State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2009 Appropriations

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs:
FY2009 Appropriations
Updated November 20, 2008
Susan B. Epstein
Specialist in Foreign Policy
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Kennon H. Nakamura
Analyst in Foreign Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs:
FY2009 Appropriations
The annual State, Foreign Operations and Related Agencies appropriations bill
is the primary legislative vehicle through which Congress reviews the U.S.
international affairs budget and influences executive branch foreign policy making
in general. Funding for Foreign Operations and State Department/Broadcasting
programs has been steadily rising since FY2002, and amounts approved for FY2004
in regular and supplemental bills reached an unprecedented level compared with the
past 40 years, largely due to Iraq reconstruction funding. Emergency supplementals
enacted annually since September 11, 2001, also have pushed spending upward.
On February 4, 2008, the President sent his FY2009 budget request to Congress.
Major foreign policy issues confronting the second session of the 110th Congress
include the following:
!The State/Foreign Operations budget FY2009 request represents a
7.8% increase over FY2008 enacted levels, while the request for
domestic programs is flat.
!DOD/State Department interagency involvement in soft power
!A foreign aid reform plan that seeks to align assistance with U.S.
strategic objectives.
!Significant increases in State Department and USAID staffing.
!Continued costs relating to Iraq and Afghanistan.
!The Civilian Stabilization Initiative — authorization and funding.
The House Appropriations State-Foreign Operations Subcommittee marked up
its bill (yet unnumbered) on July 16. The Chairwoman’s Mark totals $36.62 billion,
$3.82 billion more than FY2008 enacted levels. No further action has occurred. The
Senate took up its State Department-Foreign Operations appropriation bill (S. 3288)
on July 18; the full Senate Appropriations Committee reported it out the same day
with $36.78 billion for FY2009. With no further progress on a separate bill, on
September 24, the House approved a continuing resolution (H.R. 2638) that
continues most funding through March 6, 2009, at FY2008 levels. The Senate passed
the CR 78 to 12 on September 27. The President signed the bill into law (P.L. 110-

329) on September 30.

On May 2, 2008, the Administration requested supplemental funds for FY2009.
Congress took action on both the pending FY2008 and newly requested FY2009
supplemental appropriations (H.R. 2642) in May and June. Congress passed the
supplemental the end of June; the President signed it into law (P.L. 110-252) on June

30, 2008. (For more detail, see CRS Report RL34451.)

This report analyzes the FY2009 request and recent-year funding trends; it will
track major foreign policy issues Congress may consider and will highlight
congressional action throughout the appropriations process including the CR. This
report will be updated to further reflect congressional action.

Key Policy Staff
Subj ect Na me Telepho ne E- M a il
General: Foreign Operations PolicySusan
State Dept & Foreign Service IssuesKen
Afghanistan AssistanceRhoda
Africa AssistanceTed
Agency for International DevelopmentSusan
Asia AssistanceThomas
Broadcasting, InternationalKen
Central Asia AssistanceJim
Debt ReliefMarty
Development Assistance (bilateral)Susan
Disaster/Humanitarian Aid/RefugeesRhoda
DOD and Foreign AssistanceNina
Export-Import BankJames
Family Planning ProgramsLuisa
Health Programs, including HIV/AIDS, Malaria,Tiaji
Tuberculosis, Child and MaternalKellie
Human RightsKen
International Affairs BudgetSusan
International Crime & NarcoticsLiana
International Organizations/UN FundingKen
Iraq ReconstructionCurt
Latin America AssistanceMark
Middle East AssistanceJeremy
Military AssistanceRichard
Millennium Challenge AccountCurt
Multilateral Development Banks Jonathan
Overseas Private Investment Corporation James
Peace CorpsCurt
Nina Serafino
Public DiplomacyKen
Refugee AidRhoda
Russia/East Europe AssistanceCurt
U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA)Luisa
U.S. Institute of PeaceKen
U.N. Voluntary ContributionsMarjorie

Recent Developments..............................................1
Congressional Action...............................................2
House Action.................................................2
Senate Action.................................................2
State Department Operations.................................3
Foreign Operations.........................................4
Other Congressional Action......................................4
The FY2009 Supplemental Request and the Remaining FY2008 Supplemental.5
International Affairs FY2009 Budget Overview..........................5
Background and Trends.........................................5
FY2009 Budget Request Overview....................................9
FY2009 Budget Request: State Department and Related Agencies..........10
Civilian Stabilization Initiative..................................11
State Department — Administration of Foreign Affairs...............13
Diplomatic and Consular Programs (D&CP)...................13
Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance (ESCM)........13
Educational and Cultural Exchanges..........................14
The Capital Investment Fund (CIF)...........................14
International Organizations and Conferences.......................14
Contributions to International Organizations (CIO)..............15
Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA).....15
International Commissions.....................................15
Related State Department Appropriations..........................15
The Asia Foundation......................................15
The International Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue
Trust Fund..........................................15
National Endowment for Democracy (NED)....................16
East-West Center.........................................16
U.S. Institute of Peace.........................................17
Broadcasting Board of Governors................................17
FY2009 Budget Request: Foreign Operations...........................19
Top Ten U.S. Foreign Aid Recipient Countries......................21
Foreign Aid Reform...........................................22
FY2009 Foreign Operations Budget Details........................22
Major Changes...........................................23
Regional Distribution......................................23
Sector Distribution........................................24
Use of Supplementals.....................................26
Appendix A. Abbreviations.........................................28
Appendix B. Foreign Aid Country Categories...........................29

Appendix C. State Department and Related Agencies Appropriations........31
Appendix D. Foreign Operations Appropriations........................34
List of Figures
Figure 1. Composition of Foreign Affairs Budget, FY2009 Request..........6
Figure 2. International Affairs Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009 ($ Billions)...8
Figure 3. State Department and Related Agencies Appropriations,
FY1999-FY2009 ($ Billions)....................................11
Figure 4. Foreign Operations, FY1999-FY2009 ($ Billions)...............20
Figure 5. Regional Distribution of Foreign Aid.........................24
List of Tables
Table 1. International Affairs Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009.............8
Table 2. Status of State-Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2009.........9
Table 3. State Department and Related Agencies Appropriations,
FY1999-FY2009 .............................................10
Table 4. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009.............20
Table 5. Top Ten Recipients of U.S. Foreign Aid FY2008-FY2009.........21
Table 6. Selected Sector Funding, FY2008 Estimate and FY2009 Request....25
Table 7. Funding for Iraq and Afghanistan, FY2002-FY2009..............27

State, Foreign Operations, and Related
Programs: FY2009 Appropriations
Recent Developments
At the end of September 2008, Congress passed a continuing resolution (H.R.

2638) that continues most State-Foreign Operations funding through March 6, 2009,

at FY2008 levels. The President signed it into law (P.L. 110-329) on September 30.
The CR contains some exceptions to maintaining flat funding at FY2008-
appropriated levels. Among these exception are $9.0 million to be transferred to the
Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction to remain available until
September 2010; $465.0 million within the Economic Support Fund (ESF), of which
$365.0 million is for Georgia for humanitarian, economic, and relief assistance, and
the remainder for hurricane relief in the Caribbean; up to $5.0 million to help Liberia
in debt reduction; and an increase from $631.2 million to $670.65 million of Foreign
Military Financing (FMF) funds to be made available for procurement in Israel of
defense articles and services in FY2009. The measure also provides $37.5 million
for emergency repair and construction for the United States-Mexico International
Boundary and Water Commission water quantity program, with no deadline for
expenditure. (For account-by-account details, see the funding tables in Appendix C
and D.)
On July 16, the House Appropriations State Department-Foreign Operations
Subcommittee marked up its yet unnumbered funding bill. No further action on this
bill occurred.
On July 18, the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee and full Committee
marked up and reported out its foreign affairs funding bill (S. 3288). No further
action occurred.
As of early July, both House and Senate approved the 302(b) allocations of
$36.6 billion for the State-Foreign Operations Subcommittee FY2009 discretionary
spending. In early June 2008, Congress adopted its final version of the FY2009
budget resolution (S.Con.Res. 70). The budget resolution provides a new budget
authority of $37.2 billion for international affairs in FY2009 with outlays of $35.7
billion for the same year.
Throughout May and June 2008, Congress considered $5.4 billion for State
Department/Foreign Operations FY2008 supplemental funds still pending after
Congress approved some FY2008 supplementals last December. In addition, on May
2, 2008 the Administration sent to Congress its FY2009 supplemental request of
$2.24 billion for the Department of State and $2.88 billion for Foreign Operations.
Legislation (H.R. 2642) containing both year supplemental funds was passed by the

