides on those reforms. Its the w. H. O. Which is a member organization, member countries make those decisions. How does the United States expect to influence other members to achieve reform to the w. H. O. If it has relinquished its seat at the table . Senator, thats a good question and i appreciate it. The fact of the matter is, the United States is a member of the World Health Organization now. The president has announced that relationship is being terminated. If i said i am terminating my relationship with you, why should i listen to you . Can you explain that to me . If you tell me your terminating your relationship with me, why should i listened you have anything you want to do with the organization that i no longer am going to have a relationship with . Why dont i tell you what were actually doing . No. Why dont you answer my question . Im doing that, sir. As you know, the United States has the presidency of the g7 this year. That provides us an opportunity to speak with health ministries. In fact, secretary azar has since early on in the pandemic had once a week telephone conversations with all Health Ministers of the g7. As the situation with covid19 became more apparent, there was a focus on reform of the w. H. O. Those conversations continue and some of the countries have asked us the same question. Its in the interest of the United States whether or not wear a of the w. H. O. To have w. H. O. That performs better. Well, i appreciate your lik the answer, which is not answered as far as im concerned. The reality is you have not made it clear to me how youre going to effect change at the w. H. O. When you committed relationship. Let me ask one of the question. If we create a new Global Trust Fund at the world bank, as i understand from reading the bill thats what we do, would we just be going it alone . The rest of the world, they may be seeking change at the w. H. O. , but they are behind the w. H. O. Help me understand what of the countries would now support a new mechanism at the world bank. Wouldnt this create a parallel mechanism to the World Health Organization . Senator, we just received a copy of the bill a couple of days ago and i know our team is looking at that. I dont know if that would be the case. In terms of, for example, hiv aids there are multiple organizations that have been created and i believe they very much complement each other. I assume the senators proposal would be in the same spirit. I look forward to your further analysis of the bill. Let me close, mr. Richardson, i know that you talked about the generosity of the United States. I would just say that if i look at the president s proposals for Global Health in fiscal year 2020, which is more than a 20 decrease in the fort of their budget including a a 28 cut to Global Health programs at aid and the department of state, and similarly the proposal for fy 2021 concludes by some estimates of 34 reduction to the state department and usaids Global Health funding, and the budgets of the president for the last three years had they been enacted the u. S. Would have some account 7 billion less to spend on humanity and assistance in the last three years. To the extent that the American People have been generous, and a half, it is because of congress of the United States has put forward these funds. Not because that the administration has proposed it. I have serious concerns chunnel wait for the second round as it relates to the actual delays and the obligation of critical humanitarian aid. Weve heard from many partners that come up to ten weeks in delay, i dont think theres a good reason for that but i look forward to exploring it with yo you. Senator johnson. Thank you, madam chairman. This is a crisis that is really driven by and we defined by certain data points come certain metrics. Moving forward if were going to respond properly i think theyre certain metrics that think were to key in a pair i want to ask some questions about that. If you look at recent past viruses, different outbreaks, h1n1, i guess im not a doctor that id you that as the flu. The numbers ive seen about 60 million americans were affected by that, 200 million globally but it was not particularly deadly. Ebola i think less than all told not less than 50,000 50,000 pee been affected with ebola, about 40 fatality rate. Mers mers was about 2500 people, about 32 fertility rate. Sars less than 10,000 people and about 10 fatality rate. Is it safe to say, mr. Grigsby, that early on in december when this first surfaced in china, who was look at this, dr. Fauci looking at this . We were hoping that this type of new virus would be something similar in the order of mers and sars, might be pretty deadly bite it wasnt good to spend that much . My main point is does the main metric there, the transmission rate and how quickly can we really obtain information on transmission rate in in a new s weve never seen before . Well, i think youve hit upon the problem and i wish dr. Fauci were here to answer your question. He is a lot more knowledgeable than i am, but again the point is, is that it was a novel coronavirus, and there are other coronaviruses that we have dealt with, sars is an example. Thats really the only thing that you could go back and look at. But covid19 is not sars. It behaves differently. But you dont know that into you get into it and, frankly, they are still learning, the scientists are still learning a lot more about it and will be im sure for years. That makes it very difficult to respond to. Ebola is a scary thing. The mortality rate is high. Its very difficult to deal with but at this point theres been a lot of experience in dealing with that. There have been new tools that have been created like like a e that is effective and therapeutics that are effective. But early on that wasnt the case. But once you deal with these things, you become better at it, you learn more about and thats what we are in the process of doing. We think economic devastation caused by global and national shutdowns. We have to take that into fact that human told that as well, starting to understand that the devastating human toll of whats happened to our economies. Early on these models come for example, the college of london, i read the reports but one that glucosamine of the shutdowns, and the first report the introductory summary estimate without medication 7 billion people with contract coronavirus. Isnt that an impossibility . I confess to you that im not an expert on those models. We have people at cdc and nih and other places that are. We would be happy to bring up those folks and talk to your staff. Theres a a whole industry that deals with these modeling is. I i guess my point being is i think what models we rely to drive policy. We need to take a serious look at that and take a serious look back at what drove so much of this economic devastation. Eventually we will find out what the infection fatality rate is the right now according to the Oxford Center for evidencebased medicine they will sit be the between. 10. 41 . A bad season is about. 18. We really need to moving for entrance of what our response is going to be, we need to identify these metrics that drive the type of policy, first of all to address the Health Situation but also understand whats happening with our economy as we employ these shutdowns. Youre right, senator. Again i would go back to the fact that this is a novel coronavirus, something that not been seen in humans before. So some of it is educated guesswork. Theres no doubt about it. Thank you, mr. Chairman. If i may, just go ahead. I think a point is exactly right. I want to reemphasize that his idea of having an Early Warning tracking system, we have Early Warning tracking system for payments. Its one out of usaids. Is phenomenal. But we dont have effective Warning Systems and Data Tracking system for pandemics, for outbreaks going into a pandemic. This is a huge vulnerability and the gap in the strategic system, its not a gap currently filled by the w. H. O. Or any other system out there. Its something i think we need to look at. We will take note of that. Senator johnson, thank you for bringing this into the area of the economics. Certain something that needs to be considered as we go forward with the bill. And the metrics that need to be looked to look at that. Senator kaine. [inaudible] thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you to the witness of their i want to follow up on senator johnson data and ask you some questions about data. On january 21 the United States and south korea both had the first case report a case of coronavirus. On that day the an Unemployment Rate in both nations was fairly similar, 4 in south korea and 3. 