House on June 19, 2008, by the Senate on June 26, 2008, and signed by the President
on June 30, 2008. H.R. 2642 is now designated as Public Law 110-252.
Earlier, on February 4, 2008, the President sent his FY2009 regular budget
request to Congress, including a request of $39.5 billion for the International Affairs
Function 150 account. Throughout February and March, relevant House and Senate
committees held hearings with the Secretary of State and others testifying on the
State/Foreign Operations funding request for FY2009.
Foreign policy issues that the second session of the 110th Congress will likely
consider simultaneously with the appropriations debate include hard power/soft
power and interagency coordination, foreign aid reform, State Department personnel
concerns, and the civilian stabilization initiative.
Congressional Action
House Action
The House passed the continuing resolution, or CR, (The Department of
Homeland Security Act, 2008/H.R. 2638) on September 24, 2008, by a vote of 370
to 58 with one present.
The House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs marked up the international affairs (Function 150 account) regular
appropriation on July 16, 2009. According to the subcommittee’s press release, the
Chairwoman’s Mark totals $36.62 billion for State-Foreign Operations in FY2009,
$3.82 billion more than the enacted FY2008 level, including $2.38 billion for Israel,
$1.041 billion for Afghanistan, $1.5 billion for Egypt, and $696.9 million for Jordan.
The subcommittee approved $7.278 billion for global health programs and $1.728
billion for the Development Assistance account. In addition to providing $809
million for USAID operating expenses, this bill, combined with the FY2008
supplemental funding, will fund 400 new USAID employees. For the Department
of State, combined with the staffing increases in the FY2008 Emergency
Supplemental Act, P.L. 110-252, the legislation increases State Department staffing
by 1,061 new positions. The bill also meets the Administration’s request of $522.4
million for educational and cultural exchanges.1
Senate Action
The Senate passed the CR (H.R. 2638) on September 27, 2008, with a vote of

78 to 12.

The Senate State-Foreign Operations Subcommittee and full Appropriations
Committee marked up and reported out its bill (S. 3288/S. Rept 110-425) on July 18.

1 State and Foreign Operations Subcommittee Approves Fiscal Year 2009 Appropriations
Bill, News from Congresswoman Nita M. Lowey, Chairwoman, State and Foreign
Operations Appropriations Subcommittee, July 16, 2008.

It provides $36.78 billion for State-Foreign Operations in FY2009. (For account-by-
account detail, see the funding tables in Appendix C and D.)
State Department Operations. The Senate-reported bill appropriates $12.2
billion for FY2009, a $2.7 million increase above the Administration’s request. In
its funding of the Department of State, S. 3288 meets the Administration’s request
to increase State Department personnel above attrition by 500 positions. It creates
a new human resources category funded at $2.1 billion. This human resources
category brings together personnel costs that were previously included in larger
categories, such as Public Diplomacy or Worldwide Security support, or were funded
from program accounts, as in the case of the Migration and Refugee Account (MRA)
or the International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE) account.
The legislation funds the Civilian Stabilization Initiative at $115 million or
$133.6 million below request. On July 17 in a ceremony at the Department of State,
Secretary of State Rice officially “rolled out” this program. The committee report
accompanying S. 3288 explains that other funds for the Civilian Stabilization
Initiative are also in other parts of the legislation or provided in the FY2008
Supplemental Appropriations (P.L. 110-252).
The Appropriations Committee expressed strong support for nontraditional
students to participate in international exchanges, with an increase in appropriations
of about $22.8 million above request. The Administration requested $522.4 million,
and the programs received an appropriations of $545.3 million. In its discussion of
the construction of secure U.S. posts abroad, the committee directs the Office of
Building Operations to evaluate the process by which posts are designated as a
priority for new construction, rehabilitation, and upgrades, and to include several
factors (including political, security, social environment, and best ways to engage
local populations) in designing new embassies buildings. In the funding for U.S.
Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA), S. 3288 appropriates
$1,650 million, which is $153 million above the Administration’s request. The
committee report states that the appropriated amount is still $177 million below the
projected amount needed for U.S. contributions to the CIPA account. The
Appropriations Committee states that it does not support practices by the Office of
Management and Budget to underfund peacekeeping activities and then rely on
supplemental legislation to fund a few more peacekeeping missions.
As discussed later in this report, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG)
proposed to close or reduce certain radio language service broadcasting in order to
fund enhanced broadcasts to other countries and utilize new technologies to reach a
wider audience. The Senate Appropriations Committee, while recommending $6.1
million less funding than requested, opposes the further reduction in the language
services. The committee said, in the accompanying committee report, that it supports
the ongoing efforts to improve reaching audience by utilizing new technologies. It
does not support “going silent” in areas that the committee regards as critical,
however. The recent fighting between Russia and Georgia refocused attention on
BBG’s plans to end or reduce Voice of America (VOA) radio broadcasting to these
countries. Critics of BBG’s plans point to the fighting and the coverage in the
Russian press as an example of the need for such broadcasting, while BBG states that
surge coverage can be increased using alternative means. The committee states that

sufficient funding is provided to maintain the language broadcasts when combining
the funding recommended by the committee and the $8 million provided in the
Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-252).
Foreign Operations. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported out S.
3288 with a total of $24.5 billion for foreign operations in FY2009. This is over $1.6
billion less than the request of $26.2 billion. For bilateral economic assistance, the
Senate bill provides $17.7 billion, including USAID operating and Inspector General
funds, $1.1 billion below the Administration request. The legislation provides
$210.9 million more than requested for Development Assistance, $383.2 million
more than requested for Global Health and Child Survival, and $336.0 million more
than requested for Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA), but nearly $2 billion
less than requested for the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC). For
International Military Assistance, S. 3288 provides $322 million less than the
FY2009 request and, for Multilateral Assistance, the Senate bill provides $217.0
million less than requested.
Among the most notable concerns expressed by the Senate committee are those
regarding the MCC. The committee notes that since FY2004 Congress has
appropriated for MCC $7.5 billion, of which $5.98 billion has been obligated for 17
countries, but only $235 million has been disbursed. The committee report states that
the committee “cannot responsibly appropriate billions in additional funding for new
compacts without more evidence that existing compacts are meeting their goals.”
Therefore, the committee recommends allocating the $1.1 billion difference between
the Administration request and the Senate committee recommendation to the
accounts for which the committee increased funding and believes are underfunded
in the Administration request. These include Global Health and Child Survival,
HIV/AIDS, Development Assistance, International Development Assistance, Global
Food Security, USAID Operating Expenses, MRA and Emergency Refugee and
Migration Assistance (ERMA), and Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining and
Related programs (NADR).
Other Congressional Action
Hearings and markups for the remaining FY2008 supplemental funding and
recent FY2009 supplemental request occurred in May and June 2008. The House
passed its version of H.R. 2642 on May 15, 2008. The Senate approved an amended
version of the bill on May 22, 2008. The House passed its amended version of H.R.
2642 on June 19th. The Senate agreed to the House amendments on June 26, and
cleared the bill for the President. The President signed H.R. 2642 on June 30, 2008,
and it is not designated as P.L. 110-252.
Foreign aid reform and interagency cooperation regarding national security and
foreign assistance are getting congressional attention. Hearings in both the House
and Senate on these issues occurred in April, May, June, and July. More hearings areth
expected in the 111 Congress.

The FY2009 Supplemental Request and the
Remaining FY2008 Supplemental
On May 2, 2008, the George W. Bush Administration sent an FY2009
supplemental budget request to Congress amending its FY2009 regular request by a
total of $5.12 billion for international affairs accounts — $2.24 billion for the
Department of State and $2.88 billion for foreign assistance. The Supplemental
Appropriation Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) was signed on June 30, 2008, with a total of
$6.15 billion in FY2008 supplementals and $3.94 billion in FY2009 supplementals
for State, Foreign Operations and Related Agencies. While Division J of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2008 (P.L. 110-161, signed December 26,
2007) contained both regular appropriations and $2.4 billion for FY2008
supplemental funding for international affairs, the Administration stated that $5.4
billion of the FY2008 supplemental request ($2.2 billion for the Department of State
and $3.2 billion for foreign assistance) was lacking. (For account-by-account detail,
see the tables in Appendix C and D. Also, for more information on the current
supplemental appropriations, see CRS Report RL34451, Second FY2008
Supplemental Appropriations for Military Operations, International Affairs, and
Other Purposes.)
International Affairs FY2009 Budget Overview
The international affairs budget, also known as Function 150, funds a variety of
U.S. government programs and activities, including foreign economic and military
assistance, contributions to international organizations and multilateral financial
institutions, State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development
(USAID) operations, public diplomacy, and international broadcasting programs.
Figure 1 provides a percentage breakout of the FY2009 budget request, including
international food aid that is appropriated in the Department of Agriculture
appropriations bill.
Background and Trends
The rationale for foreign affairs programs has transitioned from a largely anti-
communist orientation for some 40 years following World War II to a more recent
focus on anti-terrorism in the post September 11, 2001 environment. During the
Cold War, foreign aid and diplomatic programs also pursued a number of other U.S.
policy goals, such as reducing high rates of population growth, promoting economic
development in general, advancing U.S. trade interests, expanding access to basic
education and health care, promoting human rights, and protecting the environment.
In the 1990s, other goals included stopping nuclear weapons proliferation, curbing
the production and trafficking of illegal drugs, expanding peace efforts in the Middle
East, achieving regional stability, protecting religious freedom, and countering
trafficking in persons.