5 in the United States. On march 3 we had a hearing in this room i believe with h. E. L. P. Committee hearing, with a number of the political appointees dealing with coronavirus. On that day south korea had experienced 28 deaths aeneas had experienced nine deaths the coronavirus and him upon in both nations was also essentially similar. Today, south korea has lost 280 people to coronavirus, and the United States has lost now more than 119,000. The south korean Unemployment Rate has risen to 4. 8 while the u. S. Unemployment rate has risen 13. 3 . South korea has won six of the population of the United States. Their gdp is 112 that of the United States. South korea per capita income is less than twothirds of u. S. Per capita income. South korea is every bit as much affected by any missteps of the w. H. O. And every bit, possibly more affected by chinese missteps because of their close proximity to china and a frequency travel between china and south korea. Even with vastly greater resources, the United States now has a a covid19 death rate per 100,000 population. That is 80 times higher, 80 times higher than that in south korea. I know for people have died of coronavirus. And our economy has been devastated by this crisis in a way that south koreas has not. In a hearing on International Response, i think its important to look at other nations and ask what did they get right that we got so wrong . So i i would like to ask our panel, how can america and the entire world replicate the more successful strategy in south korea, or other nations, japan, canada, germany, australia, new zealand, vietnam, utilize as we go forward in fighting covid19 and preparing for the next pandemic . Im happy to start out. I think that a lot of times, many years are going to be spent taking a look at Lessons Learned. The World Health Organization just approved a resolution to take the first steps to do the first one. Is that a good thing . Should the u. S. Support that . Yes, we did. In fact, we negotiated, the you spotted it and we were close within to ensure that language was, in fact, in there and was not weakened other states that were seeking to weaken that was. There were 14040 other cosponsors. I have no doubt that in our own country that would be countless studies looking at this and it will be lots of can ask you, are you guys looking at this . Are you guys analyzing the experience of nations whose death tolls are dramatically less than the United States and ask yourselves what do we need to do better right now . Not years of analysis. What do we need to do better right now and what do we need to do better to prepare for the likelihood of future pandemics . We have folks at cdc in atlanta who do just that. Country that has a lot of similarities to the United States including a very close working relationship. Yeah. And i think that all of us are going to have a lot to learn from the successes and failures of many countries, including what weve done in the United States. So thats going to be happening for years, on Something Like this, this massive of an impact. My time is close to an end. I dont want to go over. Mr. Chair, i think a hearing on best practices in in committee and maybe a combined hearing will make a lot of sense. Theres things we have done that we can teach others, but there are an awful lot of things that other nations have done that we should be true to what you are saying, we are having this hearing to prepare for future epidemics. We should be trying to learn these lessons as quickly as we can. Senator, i couldnt agree with you more, it seems to me, though, that the answer to the question is relatively straightforward, and that is how tough does the government want to be as far as locking people up so they cant spread the disease . Thats a debate thats probably going to be pretty heated, i would think, depending upon the culture of where you come from, but it needs to be explored. Theres no question about it because the question is, are you do you want to go ahead as senator johnson and others have pointed out that if you compare this to the flu, we go through this every year with the flu, and we take hits as a result of that. What are we willing to do in a pandemic like this . And thats a very fair discussion. And i think, mr. Chair, just to respond, south korea is not a china or vietnam. It is not an authoritarian state. It is a democracy. Right. Yes, the government did some things, early testing, and then if people are sick, contact trace, isolate and treat those who are sick, but by doing that, and that was heavy Government Action, they didnt have to shut down the economy. Thats why the Unemployment Rate went from 4 to 4. 8 . Where ours went from 3. 5 to 13. 3. Yeah, tough Government Action on the testing and Contact Tracing meant that they needed to do less dramatic Government Action on shutting down the economy. Other nations will have other experiences. We have done things that we can especially our Research Institutions that we can share with others, but i just think its it makes me my skin crawl to think of first case on the same day, similar tiny number of deaths in march, and now 280 deaths in south korea and 120,000 in the United States. So i just i know we can do better, and this committee, with a Global Health subcommittee, together with the Health Committee are the places where we ought to be hashing it out, learning those lessons. Fair points across the board. I think also a person pointed out to me the fact that how important wearing mask is in social interaction. And this person also pointed out that culturally around the world, there are people that are very comfortable wearing a mask in some countries, i was told by this person, who was an academic as far as these things are concerned, that in many countries, people wear a mask if they have a cold, if they have a cough. Well, you never see that in our western civilization here, but yet in other countries, thats the case. You are right. I mean, these things absolutely do need further look at. Doctor . Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Mr. Grigsby, i believe the World Health Organization failed the American People, failed the world during the coronavirus crisis, refused to call out china for its disinformation campaign, lack of transparency, the coverups, and you made reference to some of this, from the start. I believe the World Health Organization blindly accepted chinas leaders false reporting and understated the threat of the disease. They repeatedly praised china for transparency, spreading inaccurate and misleading information. January 14th, we know they pushed out false information that there was no evidence, they said, of human to human transmission of the virus despite clear evidence of the contrary. But it continues. Just last week, the World Health Organization announced that asymptomatic spread of the coronavirus was rare, and then that made the national and the International News for a day, and then the next day, they kind of walked back the claim, so had to change things, lots of inconsistent sis, but this inconsistenci inconsistencies, but this isnt the first instance of the World Health Organizations failure to protect or respond. I always thought the World Health Organizations mismanagement of ebola and the delay to declare it an international emergency. I called them out publicly about it in 2014. Due to the leadership failures and the repeated mistakes, i think it is time to reconsider the role that the who and its leadership play. I agree with the withdrawing of the funding. Reforms are needed. I agree that reforms are needed to ensure the accurate and transparent data sharing to members. The question is how do you do this . Another member of this Committee Said what leverage do you have after you withdraw the funding . I think you have a lot of leverage, because if you want the funding restored and want us to come back and reengage, then give us the kind of credibility and engagement that is necessary. So what do you see as the problem with the World Health Organization . Is it a lack of political commitment . Is it a lack of capacity or capabilities . Why are they continuing to fail to implement needed reforms . Thank you, senator. Maybe i could just talk a little bit about some of the reforms that we are discussing with other countries, and it goes beyond g7 Health Ministers as well. But also, you know, as i mentioned before, this is not the first time weve experienced this before with the World Health Organization. And in fact, in the i made mention to sars earlier, when there were problems again, in the west africa ebola crisis, that led to more reforms, creation of the Emergencies Program at who. The Obama Administration at the time actually had to redirect funding away from who because who couldnt get its act together and even accept the money so that went for good work that was going on in those countries through private organizations. So this sort of thing is not new. Theres a big difference between the covid19 pandemic and how thats impacted the world and the west africa ebola crisis, which was more regionally focused. But you know, we have had many encouraging conversations with other countries, regarding the need for reform. I mentioned a few of those in my statement, and really you answered senator menendezs question better than i did. But the fact remains, that if who can get its act together, and can make the reforms, and can prove that it has independence from china, im sure theres every possibility that the relationship with the United States is has could be changed. But the ball is in their court. There are a number of reforms that they need to undertake, and we have really a remarkable amount of agreement and Common Ground with other Health Ministers that were dealing with on the need for reform, notwithstanding our relationship with who. Thats beside the point. So the ball is in their court. We hope that they will embrace these reform proposals. Can i ask about the development of a vaccine . Can you please discuss the steps, mr. Grigsby that the administration is taking to engage with our Global Partners to ensure that the vaccine can be developed and distributed as quickly as possible . Well, yes, sir. You know, we have our own projects that are going on, operation warp speed, and were investing a lot of resources in that. There are other efforts going on globally. We have collaborations and conversations and share Lessons Learned and provide Technical Assistance to really all of these efforts. Were rooting for all of the efforts, were going to need more than one vaccine and more than one company because were going to really need vaccinations for everybody on earth, ideally, and easy access to that. So there are a lot of Different Things in play. We have folks that their job is to work on these. Im happy to bring up some folks, technical experts and scientists who can speak with you and your staff. Were happy to do that any time, but there are a number of initiatives going on, and our department and the white house as well, theyre in discussions with im assuming all of them. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator booker. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. It goes without saying this pandemic has hit the United States of america pretty significantly, and within that context, my state of new jersey has seen the worst of this pandemic, and the lives lost, the families facing devastating grief and the struggles that weve seen have been [inaudible]. Im grateful it was already said in this committee that we have a serious problem with at a time that people were calling into question chinas secrecy, we have a president that was praising china, at a time people were demanding transparency from china, this president was coddling them and encouraging them in numerous public statements, in numerous tweets, and we were failing as people in new jersey were dying, we were failing to hold to them account for the challenges that were before them. So i continue to be concerned about our policies regarding china that go beyond tough talk but to really working to get results. According to reporting, china appears during this crisis to have nationalized control of Domestic Production and International Distribution of critical personal protective equipment. In early 2020, in response to this crisis, including that of the u. S. Companies, such as 3m, this is a significant challenge, under their action of nationalizing their control, china required factories that make masks on behalf of American Companies in china to produce masks for its own domestic use. Now china is currently exporting more masks, and these exports seem to relate to political calculations, with the u. S. Receiving less priority than other markets. Chinas mask diplomacy or chinas distribution of masks and medical equipment in order to curry favor has been widely reported. I would like to know how is china in your perspective, maybe address this to grigsby and richardson, how is china prioritizing their exports of ppe, and how is the u. S. In your view benefitting or to the detriment of our country . And real the entire world, the images of our Healthcare Professionals working without adequate ppe, while we waited for china to release the splice of ppe, what have we learned as a nation through the process in the event that another surge of the coronavirus hits, and we find ourselves with heightened demands and needs for ppe . Im very concerned this problem is still ongoing and the chinese policies are still working at a detriment, at a significant detriment to the United States of america. And were not doing enough. I would like a response from mr. Grigsby and richardson if possible. Thank you, senator. I think your comments are spot on. I dont know there are many Silver Linings to this terrible crisis, but i think one of them is going to be i can assure you reexamination of the supply chains. I believe that everything you mentioned is true, in terms of that and there are i can assure you, this is not my office that does this, but there are a lot of people, not only in hhs, but across our government working very hard specifically on the supply chain issue. It is a big issue. Thank you for raising that. Thank you, mr. Grigsby. Thank you, senator. I totally agree with you and with garrett. When you look at china, and i wouldnt just look at it in the context of covid, but if you look at their approach to foreign assistance generally, they have a really mercantilistic, very strategic approach to all of what they do. They are looking at Strategic Mineral rights. They are looking at strategic ports. They are looking at bribing officials in order to get their Companies Access to things. Thats really the chinese approach to foreign assistance at large, and i think it does set up a really great dichotomy between if you want to go with china and accept that type of assistance, youre going to go backsliding on your governance and your transparency, and its not ultimately going to be the most successful for any of our partners. I think what the u. S. Really offers with our multi with our partners, donor partners offers really a different solution of transparency, no Strings Attached assistance and those types of things. It is a critical issue. Im grateful. I dont think were sounding the alarm enough. We see the authoritarian regime of china working against our country from currency manipulation to corporate espionage and stealing secrets. We have seen this behavior consistently in how they deal with foreign relations, but now in the nature of a pandemic, it is chilling to see that their actions and what they are doing is putting lives in our country at risk in the past, right now, and especially within the potential for a second wave. Im grateful you are echoing, mr. Grigsby, what i have been saying in this committee, in