Figure 1. Composition of Foreign Affairs Budget, FY2009 Request

Ot her4%Di pl om ac y

2%Food Aid3%


Devel opm ent /M ult ilat eral
33 %In t e r n a t i o n a l


State nomic
Department 10%
Military AidOperations


Source: Fiscal Year 2009 Budget of the U.S. Government and CRS calculations.
Note: The total figure of $39.50 billion includes $157.1 million for mandatory retirement accounts.
A defining change in focus came following the September 11 terrorist attacks
in the United States. Since then, U.S. foreign aid and diplomatic programs have
taken on a more strategic sense of importance, and have been frequently cast in terms
of contributing to the war on terrorism. In 2002, President Bush released his
National Security Strategy that for the first time established global development as
the third pillar of U.S. national security, along with defense and diplomacy.
Development was again underscored in the Administration’s re-statement of the
National Security Strategy released on March 16, 2006.
Also in 2002, foreign assistance budget justifications began to highlight the war
on terrorism as the top foreign aid priority, emphasizing amounts of U.S. assistance
to 28 “front-line” states — countries that cooperate with the United States in the war
on terrorism or face terrorist threats themselves.2 Large reconstruction programs in
Afghanistan and Iraq are also part of the emphasis on using foreign aid to combat
terrorism. State Department efforts focus extensively on outreach in strategically
important countries, diplomatic security, and finding new and more effective ways
of presenting American views and culture through public diplomacy.
In the context of the post 9/11 environment, the Bush Administration announced
significant initiatives relating to diplomacy and foreign aid. A new transformational
diplomacy initiative, announced in 2006, repositioned diplomats to global trouble
2 According to the State Department, these “front-line” states included Afghanistan, Algeria,
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Colombia, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary,
India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Russia,
Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.

spots, created regional public diplomacy centers, localized small posts outside of
foreign capitals, and trained diplomats in new skills. (See CRS Report RL34141,
Diplomacy for the 21st Century: Transformational Diplomacy for more information.)
Also announced in 2006 was the creation of a new position at the State Department,
the Director of Foreign Assistance (DFA), who serves concurrently as USAID
Administrator. Heading up this new “F bureau” at State, the DFA created a new
Strategic Framework for Foreign Assistance with the objectives of providing more
coordination, coherence, transparency, and accountability for aid programs. (See
CRS Report RL34243, Foreign Aid Reform, Issues for Congress and Policy Options
for more information.)
Other presidential initiatives address development and global health concerns.
The Millennium Challenge Corporation is an aid delivery concept, proposed by
President Bush in 2002, authorized by Congress (Title VI, Division D of P.L. 108-
199), and established in early 2004. It is intended to concentrate significantly higher
amounts of U.S. resources in a few low- and low-middle income countries that have
demonstrated a strong commitment to political, economic, and social reforms. The
President initially promised $5 billion annually by FY2006, although funds requested
and appropriated have never reached this level.
With regard to global health issues, President Bush announced in 2003 a five-
year, $15 billion commitment to combat HIV/AIDS. Known as the President’s
Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, the initiative has focused significant
funds in 15 focus countries, largely in Africa.3 Subsequently, the President launched
a new initiative in mid-2005 aimed specifically at malaria (President’s Malaria
Initiative, or PMI), pledging $1.2 billion in additional resources through 2010. These
initiatives, which have benefitted African nations, have contributed to fulfilling the
Administration’s pledge to double aid to Africa in the 2004-2010 period. In May
2007, the President announced a second phase commitment on HIV/AIDS of an
additional $30 billion through FY2013.
Beyond these recently emerging foreign policy goals relating to terrorism and
global health concerns, other prominent objectives have continued since the early

1990s including supporting peace in the Middle East through assistance to Israel,

Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestinians; fostering democratization and stability for
countries in crisis, like Bosnia, Haiti, Rwanda, Kosovo, Liberia, and Sudan;
facilitating democratization and free market economies in Central Europe and the
former Soviet Union; suppressing international narcotics production and trafficking
through assistance to Colombia and the Andean region; and alleviating famine and
mitigating refugee situations in places throughout the world.
The international affairs budget can be divided into two components — State
Department and Foreign Operations. Both components are analyzed separately in the
rest of this report. Taken together, the international affairs budget has fluctuated in

3 PEPFAR countries include Botswana, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique,
Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Vietnam, Guyana, and

real terms in response to changing global events. Table 1 and Figure 2 show
appropriations for the last decade in both current and constant dollars.
Table 1. International Affairs Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009
(discretionary budget authority in billions of current and 2009 constant dollars)
FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04a FY05 FY06 FY07 est. req.
Current $22.3522.5723.2224.2531.7248.3434.2334.2538.6742.4639.50
2009 $29.0628.6128.7629.4837.5655.6237.9936.7740.6343.4339.50
Source: Summary and Highlights, International Affairs Function 150, FY2009 and CRS calculations.
Note: Amounts do not include mandatory Foreign Service retirement accounts that total $157 million
in FY2009. The FY2009 column reflects amounts requested by the Administration. Figures for
FY2008 are State Department estimates. FY1999 excludes $17.61 billion for the International
Monetary Fund. All figures include regular and supplemental appropriations, including those in
FY2008 within the recently passed supplemental Appropriation Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252). FY2009
supplemental funds enacted by P.L. 110-252 totaling $3.94 billion are not included in the table.
a. Reconstruction programs in Iraq peaked in FY2004.
Figure 2. International Affairs Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009
($ Billions)

FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09
Current $Constant 2009 $
Source: Summary and Highlights, International Affairs Function 150, FY2009 and CRS Calculations.

FY2009 Budget Request Overview
On February 4, 2008, the President sent his FY2009 regular international affairs
(Function 150 account) budget request to Congress. The request seeks a total of
$39.5 billion for both the Department of State and foreign operations. This
represents an increase from the previous year of 8.5% (excluding recent
supplementals) at a time when much of the rest of the budget request is flat. Included
in the FY2009 request is a new program referred to as the Civilian Stabilization
Initiative (CSI) to help stabilize and transition countries from war to peace.
Table 2. Status of State-Foreign Operations
Appropriations, FY2009
SubcomteeConf. Rept
ma r k u p pa sse d
HouseHouseSenateSenateConf.Public Law
House Senate Rept pa sse d Rept P a sse d Rept H o use Sena t e sig n e d
7-16-08 7-18-08 110-425 Funding
t hr o ugh
March 6,
included in the
Co nt i nui ng
Reso lutio n,
H.R. 2638.
P r esident
signed P.L.

FY2009 Budget Request: State Department and
Related Agencies
The Administration’s FY2009 budget request for the Department of State is
$11.456 billion, representing a 5.6% increase over the FY2008 estimate, including
rescissions and supplementals enacted in the consolidated appropriation (P.L. 110-
161). For international broadcasting, the FY2009 request of $699.5 million
represents a 2.6% increase over the FY2008 estimate, including rescissions and
supplementals. Related agencies, which are funded in the State and Foreign
Operations Appropriations bill, include the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG),
and U.S. assessed contributions to United Nations (U.N.), International
Organizations, and U.N. Peacekeeping. Also included are funding for the Asia
Foundation, the National Endowment for Democracy, and several other small
educational and exchange organizations, as well as resources for international
commissions, and the U.S. Institute of Peace. Table 3 and Figure 3 show
appropriations for the last decade in both current and constant dollars.
Table 3. State Department and Related Agencies
Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009
(discretionary budget authority in billions of current and 1999 constant dollars)
FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 est. req.
Current $6.916.166.917.718.059.2910.7811.1210.9012.4611.22
2009 $8.987.818.569.379.5310.6911.9611.9411.4512.7411.22
Source: The Department of State Congressional Budget Justifications, FY2001 - FY2009 and CRS
Notes: Amounts do not include mandatory Foreign Service retirement accounts that total $123 million
in FY2009. Figures include regular and supplemental appropriations. Figures for FY2009 are
requested amounts. Figures for FY2008 are State Department estimates. FY2008 includes
supplemental appropriations passed June 30, 2008, in P.L. 110-252. Enacted FY2009 supplemental
funds of $1.07 billion are not included in the table.