the Small Business committee is these supply chain issues are National Security issues. And we need to be acting with bolder, far greater action to protect our nation from this menace that seems to be the chinese intention to undermine our safety, our health, and our well being. I want to ask very quickly, that about wet markets because i have great partnerships across the aisle. China cdc announced it found covid19 in samples collected in a wet market in wuhan, china, in january. Theres a new outbreak right now in beijing, but china yet again in this outbreak, we see that it is still linking a lot of the challenges to wet markets, these live wildlife markets, also linked to the 2003 sars outbreak. Scientists studying diseases, diseases that jump between animals and humans, have pointed to the close proximity of shoppers, vendors, in these markets, as being prime locations for the spread of these pathogens. And so we know from sars, which i mentioned, ebola, monkey pox, covid19, and more jump from wildlife to humans. It is clear these markets need to be shut down. Senator graham and i sent a letter to heads of International Organizations urging them to engage in efforts to shut down these markets. Very quickly and then i will stop and love to ask this question to you. How should the u. S. Work through International Organizations and International Wildlife communities to increase the awareness of this risk and really to begin to take real measures to shut down and ban wildlife markets so that we dont see this challenge again . Im grateful to be working with senator cornyn, senator graham and others on legislation, but to me this has got to be an international priority, and i would love to get your thoughts on that. Thank you, senator. I appreciate the comments. There are robust programs when it comes to preventing wildlife trafficking, environmental programs, and we have a fairly broad reach, although a lot of the countries that are the greatest offenders, like china, we dont have a lot of those types of programs, in some of these countries. I think we need to expand not just in the development piece that chris will certainly have better insight in, but on the diplomatic side. I think we need to do a onetwo punch here. But working together, i think we can make real progress, but chris . This shows that these issues are interrelated. Cant look at just a Simple Health focus. It is all interrelated. We have a tremendous opportunity to build more commitment behind preventing wildlife trafficking by talking to many of the countries that enabled this to happen, about the consequences and the downstream effects. This is a tremendous opportunity. Going back to the whole sanitation issue that you raised, were prioritizing many of investments in water sanitation and hygiene, particularly for that reason, so we can prevent the spread of this as it goes forward. Senator booker your point is well taken that these issues are all quite interrelated, but we have an important ability to message strongly and show these connections which can help have a broader impact on these important issues such as wildlife trafficking thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator booker for raising the supply chain. One of the things this south korea did, it had an all of government approach to this thing, and they shut down their supply chain out. They hung on to everything that they had. Whats happened in this is theres been a real underscoring of the weaknesses that we have as a result of a lot of our manufacturing going overseas. Some of that manufacturing, National Security, and certainly the Health Challenge is a National Security issue like anything else, i have no doubt that we will be looking at that as we go forward. Thank you for that. Senator murphy . Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. In response to a question about global vaccine efforts, mr. Grigsby said that were rooting for these efforts, and i will maybe direct this question to mr. Richardson because it probably matters more what the secretary of state thinks about this than the head of the cdc, why should we just be rooting for these global vaccine efforts . In fact, we could be part of the global vaccine efforts, in particular, theres one that is probably the most promising, the coalition for epidemic preparedness innovations. All our allies are a part of it. It is frankly doing work as we speak with u. S. Companies. The legislation that the senator and i have would authorize the United States to become a partner with that organization and put money behind that effort. Whats the administrations specific position on the wisdom of joining this particular global vaccine effort . It seems to be a lot smarter for us to be at the table, so if this organization is the one that produces a vaccine, that we have something to say about where that vaccine goes and who gets it first. I appreciate that, senator. That Organization Plays an important role, certainly. Another Organization Also plays an essential role. The Administration Just made the largest pledge ever for an American Government to that organization of 1. 6 billion dollars. I think our commitment to the International Effort for vaccines is pretty strong. I would say that if you look at what we have done, and a lot of this actually is on hhs side, but 4 1 2 billion dollars, weve invested through barta. Weve allocated 350 Million Dollars for a vaccine efforts, 1. 8 billion dollars for rapid acceleration of diagnostics. I think there is a lot of work that has already been happening in the u. S. Am i going to say that we shouldnt coordinate more closely with our partners and allies around the world . Well, of course we should. Thats a great common sense approach. I will say and i dont know if your question was leading to the eu conference before, but the u. S. Has invested private sector and public dollars, over 12 billion dollars so far in to Vaccine Development and therapeutic i dont deny were spending a lot of money on vaccines. My question is not whether were spending enough money. It is whether we are better off hedging our bets and making sure were not only doing it domestically but also joining the International Efforts. I hope the administration would be open to bipartisan congressional legislation pushing us towards joining that organization. I think there is bipartisan support here. [inaudible]. Mr. Grigsby, i want to turn back to the question of the who. I do think it is pretty stunning to hear from the administration that the problem early on was that the who was giving cover for china to withhold information about the vaccine, and senator menendez covered this, and so we dont need to belabor the point, but it was not that the president was simply saying nice things about china early on. On 40 different occasions, up to and including the month of april, the president of the United States was the primary global cheerleader for the chinese response to covid. He went out of his way over and over again to say great things about the chinese response. Here he is on february 7th, this is far after we all recognized that china was withholding information. He gets a direct question at a gaggle, are you concerned that china is covering up for the full extent of coronavirus . February 7th, he has an opportunity right here to say yes, im concerned about it. They need to give us information. His answer is no, china is working very hard. And ive got 20 pages of this from the president. And so it just belies reality to suggest that the problem was the who covering up chinas response. The president of the who is not more powerful than the president of the United States, and we all need to acknowledge that. My question to you is this, the idea that were going to try to affect who reform through the g7 is a new one. Can we at least just stipulate for the time being that it is harder for the United States to impact reform in the who if we are not a part of it rather than a part of it . It might just be good for us to stipulate that. Whether or not youre going to try to pursue to reform the g7 or not, can we at least stipulate it is more difficult for us to get the who to reform if we have withdrawn from it . Thank you, sir. I think senator menendez or another senator had mentioned, the who is a member state institution. Our conversations with the g7 are important because it really represents the most significant and influential donors to the World Health Organization. I would say that if who and other countries, and other countries do not want to see the United States leave who, theres no doubt about that. Its important for who to embrace these reforms, and at the appropriate governing bodys meeting for Member States to take these reforms up and approve them. Theres one country that is desperate for the United States to leave who, and thats china. They are going to fill this vacuum. They are going to put in the money that we have withdrawn, and even if we try to rejoin in 2021, it is going to be under fundamentally different terms because china will be more influential because our even temporary absence from it. Any other construction of reality is just putting the United States in a very very dangerous position. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I guess i would say to that, sir, that the u. S. Has been the most generous donor to who really since the beginning. Its been remarkable the increase in chinas influence within who, really over a long period of time. Thats been with the United States in who and being the most generous contributor to who. So the president made a bold decision. Theres no doubt about that. Personally, i hope that it will get the attention of the leadership of the World Health Organization and that the scenario you just described will not come about. Thats at least my hope. I just finally note, we were continuing to fund the who for the last three years, but we left our seat on the board vacant, so it doesnt take a lot of imagination to figure out why china was able to get more influence, if we were sending money, but not sending anybody to sit on the governing board. So we invited listen, im not defending the fact that who has gotten closer to china, but we essentially invited the chinese to step in and fill the shoes of the United States, given the fact that we werent sitting on that governing board. Senator, i actually have something to do with that so i would like to respond to that. Im actually the alternate board member, and im sure i dont nearly as a good a job as the Senate Confirmed person. But that seat was not vacant. I assure you. In fact, the ambassador or his predecessor, the ambassador geneva, they are always there to fill that seat. The assistant secretary of health was actually nominated i think it was 2017, so he was nominated a long time ago, and we sure do wish we could have had him confirmed sooner, but he was just confirmed a couple of weeks ago. He was nominated last year and had to be renominated again this year. All right. Well, i wont get into an argument over whether it is more effective to have Senate Confirmed positions or not, i would obviously argue that it is. Im well over my time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator murphy. Mr. Grigsby, i can tell you that i have contacts with the who, and your suggestion that our talk of withdrawing and withdrawing funds might get their attention, i can assure you its gotten their attention. Thats probably been your experience too, clearly my experience. In any event, we want to look forward as opposed to backward. Were going to talk about that in a few minutes. Before we do that, senator cardin . Well, i hope im looking forward. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for holding this hearing. Let me thank all of our witnesses for their service to our country. On Global Challenges, u. S. Leadership is indispensable, if were going to have the type of outcome thats in the interest of the United States and our security interest. And this committee knows that best. Thats why i was very pleased to see that were holding this hearing. Its through u. S. Leadership that we have a safer world, a more democratic world, and a healthier world. So many of us are very concerned as to how the United States responded to this Global Pandemic. Weve seen inconsistent information coming out from the white house, and thats being kind to the president , on a lot of the things that he has done with regards to this pandemic. We have not seen the type of preparation or response to the pandemic that would be used as a model for the world to respond. I think senator cain pointed that out pretty clearly in his questioning. This is not an isolated example of the Trump Administration in regards to Global Affairs. I can point to the immigration policy of this country. I was very proud that the Supreme Court ruled the president s actions in trying to end the daca program was in their words arbitrary and capricious. But we also could talk about the president s trade agenda that initially put us at odds with our trading partners, our traditional trading partners rather than trying to isolate china. Or the United States pulling out of the paris climate agreement, the only country in the world basically to pull away from that. And now the pandemic. So my question starts off with the effectiveness of u. S. Global leadership on this pandemic, when other countries look at whats being done here in the United States, how much influence do we really have in the behavior of other countries because they look at whats happening in the United States, they see the president holding a political rally, bringing lots of people together, against the advice of the Public Health officials. How can we complain whats going on in other countries, and my question is going to deal specifically with some of our largest countries in our hemisphere who have at least publicly reported that their cases of covid are very much underreported, and they have not taken the steps that Public Health officials believe is necessary in order to contain the spread of covid19. This is our hemisphere. We know this is a Global Pandemic. How much influence do we really have, and how much of concern are we with whats happening in our own hemisphere with other countries that are underreporting covid19 and have not taken the steps that Public Health officials believe are necessary in order to contain this virus . Senator, i can start that. I appreciate that question. You know, were really truly committed to the western hemisphere. I think we Just Announced another 250 Million Dollars to be turned on for the northern triangle countries. Our commitment to columbia is unprecedented, mexico im trying to limit this to covid19, if i can. Sure, yeah. You might want to also point out the congress appropriated almost 2 billion dollars of aid to deal with covid19. Can you tell me how much of that money is actually been spent and where its been spent . We can go and look exactly at the obligations by country not obligations, how much has been spent. Thats how much has been spent, yeah. Can you give me a range of that 2 billion how much has been spent . Yeah, so congress has appropriated 1. 6 billion dollars for aid. I can speak to that piece. We have committed about 1. 3 billion. Of that we have committed almost 200 million for the western hemisphere. You say the committed. The money is out and being spent . We have identified what projects i understand you have identified. How much of that has actually been spent . It gets down to the obligation rates, which i will turn to chris to answer specifically. But in general obligated almost over i want to know how much has been spent. This is a global emergency. Right. So time is critical. How much has actually been spent . So obligation equals spending. It is when we actually hand over the money to the partner to do the work, and so thats the big picture. Then i can turn it over to chris if he has more details specifically for western hemisphere what the obligation rate is. I will say one thing, so each individual bureau and an agency handles their own obligations rate. I can speak for the state department side. The state department has obligated every dollar that weve identified that we want to spend on covid, so thats happening. Aid has a different mechanism and different approach to this, and so i can let chris sort of elaborate, but i think let me just do that. Chris, if you want thank you, senator. The easy answer from our perspective is that u. S. Aid has put over a billion dollars into the hands of people overseas to respond to the covid19. That includes the portion of the supplemental that we are still continuing to put in peoples hands. How much of the supplemental has been spent . More than 50 , sir, of the portion that we control. Why hasnt all of it been allocated . Weve been allocating in tranches because the virus moves very quickly, and what we need to do is see where the virus is going and then move ahead of it and prepare and learn as we go. Do you need more money . Will you be requesting more money . Were busy obligating the money that we have. Were very thankful for the generosity of congress in this. We are not through this pandemic, and we are learning a lot. One of the things im most concerned about, sir, are the secondary and tertiary impacts. We are seeing a big rise in security. We see 1. 1 billion children out of school. Were alarmed about gender based violence. Theres a whole set of secondary and tertiary impacts that we will have to consider going forward, sir. Keep our Committee Informed as the money is actually spent and the request for additional funds as you see the needs. Yes. Absolutely, senator. To pick up on what chris mentioned, we have 35 billion dollars thats being spent every year on foreign assistance. You know, much of it going to western hemisphere. We want to make sure that every dollar is spent in a covid sensitive way; right . How do we make sure that our gender based violence programming, our education programming, our health programming, takes into effect of whats happening with the virus right there, right then. And so its a really important conversation. It is not just as chris mentioned, it is not just the supplemental. Were really trying to bring to bear all of our foreign assistance in order to help countries overcome this virus. Thank you. Let me follow up on senator cardins question. On the 50 of the money, its supplemental money thats been put out, has that been spent on the primary effects of covid . Or is some of it spent on the secondary and tertiary effects that you have quite properly and considerately yeah, it is a mix. So congress has appropriated a certain amount of money for our economic support fund, which is really looking at that tertiary and secondary impacts. Primarily most of our resources are coming in the form of both Global Health and humanitarian, who do focus more primarily on the actual virus in providing critical medical supplies, training healthcare workers, looking at best practices, those types of things. Thank you very much, senator shaheen . Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you to our panelists. I would like to go back to china, a lot of discussion about china and their role in the hearing today. We have seen a concerted effort from china to counter any negative narrative that may develop in the International Media within countries on chinas role in the pandemic, and i would say given the discussion this morning, they have been pretty successful. They have demonstrated a clear willingness to use their resources including the manufacturing of personal protective equipment to realign National Sentiments in countries that may otherwise be inclined to critically examine chinas response to the coronavirus. In fact the center for strategic and International Studies leased released a report earlier this month that surveyed political elites across Southeast Asia and found that china is gaining ground on political influence and far outstretches the u. S. On economic influence in that region. I have two questions, how does the lack of u. S. Leadership on the Pandemic Response create a vacuum that allows china to better develop that narrative, where they are the provider, helping countries with needed resources and expertise . And secondly, how does the pandemic contribute to this dynamic in Southeast Asia in a way that has a negative impact on the United States and our role . Im happy to have whoever wants to answer it. I can start and pass it on. I totally agree with your premise of the question. I mean, the reality is china has used this pandemic to advance their Strategic Interests around the world. As i mentioned earlier, it does need to be seen in the context of the larger of their larger efforts. I think we have a lot of work to do, especially on the Public Diplomacy side, for one, to counter misinformation and our Global Engagement center does a great job of doing that. Let me im sorry to interrupt. Of course. Let me ask you, why do you think that is . Why have we been slow . Has it been some of the statements that were read from the president that suggests that we have been slow to recognize what was happening in china . No actually i think what you are seeing is that the United States has outspent china time and time again, both in its every day foreign assistance. China spends 400 million or so on foreign assistance. And were at 35 billion. I mean, they are just not a significant player when it comes to what we would consider to be effective foreign assistance. They spend all of their resources trying to build up strategic ports and engage in bribery and other aspects. I think it is an asymmetrical challenge from a development perspective, and we need to develop asymmetrical responses accordingly. Congress has been was really smart in last years appropriations bill. They established whats called a countering china incentive fund. We will be spending 300 Million Dollars through a bottom up process trying to develop best practices across the world to say how can we effectively Counter China in el salvador and other areas areas . This is not a Southeast Asia problem as you know. We want to position ourselves in order to be able to be one the partner of choice always, and two, remind people of the every day commitment we have been making to countries over the past 40 years. Weve been there. Weve stood with countries, through thick and thin. As i said, weve invested 500 billion dollars just over the past 20 years. I agree with that, but a lot of that 500 billion has not been in humanitarian and Economic Development aid. Is it, when you are counting that 500 billion, are you not counting the military aid in that as well . Yeah, so about 25 so the way that our budgets work, about 25 of our foreign assistance is security assistance. Thats not just military. Thats also Law Enforcement and those types of things. 25 is Global Health. 25 is humanitarian. And 25 is everything else. So given that, why do you think we have not been more successful and china has been successful . I would like to ive been working in development for 30 years. Most of the time i have been overseas. Yes, we have seen the quick increase in chinese influence. But were also seeing that china is not now as successful in many terms. Theres a lot of buyers remorse, and more understanding that chinesE Investments come with strings a. Thatted. Strings attached. The supplemental that were implementing has a very important Public Diplomacy side that really shows American Leadership and countries overseas are turning to us and our embassies for leadership on this issue. So can i im sorry to interrupt again, but im out of time. I just want to get an answer to the what has the pandemic done to allow china to increase its influence as opposed to our reaction globally to the pandemic, which does not seem to have produced a similar response to american aid . Yeah. I mean, thats a tough question obviously to answer. And we cant wed have to go country by country to really determine every country is unique in how they approach it and how they think about chinese assistance. Most countries are willing to accept face masks or whatever from china, but to chriss point, they often then go around to us and say hey, is this Financing Deal from china any good . Were the trusted partner and choice, even though weve seen china really accelerate, but if you look at their investments, even in covid, versus what the u. S. Has invested, it pales in comparison. I think they are just really focused on getting the head lines. The state of New Hampshire was able to get personal protective equipment from china when we couldnt get it from the United States or from fema. I think we need to examine whats happening there and what we could be doing better in order to address the fallout from the pandemic. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator shaheen. Now, the tough questions, if you guys were sitting here, each of you, one at a time, what would you do to construct a system for the future . Would it be to rehabilitate who . To reform who . To create a new division of who . To restructure its management . Would it be to create a new International Agency . Would it be to use Something Else like cdc or what have you to construct the system as we go forward . I want to say that senator menendez raised a very legitimate question about parallel spending in another organization, and i think the last thing anybody here wants to do is create more bureaucracy as opposed to an effective nimble response to this in the future. And so give me your thoughts. I guess well go down the line. Mr. Richardson, youre up. Thank you, mr. Chairman. You know, whenever you deal with these challenges, i also want to make sure were thinking about what problem were trying to solve and what results that were looking for. The solution and the specifics about those solutions will naturally come, and thats through the legislative process. The administration has yet to finalize its own proposal in this space. But let me say a couple things, you know, first and foremost, having a really clear leadership and coordination function is essential. And as i said, coordination doesnt mean control. It means empowerment. We shouldnt be you know, the state department shouldnt be doing Global Health programming. That would be a terrible duplication of efforts and really takes away from what cdc and usa id does, but it also has global reach, embassies at nearly every country in the world but has a National Coordination function that is essential. The other gaps into the system that we have seen in both the domestic and the International Systems is Data Tracking, built in accountability, how do we create true accountability into the International System to hold countries accountable for not meeting minimum standards . How do we make sure that we are encouraging countries to use their own resources in a coordinated and systematic way that allows us to better share data, to be able to create Early Warning systems, and how do we bring the very best of our private sector and the u. S. Government to Work Together . So those are a couple thoughts. Those are all good questions but not much of an answer. When the fire alarm goes off, who responds . The state department is the functional lead for foreign policy, for the United States. How about for the world . For the world, sorry. The cdc is responsible for outbreaks or for Public Health emergencies. Usa id leads on conflicts, crisises. Each one of us has our natural roles and responsibilities. I guess i would encourage how we can pull all of our expertise together in order to solve the problem. So the criticism has been made, both in this committee here and for a long time, the who fell down on the job when it was obvious that there was something developing. Should they be the ones to undertake this in a fastmoving pandemic like this . Or should there be a Different Agency that does that . That shines light on it, attacks it, goes and gets it . Who should do that . I appreciate that. I dont think that look, the who has failed the world on multiple occasions. The last administration saw the same thing with the ebola crisis. We have now seen this with the covid crisis. When this problem has been brought to us before, this is not the first time that weve had to think about can the who do hiv aids response, for instance . I think the world said no, it does what it does, but it is not going to be nimble, dynamic, respect burden sharing, bring in private sector actors and able to respond appropriately with the highest levels of accountability, so last time the u. S. Led to create the global fund, in order to do something on the hiv aids side. And so i think that looking at where are the strategic gaps in the multilateral space and how the u. S. Can lead with our friends and partners and folks around the world in order to strategically fill those gaps, that will be an essential part of the conversation. Is it global fund a model . I think it is a tremendous model. There are a lot of different option out there that we can learn from. The key here is having worldwide reach, focusing on burden sharing. Right now the u. S. Spends 40 of the worlds global Public Health work comes from the American People. You know, we dont want to back away from that, but as we take on new challenge, we need surge both private sector and other donors into this space, and there are tremendous models on how to do that well. Do you agree . Thank you, senator, when i think about the future, i think we need to think about how do we respond to the next pandemic, and how do we prevent also as well an epidemic from becoming a pandemic . How do we structure ourselves to effectively engage in that effort . We know that in order to respond, we have to maintain a nimble and effective means to do so. We cant have overarching topdown bureaucratic bureaucracy engaging in that. We have learned that the hard way. We need to empower our people in the field at the country team level because thats where the true coordination and expertise comes due. Do you agree with mr. Richardson that the vehicle good models for the vehicle are global fund and gavi . That depends sir, its a model for what . I dont mean to be cheeky. No no, fair enough. Preventing is very different than responding. Those are different skill sets and different attributes. What i consider about preventing, we know that a pandemic is not really a health crisis. It is a governance crisis. We know where we have epidemics today, we have them because of state fragility. Where is ebola today . Eastern congo. Why is polio still exist where it exists today . It exists in fragile states like parts of pakistan and south sudan. So many times an epidemic is really a governance crisis masquerading as a health crisis. We need to make sure that we have an integrated approach. Senator booker talked about the link between wildlife trafficking and crossovers. So when we look at about preventing, theres a level of coordination that needs to take place. We havent a stovepipe alone approach that creates another layer of bureaucracy. It has to be something that brings everything together. When we look at the response side, we have to maintain our nimbleness and our ability to actually engage in that International Effort at multiple levels. What agency or what system, what do you recommend in that regard . Again, for that part, when the fire alarm goes off and the Fire Department goes, who is the Fire Department . Its not necessarily we dont really have the global fund set up to be the Fire Department. The global fund is responding to slowmoving epidemics. Is there no model then that exists for the Fire Department . The only model that we currently have is the one that were suggesting needs to be reformed. Currently, when theres a humanitarian crisis, and ive led many of our interactions in them, we work through the u. N. Cluster system. The u. N. Sets and organizes the International Parts together. It works well for a regional stage, but now we dont have a model for the pandemic stage. But we have principles that we need to incorporate, flexibility, responsiveness, integrated approach, and one that brings the u. S. Government core capabilities that we share at this table into that together. Mr. Grigsby . Yes, sir, thank you. I think jim and chris have stated it quite well. And i just want to thank jim and colleagues at u. S. Agency for International Development. We have worked very closely with them, in development of these ideas. We appreciate that. We do support the coordinated concept being in a nonimplementing agency. I would just point out that most of what were talking about