Figure 3. State Department and Related Agencies
Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009
($ Billions)

FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09
Current $Constant 2009 $
Source: The Department of State Congressional Budget Justifications, FY2001 - FY2009 and CRS
Civilian Stabilization Initiative
More than a year ago, in the President’s January 2007 State of the Union
Address, he mentioned the idea of establishing a civilian reserve corps (CRC) to be
available for work in countries experiencing conflict or post-conflict crises. In
subsequent testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Secretary Rice
stated that the Department did not have the personnel or the skill sets required to
implement the CRC at that time, but perhaps the Defense Department could help in4
the short run. In the FY2007 supplemental (P.L. 110-28), Congress provided $50
million for establishing the CRC, but included language requiring authorization to
spend the money. This year the Administration is requesting $248.6 million for the
Civilian Stabilization Initiative, including CRC, in FY2009.
DOD’s expanding role in traditional civilian overseas activities over the years
has led some observers to comment that DOD is not ideally suited, by expertise or
training, to perform some of these missions. For example, some observers claim that
police training missions are best performed by civilian law enforcement personnel.
Others suggest that local-level economic reconstruction initiatives may be more
effective when integrated into a broader economic reconstruction and development
strategy, guided by civilian experts. Some nongovernmental organizations (NGOs),
4 FY2008 budget Testimony by Secretary of State Rice before the House Foreign Affairs
Committee, February 7, 2007.

in turn, have expressed concerns that working closely with the military could affect
how the NGOs are perceived by host populations.
For almost two decades, some analysts have judged that the United States needs
a broader array of civilian personnel, readily available and trained to work with the
military, to deal with the many needs of states emerging from conflict, as well as to
prevent conflict. Without such civilian personnel, observers maintain that tasks such
as civil administration, policing, political institution building, humanitarian relief,
and early reconstruction or construction of physical infrastructure have fallen by
default to ad hoc arrangements and to military forces, which as a whole are neither
structured nor trained for them. The Bush Administration has moved incrementally
to develop a small operational civilian capability that, as stated in the February 2008
announcement of a Civilian Stabilization Initiative (CSI), would serve as “a
counterpart to the U.S. military, ready and capable to stabilize countries in the
transition from war to peace.”5
In mid-2004, the Bush Administration established the State Department Office
of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization (S/CRS) as the first step in
operationalizing the State Department and other civilian agencies to undertake
reconstruction and stabilization missions, either alone or with the military. Congress
endorsed the creation of S/CRS in 2004 (Consolidated Appropriations Act for
FY2005, H.R. 4818, P.L. 108-447, signed into law December 8, 2004. Section 408,
Division D) and defined its responsibilities. Since then, S/CRS has worked to
establish the basic concepts, mechanisms, and capabilities necessary to carry out
reconstruction and stabilization missions. Among its principal tasks has been the
development of the CRC to undertake reconstruction and stabilization missions.
Senators Lugar and Biden have introduced legislation repeatedly since 2004 to
support the creation of civilian capabilities and fund their activities, including a
permanent authorization for S/CRS, the authorization and funding of a readiness
response corps, and the establishment of a conflict response fund. The latest version
of this bill is S. 613, the Reconstruction and Stabilization Civilian Management Act
of 2007, reported by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 10, 2007 (S.
Report 110-50). On February 27, 2008, the House Foreign Affairs Committee
approved a similar bill, H.R. 1084. Both bills include the authorization for CRC
required by Congress before the Administration can spend the $50 million
appropriated in the FY2007 supplemental appropriations bill. Title 16, the
Reconstruction and Stabilization Civilian Management Act of 2008, of H.R. 5658/S.

3001, The Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009,

also contains measures to authorize a Response Readiness Corps and the CRC. On
September 27, 2008, Congress cleared this bill for the President. The President
signed the Defense Authorization Act on October 14, 2008, with the legislation
designated as P.L. 110-417.
With its FY2009 budget request of $248.6 million for CSI, the Bush
Administration presented its plans for a 4,250 - person Civilian Response Corps, to
be developed over the next few years. The Corps would consist of a 250-member

5 The Budget in Brief FY2009, United States Department of State, p. 63.

interagency Active Response Corps (ARC) of government personnel who could
deploy immediately to a crisis, and a 2,000 - member Standby Response Corps (SRC)
of government personnel who could respond next. Those personnel would come
from all 15 U.S. government civilian agencies. The third component would be a

2,000-member CRC of citizens who could provide the expertise needed for policing,

rule of law, public administration, and infrastructure assistance. The Administration
requested $248.6 million for FY2009 to organize, train, equip, and deploy CSI.
After receiving an appropriations of up to $75 million in initial funding for the Active
and Standby components in the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2008, P.L. 110-
252), on July 16, in ceremonies at the Department of State, the Secretary formally
launched the interagency Civilian Response Corps.
State Department — Administration of Foreign Affairs
The State Department’s mission is to advance and protect the worldwide
interests of the United States and its citizens through the staffing of overseas
missions, the conduct of U.S. foreign policy, the issuance of passports and visas, and
other responsibilities. Currently, the State Department coordinates with the activities
of more than 40 U.S. government agencies in 268 posts in over 180 countries around
the world. The State Department employs approximately 30,000 people, about 60%
of whom work abroad. The Administration of Foreign Affairs includes funds for
salaries and expenses, educational and cultural exchanges, and embassy construction
and security. For FY2009, the Administration is seeking $8.217 billion, an increase
of more than $690.7 million (a 9.2% increase) over the FY2008 estimate. Highlights
Diplomatic and Consular Programs (D&CP). The D&CP account funds
overseas operations (e.g., motor vehicles, local guards, telecommunications,
medical), activities associated with conducting foreign policy, passport and visa
applications, regional bureaus, under secretaries, and post assignment travel.
Beginning in FY2000, the State Department’s Diplomatic and Consular Program
account included State’s salaries and expenses, as well as the technology and
information functions of the former U.S. Information Agency (USIA) and the
functions of the former Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA).
For D&CP’s FY2009 budget, the Administration is requesting $5,364.3 million,
$37.6 million more than the estimated FY2008 level of $5,326.7 million, including
rescissions and supplementals. The D&CP account includes an increase in personnel
of 1,149 positions above attrition, with 500 of these positions designated for a new
“Critical Skills and Strategic Relationship for Global Engagement” category. Within
the FY2009 request, $1,162.8 million is designated for worldwide security upgrades
(for increased security personnel, maintenance, and ongoing salaries). This
represents a 20% increase over the FY2008 estimated level of $968.5 million.
Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance (ESCM). This
account supports the maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement of facilities to
provide appropriate, safe, secure and functional facilities for U.S. diplomatic
missions abroad. Early in 1998, Congress had enacted $403.6 million for this
account for FY1999. However, following the embassy bombings in Africa in August

1998, Congress agreed to more than $1 billion (including a supplemental

appropriation of about $627 million) for the Security and Maintenance account by
establishing a new subaccount referred to as Worldwide Security Upgrades. This
subaccount funds the bricks and mortar type of security needs overseas.
For FY2009, the Administration seeks $841.3 million for regular ESCM and
$948.4 million for worldwide security upgrades, for a total account level of $1,789.7
million, a 25.5% increase over the FY2008 estimated level, including rescissions.
Educational and Cultural Exchanges. This account funds programs
authorized by the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, such as
the Fulbright Academic Exchange Program, as well as leadership programs for
foreign leaders and professionals. Government exchange programs came under close
scrutiny in past years for being excessive in number and duplicative. After the
September 11th attacks, the Department of State began to emphasize public
diplomacy activities in Arab and Muslim populations. The Bush Administration is
requesting $522.4 million for exchanges in FY2009. This represents a 4.2% increase
over the FY2008 estimate.
Within the D&CP account, Congress, in the FY2008 consolidated appropriation,
designated $360.9 million for public diplomacy. The Administration is requesting
$394.8 million for this subaccount for FY2009.
The Capital Investment Fund (CIF). CIF was established by the Foreign
Relations Authorization Act of FY1994/95 (P.L. 103-236) to provide for purchasing
information technology and capital equipment that would ensure the efficient
management, coordination, operation, and utilization of State’s resources.
The FY2009 budget request includes $71.0 million for CIF, which is 19.1%
higher than the FY2008 estimate of $59.6 million, after rescissions.
International Organizations and Conferences
In recent years, U.S. contributions to the United Nations and its affiliated
agencies (Contributions to International Organizations — CIO) and peacekeeping
activities (Contributions to International Peacekeeping Account — CIPA) have been
affected by a number of issues. These have included the withholding of funds related
to international family planning policies; issues related to implementation of the Iraq
Oil for Food Program, and the findings and recommendations of the Volcker
Committee Inquiry into that program; alleged and actual findings of sexual
exploitation and abuse by personnel in U.N. peacekeeping operations in the field and
other misconduct by U.N. officials at U.N. headquarters in New York and at other
U.N. headquarters venues; and efforts to develop, agree to, and bring about
meaningful and comprehensive reform of the United Nations organization, in most
of its aspects.
Since 2004, congressional attention has often been directed to ways to ensure
comprehensive U.N. reform, through legislative proposals fashioned after extensive
hearings. Current legislative issues include followup and oversight of reforms
initiated by the United Nations membership in September 2005 and throughout its

fall General Assembly session and the possibility of increasing the 25% statutory cap
on U.S. contributions to U.N. peacekeeping assessments to 27.1%.6
Contributions to International Organizations (CIO). CIO provides
funds for U.S. membership in numerous international organizations and for
multilateral foreign policy activities that transcend bilateral issues, such as human
rights. Maintaining a membership in international organizations, the Administration
argues, benefits the United States by advancing U.S. interests and principles while
sharing the costs with other countries. Payments to the United Nations and its
affiliated agencies, the Inter-American Organization, as well as other regional and
international organizations, are included in this account.
The President’s FY2009 request totals $1,529.4 million for this account,
representing a 13.8% increase over the estimated FY2008 level of $1,343.4 million,
after rescissions.
Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA). The
United States supports multilateral peacekeeping efforts around the world through
payment of its share of the U.N. assessed peacekeeping budget. The President’s
FY2009 request totals $1,497.0 million. This represents an 11.4% decline from the
FY2008 estimated level of $1,690.5 million, including supplementals and rescissions.
This account received $468.0 million in the FY2008 emergency supplemental,
$390.0 million of which was designated for the U.N. mission in Darfur.
International Commissions
The International Commissions account (in the State Department budget, but not
in the 150 account) includes the U.S.-Mexico Boundary and Water Commission, the
International Fisheries Commission, the International Boundary Commission, the
International Joint Commission, and the Border Environment Cooperation
Commission. The FY2009 request of $110.0 million represents a 29.1% decrease
over the FY2008 estimate of $155.1 million.
Related State Department Appropriations
The Asia Foundation. The Asia Foundation is a private, nonprofit
organization that supports efforts to strengthen democratic processes and institutions
in Asia, open markets, and improve U.S.-Asian cooperation. The Foundation
receives both government and private sector contributions. Government funds for
the Asia Foundation are appropriated to, and pass through, the State Department.
The Administration request for FY2009 is $10 million, the same as requested a year
earlier, but 35.1% below the estimated FY2008 appropriated level of $15.4 million
(with rescissions).
The International Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue Trust
Fund. Through funded research, collaborative studies, training, conferences, and

6 For more information, see CRS Report RL33611 United Nations System Funding:
Congressional Issues, by Marjorie Ann Browne and Kennon Nakamura.

policy discussions, the Center, a U.S. NGO, seeks to encourage mutual understanding
among people who share a Western European tradition, and the peoples of Southeast
Europe, the Near and Middle East, and Central Asia, who share cultural and religious
traditions of those areas of the world. Conferees added language in the FY2004
conference agreement for the Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2004, to establish
a permanent trust fund for the International Center for Middle Eastern-Western
Dialogue. The act (P.L. 108-199) authorized $6.9 million for perpetual operation
of the Center, which is to be located in Istanbul, Turkey. From FY2004 to FY2006,
appropriations provided $18.75 million as seed money. The Center’s funds each year
are the total amount of interest and earnings from the Trust. The Administration
requested spending $875,000 of interest and earnings from the Trust Fund for
program funding in FY2009. For FY2008, the Administration requested
appropriation authority to spend $875,000 of interest and earnings from the Trust
Fund to be used for programming activities and conferences at the Center, but got
$868,000 after rescissions. The FY2009 request is for $875,000.
National Endowment for Democracy (NED). The National Endowment
for Democracy, a private nonprofit organization established during the Reagan
Administration, supports programs to strengthen democratic institutions in more than
90 countries around the world. NED proponents assert that many of its
accomplishments are possible because it is not a government agency. NED’s critics
claim that it duplicates U.S. government democracy programs and either could be
eliminated or could operate entirely with private funding.
The Administration’s FY2009 budget request of $80 million for NED is the
same as its FY2005, FY2006, FY2007 and FY2008 requests. The FY2009 NED
request, located within the State Department portion of the international affairs
budget request, represents an 19.4% decrease from the enacted $99.2 million (afterth
rescissions) for FY2008. The 109 Congress created a Democracy Fund in the
FY2006 Foreign Operations Appropriations (P.L. 109-102) where Congress locates
the NED appropriation.
East-West Center. The Center for Cultural and Technical Interchange
between East and West (East-West Center), located in Honolulu, Hawaii, was
established in 1960 by Congress to promote understanding and cooperation among
the governments and peoples of the Asia/Pacific region and the United States. The
Administration’s FY2009 request is for $10 million for the East-West Center, a
decrease of 48.2% from the FY2008 funding estimate of $19.3 million (including
rescissions). The FY2007 actual funding level is $19 million.
At one time, Congress also appropriated funds for the North-South Center. The
Center for Cultural and Technical Interchange between North and South (North-
South Center) is a national educational institution in Miami, Florida, closely
affiliated with the University of Miami. It was established to promote better
relations, commerce, and understanding among the nations of North America, South
America and the Caribbean. The North-South Center began receiving a direct
subsidy from the federal government in 1991. Congress has not funded the North-
South Center since FY2001, noting that it should be funded by the private sector.

U.S. Institute of Peace
The U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP) was established in 1984 by the U.S. Institute
of Peace Act, (Title XVII of the Defense Authorization Act of 1985 P.L. 98-525).
USIP’s mission is to promote international peace through activities such as
educational programs, conferences and workshops, professional training, applied
research, and dialogue facilitation in the United States and abroad. Prior to the
FY2005 budget, USIP funding came from the Labor, HHS, Education and Related
Agencies appropriation. In the FY2005 budget process, it was transferred to the
Commerce, Justice, State and related agencies appropriation primarily for relevancy
For FY2009, the Administration is requesting $33 million, up $8.2 million
(33%) from the FY2008 estimated level of $24.79 million, after rescissions.
Broadcasting Board of Governors
The United States International Broadcasting Act of 19947 reorganized within
USIA all U.S. government international broadcasting, including Voice of America
radio and television (VOA), Broadcasting to Cuba, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
(RFE/RL), Radio Free Asia (RFA), and the Middle East Broadcasting Network. The

1994 act established the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to oversee all U.S.

government broadcasting; abolished the Board for International Broadcasting (BIB),
the administering body of RFE/RL; and recommended that RFE/RL be privatized by
December 31, 1999. This recommendation was repealed in 1999 by P.L. 106-113.
In 1999 the functions and staff of the United States Information Agency (USIA)
and the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) were incorporated into the
Department of State. Congress, however, also left the U.S. civilian international
broadcasting function outside of State and kept the function under an independent
agency, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to maintain broadcasting’s8
independence and integrity. The BBG funds the VOA radio and television,
Broadcasting to Cuba, RFE/RL, RFA, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks
(including Alhurra, Alhurra-Iraq, Alhurra-Europe, and Radio Sawa). BBG

7 Title III of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995; P.L. 103-


8 The Statement of Managers in Conference Report 105-825, which accompanied H.R. 4328,
Making Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Fiscal
Year 1999, contained two paragraphs discussing Congressional intent regarding all of
Division G, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998. Earlier on April 28,
1998, the Congress cleared for the White House, H.R. 1757, the Foreign Affairs Reform and
Restructuring Act of 1998. On October 21, 1998, the President signed H.R. 4328, and
vetoed H.R. 1757. Both bills pertained to the abolition of the same foreign affairs agencies,
and the transfer of the agency’s functions, personnel and appropriations to the Department
of State. The Conference Report, 105-432, which accompanied the bill, H.R. 1757, contains
a more detailed discussion than Report 105-825, of the intentions of Congress regarding the
relationship between U.S.-supported international broadcasting activities and the
Department of State. See Conference Report 105-432, pp. 125-130.

programming is broadcast to the world through radio, television, the Internet, and
other media in 60 languages.
The Administration’s FY2009 funding request for the BBG is $699.5 million
or $17.5 million above the FY2008 appropriated figure of $682.0, a 3 percent
increase. The BBG budget is composed of three elements: the International
Broadcasting Operations, Broadcasting to Cuba, and Broadcasting Capital
The FY2009 request for the International Broadcasting Operations portion, the
largest of the three parts of the BBG budget, is $653.8 million. This is $17.5 million
below the FY2008 estimated funding of $671.3 million or a reduction of about 3
percent. Even with reduced funding, the Administration proposes to enhance VOA
broadcasts to Somalia and the Horn of Africa, and start a new RFE/RL surrogate
Azerbaijani broadcast to Iran. The Administration also seeks to strengthen VOA,
RFE/RL, and RFA Internet capability, and improve Alhurra’s television production
capability. These new initiatives total $8.5 million. In the other portions of the BBG,
the Administration’s FY2009 request is $34.4 million for Cuba Broadcasting and
$11.3 million for Broadcasting Capital Improvements, an increase above FY2008 of
While realizing the importance and necessity of voice broadcasting especially
in some areas of the world, the BBG notes that one of its highest priorities is to
strengthen its capabilities in television and the Internet to accommodate the changing
nature of communications in the world.9 It proposes reallocating language service
radio staff to Web positions and shifting radio transmission funding to the Internet
programs and television broadcasting.10 In order to fund these new initiatives with
a reduced resource-request, the Administration proposes to eliminate RFE/RL’s
South Slavic (Serbian, Bosnian, and Macedonian) and Albanian language
programming, and reduce funding in several other areas.11 In FY2008, BBG
proposed to reduce or eliminate radio broadcasting in a number of services, including
Cantonese, Ukrainian, Tibetan, Portuguese to Africa, Romanian, and Kazakh, as well
as broadcasts in Hindi, Russian, English, Croatian, Greek, and Thai. This effort was
stopped by an infusion of $12 million in emergency supplemental funding in the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161). The FY2009 request
assumes that this funding support would not continue in FY2009, and proposes to
implement most of the language service reductions proposed in the FY2008 request
by September 30, 2008.12 The recent fighting between Russia and Georgia refocused
attention on BBG plans to end Voice of America (VOA) radio broadcasting to these
countries. Critics of the reallocation of resources to other areas and new technologies
point to the fighting and the coverage in the Russian press as an example of the need