is sort of foreign assistance related. The cdc, which would be the agency in hhs that would have the most to do in this area, its not a foreign assistance agency. It really is a technical, Technical Assistance agency. It operates differently than usa id and in fact in different places. It does have 50 or 60 offices in developing countries, but it actually operates in every country on earth, so rich countries, poor countries, all sorts of collaborations. But we are you suggesting cdc is the model for the Fire Department . No, not necessarily. It just depends on what kind of fire that the trucks are going out to address, i guess. I mean, cdc is on point when it comes to the pandemics and disease outbreaks. Theres no doubt about that. It often time works very closely with u. S. Agency for International Development, particularly in a case theres a great example where theres a disease outbreak and its happening in a part of the world where theres a war going on and many other problems, and its by definition a complex emergency. So we work hand and glove with usaid on that. So i dont know that theres a one size fits all sort of answer. Its kind of case by case, but thanks. I was hoping to get a clearer answer to the question who is the Fire Department because thats what were trying to do here. I get all the moving parts. I understand that. But it seems to me that if there was a telephone number that somebody could call, and say come and put out the fire, we want that agency, and right now what youre suggesting is we give them a list of phone numbers to call, and im not sure that that response senator, if i could just be very clear. There already is a number that countries call when they have a problem. It is our ambassador. And thats really where our worldwide reach is really essential. And then our ambassadors, around the world, they naturally lean on the Technical Expertise depending on the challenge; right . As we start thinking about what the next pandemic looks like, is it fast moving . Is it slow moving . Does it hit the developing world . Does it hit the high Income Countries . How does it work . What are responses that we need to do . We just dont know. So making sure we have true coordination that can pull the right levers at the right time in order to get to results i think is essential. But i certainly wouldnt want to move away from the fact that we do have worldwide reach today. People know who to call. And thats our chief of mission, at the state department, and we want to just look to strengthen that capacity. If i could add briefly to, that i would say that the our ambassadors they are the mayors. And the firemen is the office of foreign Disaster Assistance which mobilizes rapidly around the world. Currently responding to very complex humanitarian assistance all around the world and complex emergencies. So from our u. S. Point of view, we have firemen, but i think your question, sir, should there be and will there be an International Fire person . Thats what were looking for. Senator cain, anything for a good of the order . Just a followup, there chair, on your comment and then one additional question. Mr. Chair, on your comment and then one additional question. I think we should stay in the who and use our leverage push reforms, an enormously frustrating organization, like every international organization. The u. S. Chose not the senate actually chose not to put the u. S. Into the league of nations when president wilson urged after world war i that we do so, and the organization was ineffective. It was more ineffective because the u. S. Wasnt involved. But its interesting during the 1930s, long before world war ii, fdr could see the league of nations collapse coming and basically said its been ineffective but if it collapses we will have to recreate it the world needs it and started planning for a u. N. Those plans were delayed by world war ii. Eventually it was carried forward. Recognizing the frustrations the u. S. Pulled out of the u. N. Human Rights Council for some legitimate reasons, history of antiisrael bias and also a more broad history of hypocrisy, the member nations, you know, were talking about human rights and doing bad things, but whats happened as a result of us pulling out has it gotten better for israel . No. And things that the u. S. Advocated on the council that did become global priorities. For example, fighting against discrimination of lgbtq people. That wouldnt have been part of the Global Human Rights agenda if it werent for the United States. Those have gone unaddressed or sort of dormant with the u. S. Not there. we have, im so confident the u. S. Always had such a value to an organization that when we back away from it, they lose the expertise we have and worse actors elevate their profile in ways that not good for us or anyone else. Is what i want to ask, the New York Times piece last week, on the ground agencies feeling frustrated, the delivery of the march cares act and this 1. 6 billion into the field. Given us, a lot of it has been committed, a big chunk of it obligated and i want to understand, maybe we will followup in writing, it means you put it in the hands of the organization for the u. S. Is writing a check, is it the same as getting to the field . Might some of the complaints of these groundlevel Church World Service is save the Children World vision, might their complaints the u. S. Written to somebody as a middleman not getting down to the ground get this was a recent piece in the New York Times, what is the source of their frustration . I think the source of their frustration is they want to act as quickly as we want them to as well without getting bureaucratic, they have different abilities to spend money. These concerns from important partners . With the funding we have, as soon as its available, they can begin spending it. We contacted directly with them, we dont go through middleman. This is the unique ability we have so of the 535 million in funding, they can currently spend 257 million involved july 17, they can spend all of it. Thats in addition, thats part of the overall funding, which is a billing dollars we made available which is in their hands to do work now. We are looking at ways of streamlining the process, we are committed to fully obligate this assistance by the end of july. These are extraordinary times. Previous to the Global Pandemic, we were running large system efforts in difficult places like yemen, iraq, south sudan and syria. The Global Pandemic has affected our own workforce as well but we are adapting and streamlining and meeting the challenge. Thank you. To our witnesses, thank you so much. Youve been very patient. This is part of the puzzle we are trying to solve, we appreciate your thoughts on it, we hope to hold a number of these hearings to get to as much input as we can and then sit down and construct a bill that will move us forward and when this happens again, hopefully later rather than sooner but we will be more ready hopefully we will have legislation to address that. Thank you again for your service and attending this hearing. Committee is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] tonight, a special edition of book tv airing weeknights this week. Starting 8 30 p. M. Eastern, astrophysicist mario libya looks at the scientific to groceries of galileo that challenge conventional thinking during his time. Evolutionary biologists neil looks at evolution using dna from prehistoric fossils and later, nasa astronaut and scientist, kate greene recalls her experiences living in a simulated martian environment. Enjoy book tv on cspan2. Social justice advocates and scholars look at Police Reform before a House Oversight committee briefing. Other topics focused on systemic racism and policing, the inclusion of black women in the discussion on Police Brutality and the role of police unions. We will come to order. I now recognize myself for an opening statement. Good morning and thank you for being here for this important briefing. Black lives matter. I cant breathe. No justice, no peace. These powerful phrases are rally cries for fair minded americans to live up to this countrys core principles, equal justice unde t