9 Broadcasting Board of Governors, “Internet Programing,” Fiscal Year 2009 Budget
Request, Washington, D.C. p. 1.
10 Ibid.
11 Broadcasting Board of Governors, “Executive Summary,” Fiscal Year 2009 Budget
Request, Washington, D.C. p. 4.
12 Ibid.

for such broadcasting. BBG states that broadcasting hours were increased to Georgia
through the use of VOA-FM, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and the
use of the Internet.
FY2009 Budget Request: Foreign Operations
The Foreign Operations budget comprises the majority of U.S. foreign
assistance programs, both bilateral and multilateral. (See tables at the back of this
report for Foreign Operations accounts and funding levels.) The annual Foreign
Operations Appropriations bill funds all U.S. bilateral development assistance
programs, managed mostly by USAID and the State Department, together with
several smaller independent foreign aid agencies such as the Millennium Challenge
Corporation, the Peace Corps, and the Inter-American and African Development
Foundations. It supports U.S. obligations to major multilateral financial institutions,
such as the World Bank, and United Nations activities, such as UNICEF. The
Foreign Operations appropriation also includes funds for the Export-Import Bank,
whose activities are regarded more as trade promotion than foreign aid. On occasion,
the bill replenishes U.S. financial commitments to international financial institutions,
such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. International food aid,
such as the P.L. 480 Food for Peace program, however, is funded in the Agriculture
Appropriations bill, although it is also considered foreign aid. The FY2009 request
for food aid programs totals $1.326 billion.
The regular foreign operations budget request for FY2009 totals $26.1 billion13
in foreign assistance programs, representing a 8.8% increase from the previous year’s
enacted level of $24.0 billion, excluding recent supplemental funds. This increase
is larger than the overall FY2009 budget increase of 4.9%, and continues the general
trend of foreign aid increases since September 11, 2001. Table 4 and Figure 4
provide funding levels, including supplementals and rescissions, for foreign
operations since FY1999 in both current and constant dollars. Since 1999, foreign
aid funding increased by nearly 86% in current dollars, but by 43% in constant

13 This does not include the mandatory Foreign Service Retirement and Disability Account,
that totals $36 million for FY2008. The account is included in tables at the end of this
report. Note that additional funds are being considered by Congress in a supplemental
appropriation bill (H.R. 2642).

Table 4. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009
(discretionary budget authority in billions of current and constant dollars)
FY08 FY09
FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 est. req.
Current $15.4416.4116.3116.5423.6739.0523.4523.1326.3827.2226.14
Co nst a nt
2009 $20.0820.8020.2020.1128.0344.9326.0324.8327.7127.8426.14
Source: The Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification, FY2001-FY2009 and CRS
Notes: Figures for FY2009 are requested amounts. Amounts do not include mandatory Foreign
Service retirement accounts that total $34.6 million in FY2009. Figures for FY2008 are
Administration estimates. Current dollars for FY2004 include $18.4 billion for Iraq Relief and
Reconstruction Fund (IRRF). Without IRRF, the current dollars for that year would have been $20.65
billion, $18.28 billion in constant dollars. For FY2003, IRRF amounted to $2.5 billion, so FY2003
current dollars without IRRF would have totaled $21.17 billion with current dollars being $19.28
billion. FY1999 excludes $17.61 billion for the IMF. All figures, except FY2009 request, include
regular and supplemental appropriations, including supplemental funding in P.L. 110-252, passed in
June 2008. The Act also provided FY2009 supplemental funds of $2.64 billion for Foreign
Operations, not included in the table.
Figure 4. Foreign Operations, FY1999-FY2009
($ Billions)

F Y 99 F Y 00 F Y 01 F Y 02 F Y 0 3 F Y 0 4 F Y 05 F Y 06 F Y 07 F Y 08 FY 09
Current $Constant 2009 $
Source: The Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification, FY2001-FY2009 and CRS

Top Ten U.S. Foreign Aid Recipient Countries
Prior to 9/11 and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Israel and Egypt typically
received the first and second largest amounts of U.S. foreign aid. In recent years,
after supplementals are added, Iraq or Afghanistan have moved Egypt to third or
fourth place. Except for FY2004 when funding to Iraq jumped to more than $18
billion, Israel and Egypt typically are at the top of the list for receiving the most aid
from the United States in recent years. See Table 5 for top U.S. aid recipients from
FY2008 to the FY2009 request.
Table 5. Top Ten Recipients of U.S. Foreign Aid FY2008-FY2009
(appropriation allocations; in billions of current $)
FY2009 Requesta
Israel $2.55
Egyp t 1 .50
Afgha ni st a n 1 . 0 5
Pakistan 0.83
South Africa0.58
Kenya 0 .5 7
Co lo mb ia 0 . 5 4
Jordan 0.53
Mexico 0.50
Nige ria 0 .4 9
a. Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Jordan, and Mexico will receive supplemental funds in P.L. 110-
252, which will likely change this list with FY2009 funding enacted.
FY2008 Estimatea
Afgha ni st a n $ 2 . 7 9
Israel 2.38
Egyp t 1 .70
Iraq 1.56
Jordan 0.94
Pakistan 0.80
Kenya 0 .5 9
South Africa0.57
Co lo mb ia 0 . 5 4
Nige ria 0 .4 9
Ethiopia 0 .46
a. Includes FY2008 Supplemental Appropriations, including those in P.L. 110-252, enacted on June
30, 2008.

Foreign Aid Reform
Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the role of foreign assistance
as a tool of foreign policy has come into sharper focus. President George W. Bush
elevated global development as a third pillar of national security, with defense and
diplomacy, as articulated in the U.S. National Security Strategy of 2002, and
reiterated in 2006. At the same time that foreign aid is being recognized as playing
an important role in U.S. foreign policy, it has also come under closer scrutiny by
Congress, largely in response to a number of presidential initiatives, and by critics
who argue that the U.S. foreign aid infrastructure dates back to the Cold War era, is
cumbersome and fragmented, and that a national aid strategy is lacking.
In recent years, several initiatives have heightened congressional interest in, and
caused a re-examination of, U.S. foreign assistance policy and programs, including
organizational structure. In January 2006, Secretary of State Rice announced an
initiative to bring coordination and coherence to U.S. aid programs. The Secretary
created a new State Department position — Director of Foreign Assistance (DFA)
— the occupant of which serves concurrently as Administrator of the U.S. Agency
for International Development. A new Bureau of Foreign Assistance (F Bureau) was
created to coordinate assistance programs, led by the DFA, who in 2006, developed
a Strategic Framework for Foreign Assistance to align U.S. aid programs with
strategic objectives. The Framework guided the writing of the FY2008 and FY2009
budget requests.
This year a number of Members of Congress and nongovernmental
organizations have indicated an interest in exploring greater reforms including the
establishment of a national strategy on U.S. foreign aid policy, elevating the
importance of foreign aid as a foreign policy tool to more closely align with that of
diplomacy and defense, and rewriting the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to change
the emphasis from the Cold War era to the post-9/11 era, among other things.
FY2009 Foreign Operations Budget Details
Despite a proposed 8.8% increase in the Bush Administration’s FY2009 regular
foreign aid budget request, most of the additional funds are concentrated in a few
areas. The FY2009 budget continues to focus on the war on terrorism and
reconstruction in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as assistance to front-line states.
Other areas that would see significant increases include two of the President’s
cornerstone initiatives — the Millennium Challenge Corporation (up 44%) and the
President’s Malaria Initiative (up 9.3%). The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS
Relief (PEPFAR), which in the past also addressed treatment and prevention of
malaria, increased by .5%. Africa and the Near East continue to see higher levels of
assistance than other regions, but for Africa, most of the funds are concentrated in
HIV/AIDS programs, with other types of assistance, such as basic education,
decreasing. For the Near East, the aid increases are primarily for Iraq reconstruction.
(See Appendix D for account-by-account funding levels for FY2007, FY2008
estimates, and the FY2009 request.)

Major Changes. The Bush Administration’s FY2009 foreign aid request
would increase the Millennium Challenge Corporation by 44%, the International
Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement by116%, the Andean Counterdrug Program
by 27%, and Debt Restructuring by 368%. Smaller increases in the budget request
include the Child Survival and Health Programs (CSH) up 16%, the Economic
Support Fund (ESF) up 5.5%, Peace Corps up 3.8%, the Global HIV/AIDS Initiative
(GHAI) up 2.5%, and Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining, and Related
Programs (NADR) up 3.3%.
The Administration’s FY2009 foreign aid budget request would reduce some
programs from the FY2008 level, including International Disaster Assistance (IDA),
down 30.6%, Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA), down 25.3%, and
Peacekeeping Operations (PKO), down 5.4%. The Administration has requested
FY2009 supplemental funds which include additional funding for IDA, MRA, and
PKO, however.
Regional Distribution. Comparing the FY2009 request to the FY2008
funding estimates, Figure 5 shows that U.S. foreign assistance would increase to all
regions except East Asia and Pacific (EAP), which would decline by 18.7% and
Europe (EUR), which would decline by 6.4%. The EAP decline is due in part to
accounting — the Administration moved some funds to the Department of State
budget and others to USAID’s global programs. The decline in aid to Europe reflects
the graduation from development assistance of 11 countries in the region and the
critical need for aid elsewhere in the world.
The Western Hemisphere (WH) region would receive more U.S. aid in the
FY2009 request than any other region — up by 39.7% over the FY2008 estimates.
The increase is largely due to the Mérida Initiative which, for Mexico, includes
$477.8 million in the FY2009 request, up from $26.6 million the year before.
Without Mérida, the funding level would be similar to that of the previous year.
Africa would benefit from a 2% increase in FY2009, with no increase over the
FY2008 level in Global HIV/AIDS (GHAI) funds. (In FY2008, GHAI funds to
Africa increased by 39%, with other programs reduced.) South and Central Asia
would see a increase of nearly 3.3% in FY2009, largely due to increased ESF
assistance to Pakistan. The Near East would receive a 5.1% increase, mainly due to
Iraq assistance.

Figure 5. Regional Distribution of Foreign Aid

4 B

3. $

2nt U
F Y 2007 F Y 2008 F Y 2009
Source: Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification, FY2009.
Note: EAP=East Asia and Pacific; EUR=Europe and Eurasia; NE=Near East; SCA=South and Central
Asia; LAC=Latin American and Caribbean=Western Hemisphere.
Sector Distribution. Over the years, Congress has expressed interest in
various aid sectors, such as education, democracy, human rights, trade, maternal and
child health, family planning and reproductive health, agriculture and environment.
Table 6 provides FY2008 funding estimates and the FY2009 budget request for
many of these sectors. Some sectors are cut significantly by the FY2009 request, as
listed below, while others receive sizeable increases. Increases in counter narcotics
programs in the regular budget request are up 54.3%, for example. Establishment of
the Mérida Initiative, a program that supports Mexico and Central America in
combating drug activity throughout the region, is the primary reason for the large
increase in the counter narcotics sector. In addition to the FY2009 request for Merida
funds, the FY2008 supplemental request includes $500 million for Mexico and $50
million for Central America for the Mérida Initiative.
Another key country receiving increased counter-narcotics support is Pakistan,
under the President’s commitment to support the Federally Administered Tribal
Areas.14 The FY2009 budget reflects decreases in global health-related programs,
including a decline in funding for tuberculosis, maternal and child health, family
planning and reproductive health, and water supply and sanitation.15 The FY2009
request also decreases funding levels for education and civil society.
14 Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification for FY2009, Department of State,
p. 791.
15 Ibid., pp. 815, 818, 820, and 822.

Table 6. Selected Sector Funding, FY2008 Estimate and
FY2009 Request
(millions of current U.S. dollars)
Sector Estimate Request Change
Good Governance371.3533.343.6%
Rule of law and Human Rights396.1475.220.0%
Health 7,168.1 6,837.9 -4.6%
Counter-narcotics 897.7 1,385.4 54.3%
Education 850.5 757.9 -10.9%
Trade and Investment177.2237.534.0%
Agriculture 413.3 522.5 26.4%
Envi ronment 329.4 333.2 1.2%
Counter-t errorism 170.5 191.1 12.1%
Civil Society436.1398.0-8.7%
Source: U.S. Department of State Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification, FY2009,
p. 783, and CRS calculations.
Mérida Initiative. In October 2007, the United States and Mexico announced
the Mérida Initiative, a multi-year proposal for $1.4 billion in U.S. assistance to
Mexico and Central America aimed at combating drug trafficking, gangs, and
organized crime. The first year of funding for this initiative — $500 million for
Mexico and $50 million for Central American countries — is included in the
Administration’s FY2008 supplemental appropriation request. In latest legislative
actions, on June 19 and 26, 2008, the House and Senate approved compromise
language on the FY2008 supplemental, H.R. 2642, that would provide $465 million
in FY2008 supplemental and FY2009 supplemental assistance for the Mérida
Initiative, with softened human rights conditions compared to earlier House and
Senate versions. For Mexico, $400 million would be provided, with $352 million in
FY2008 supplemental assistance (within the INCLE, FMF, and ESF accounts) and
$48 million in FY2009 supplemental assistance (within the INCLE account). For
Central America, $65 million would be provided for Central America, Haiti, and the
Dominican Republic (within the INCLE, NADR, ESF, and FMF accounts), with
Haiti and the Dominican Republic receiving $2.5 million each in FY2008 INCLE
funding and none for FY2009.
The FY2009 budget request also includes another $550 million — $450 million
for Mexico and $100 million for Central American countries — within the INCLE

16 For more detail on this issue, see CRS Report RS22837, Merida Initiative: Proposed U.S.

HIV/AIDS. In launching in 2003 the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS
Relief (PEPFAR), President Bush pledged to provide this five-year initiative with a
total of $15 billion by FY2008. Congress appropriated an estimated $5.97 billion in
FY2008 which met total pledged funding over the five year period. On May 30,
2007, President Bush announced a follow-on plan to provide a total of $30 billion
through FY2013. The FY2009 request of $6.0 billion begins the new five-year $30
billion program. Of the $6.0 billion requested, $4.8 billion is within the Department
of State budget and $439.1 million is within USAID’s budget. The remaining funds17
are within the Department of Health and Human Services.
Malaria. The President’s Malaria Initiative was announced in 2006 to provide
an increased focus on malaria, pledging that the United States would spend an
additional $1.2 billion over a five-year period (FY2006-FY2010). Congress
appropriated $122 million in FY2006 and $248 million in FY2007. The President’s
request for FY2008 is $388 million, keeping the pledge on target. Including
supplementals and rescissions, Congress provided $352 million for PMI in FY2008.
The FY2009 request is $385 million, within the Child Survival and Health Programs
MCC. In announcing the creation of the new independent Millennium
Challenge Corporation (MCC), the President pledged $5 billion annual funding by
FY2006. In fact, requests have never topped $3 billion a year. Congress has
consistently cut the MCC request with some Members expressing concern that the
program was slow to get started, and has not disbursed much of its existing funding.
In the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161, H.R. 2764),
Congress provided $1.544 billion, almost half of the Administration’s request. The
FY2009 MCC budget request is for $2.225 billion, reflecting a 44% increase over the
FY2008 level.18
Use of Supplementals. Supplemental resources for Foreign Operations
programs, which in FY2004 exceeded regular Foreign Operations funding, have
become a significant source of funds for U.S. international activities, especially those
related to reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Supplemental
appropriations bills have often been used as vehicles to provide additional funding
to respond to unanticipated emergencies or natural disasters.
There has been some criticism that the Administration has relied too heavily on
supplementals, keeping funds off budget and difficult for year-to-year comparisons
or future-year planning. Some supplemental appropriations, particularly those

16 (...continued)
Anticrime and Counterdrug Assistance for Mexico and Central America, by Colleen W.
Cook, Rebecca G. Rush, and Clare Ribando Seelke, updated regularly.
17 For more information see CRS Report RL33396, The Global Fund to Fight AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria: Progress Report and Issues for Congress, by Tiaji
Salaam-Blyther, updated regularly.
18 For more information on MCC, see CRS Report RL32427, Millennium Challenge
Account, by Curt Tarnoff, updated regularly.

relating to Iraq, should be incorporated into the regular appropriations cycle if they
are going to be on an annual basis, according to critics. The Administration counters
that given the nature of rapidly changing overseas events and unforeseen
emergencies, it is necessary to make supplemental requests for unexpected and non-
recurring expenses.
Iraq and Afghanistan Share of Total Aid Budget. Including both base
budgets and supplemental appropriations, the share of U.S. bilateral foreign
assistance going to Iraq and Afghanistan has increased sharply since FY2002.
Foreign aid to Afghanistan mushroomed from $590 million in FY2003 to $1.799
billion the next year. For Iraq, assistance consisted of small sums to support Iraqi
opposition groups in the early 2000s, but picked up precipitously in FY2004 to more
than $17 billion, and then fell to $1.6 billion in FY2006 and roughly $2.2 billion in
FY2007. Table 7 tracks funding to both countries from FY2002 through the FY2009
and includes both regular budgets and supplemental funds. Amounts for FY2009
represent requested amounts.
FY2007 regular and supplemental funding for Iraq and Afghanistan together
comprises about 16% of total foreign aid spending. The share of the FY2008 budget
is just under 13%. The FY2009 aid requested for Iraq and Afghanistan, before
supplementals, is 5.3%.
Table 7. Funding for Iraq and Afghanistan, FY2002-FY2009
(millions of current U.S. dollars)
Ir a q 25.0 2 ,890.0 17,849.5 27.7 1 ,657.7 2 ,159.9 844.5 397.0
Afghan. 686.1 589.6 1 ,798.7 2 ,674.1 967.8 1 ,827.8 2 ,795.9 1 ,054.0
Source: U.S. Department of State, Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justifications, FY2004
through FY2008, and CRS calculations. Figures here do not include Department of Defense funds.
For more information, see CRS Report RL31833 Iraq: Reconstruction Assistance, by Curt Tarnoff,
and CRS Report RL30588 Afghanistan: Post-War Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy, by Kenneth
Note: Figures for FY2008 include supplemental funding in P.L. 110-252; also enacted in P.L. 110-
252, but not included above, are FY2009 supplemental funds of $107 million for Iraq and $455
million for Afghanistan.

Appendix A. Abbreviations
Funding Accounts:
ACIAndean Counterdrug Initiative
CSHChild Survival and Health
DADevelopment Assistance
DFDemocracy Fund
ERMAEmergency Refugee and Migration Assistance
ESFEconomic Support Fund
FMFForeign Military Financing
FSAFreedom Support Act — Assistance to the Independent States of the
Former Soviet Union
GHAIGlobal HIV/AIDS Initiative
IDFAInternational Disaster and Famine Assistance
IMETInternational Military Education and Training
INCLEInternational Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement
MCCMillennium Challenge Corporation
MRAMigration and Refugee Assistance
NADRNon-proliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining, and Related Programs
PEPFARPresident’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief
PKOPeacekeeping Operations
PL 480Food aid
PMIPresident’s Malaria Initiative
SEEDSupport for Eastern European Democracy Act — Assistance for
Eastern Europe and the Baltic States
TITransition Initiatives
DFADirector of Foreign Assistance
EAPEast Asia and Pacific
EUREurope and Eurasia
LACLatin America and Caribbean
NENear East
SCASouth and Central Asia
USAIDU.S. Agency for International Development

Appendix B. Foreign Aid Country Categories
Rebuilding: Countries in or emerging from internal or external conflict.
Afgh ani s t an Lebanon
Cote d’IvoireNepal
Democratic Republic of the CongoSierra Leone
Transforming: Low or lower-middle income, meeting performance criteria.
Braz il Mozambique
East TimorNicaragua
El SalvadorPhilippines
GhanaSri Lanka
Honduras Tanz ania
Madagascar Vanuatu
Sustaining Partnership: Upper-middle income; aid sustains partnerships.
ArgentinaMarshall Islands
Bahamas M auritius
Costa RicaPortugal
Czech RepublicSaudi Arabia
Eastern CaribbeanSeychelles
Equatorial GuineaSingapore
GreeceSouth Africa
IrelandTrinidad & Tobago
KuwaitUnited Arab Emirates

Developing: Low or lower-middle income, not yet meeting performance criteria.
Algeria M acedonia
Azerbaijan Mauritania
Bangladesh Moldova
Bosnia and HerzegovinaMontenegro
Burkina FasoMorocco
Cameroon Pakistan
Cape VerdePapua New Guinea
Central African RepublicParaguay
ComorosRepublic of the Congo
Dominican RepublicSenegal
EgyptSolomon Islands
Ethiopia S uriname
Georgi a Tajikistan
Guinea-Bi ssau Tunisia
Guyana Turkmenistan
J o rdan Uz bekistan
Kazakhstan Vietnam
Kyrgyz RepublicZambia
Restrictive: Significant freedom and human rights issues; legislative and/or
Secretarial-designated limitations on assistance.
The Restrictive country category includes those countries that have restrictions
on the receipt of U.S. assistance either by statute or Secretarial determination. The
State Department does not provide a list of restrictive countries, although the FY2008
Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification lists certain countries with
no categorization: Belarus; Burma; China; Cuba; Iran; Libya; North Korea;
Venezuela; West Bank and Gaza; and Zimbabwe.

Appendix C. State Department and Related Agencies Appropriations
(millions of current dollars)
Enacted Enacted CR
FY2008FY2009FY2009 asOctober 1
Supp Supp % +/-through
FY2007aFY2008aP.L. 110-P.L. 110-FY2009FY2008FY2009March 6,c
Ac t u al Estimate 252 252 Re que s t est. Senat e 2009
le I State Department and Related Agencies
atic & Consular Program$5,201.6$5,322.7$1,465.7$744.9$5,364.30.7%$4.152.5$1,742.4
acy($329.7)($575.0) — —
Upgr ades ($778.4) ($968.5) ($1,162.8) 20.0% $1,137.5 $418.3
iki/CRS-RL34552nvestment Fund$58.1$59.6$71.019.1%$71.0$25.6
g/wbassy security/constr/maintenance$1,490.9$1,425.6$160.0$41.3$1,789.725.5%$800.0$357.0
s.or upgrades($898.6)($670.5)($948.4)41.4%$830.0$288.4
ilian Stabilization Initiative — — $248.6 — $115.0 —
://wikinspector General $31.4$33.7$57.0$35.55.3%$40.0$14.5
cultural exchange programs$465.7$501.3$522.44.2%$545.3$215.6
$8.2 $8.1 $8.2 1.2% $8.2 $3.5
n missions & officials$9.3$22.8$18.0-21.1%$12.0$9.8
ergency-diplomatic & consular services$13.4$8.9$19.0113.5%$9.0$3.8
$1.3 $1.3 $1.4 3.7% $1.4 $0.5
ment American Institute Taiwan$15.8$16.2$16.83.7%$16.8$7.0
n Service Retirement Fund (mandatory)$126.4$158.9$122.5 — $157.1$68.3
Foreign Affairs$7,422.1$7,559.1$1,868.0$843.2$8,217.49.2%$8,035.9

Enacted Enacted CR
FY2008FY2009FY2009 asOctober 1
Supp Supp % +/-through
FY2007aFY2008aP.L. 110-P.L. 110-FY2009FY2008FY2009March 6,c
Ac t u al Estimate 252 252 Re que s t est. Senat e 2009
l organizations$1,201.3$1,343.4$53.0$75.0$1,529.413.8%$1,529.4$577.8
eeping $1,418.3 $1,690.5 $333.6 $150.5 $1,497.0 11.4% $1,650.0 $525.8
. $2,619.6$3,033.9$386.6$225.5$3,026.4-0.2%$3,179.4
$67.3$155.1 — — $110.0-29.1%$125.9$66.7
ated Appropriations
ntr for Middle East-West Dialogue-Trust — — — — — — — —
iki/CRS-RL34552West Dialogue Program $0.7$0.9 — — $0.9 — $0.9$373.3
g/w$13.8$15.4 — — $10.0-35.1%$16.0$6.6
s.or b
leakent for Democracy$74.0 — — $80.0-19.4%$120.0$42.7
://wikiWest Center$19.0$19.3 — — $10.0-48.2%$22.0$8.3
httpe$0.5$0.5 — — $0.5 — $0.5$0.1
$0.4$0.4 — — $0.4 — $0.4$0.1
$108.4$36.5 — — $101.8-25.0%$159.8
$10,217.4 $10,784.6 $1,991.6 $1,068.7 $11,455.6 5.6% $12,225.3
ational Broadcasting
Operations $649.1 $671.3 $2.0 $6.0 $688.2 2.5% $682.1 $283.6
mprovements$7.6$10.7 — — $11.36.6%$11.3$4.6
to Cuba($33.6)($38.7) — — ($34.4)2.1% — —

Enacted Enacted CR
FY2008FY2009FY2009 asOctober 1
Supp Supp % +/-through
FY2007aFY2008aP.L. 110-P.L. 110-FY2009FY2008FY2009March 6,c
Ac t u al Estimate 252 252 Re que s t est. Senat e 2009
roadcasting$656.7$682.0$2.0 $6.0$699.52.6%$682.1
ated Independent Agencies
m for Preservation America’s Heritage Abroad$0.5$0.5 — — $0.620.0%$0.6$0.2
mission on International Religious Freedom$3.0$3.3 — — $4.021.2%$4.0$1.4
mission on Security and Cooperation in Europe$2.0$2.4 — — $2.68.3%$2.6$1.0
ress-Executive Comm. People’s Rep. of China$6.0$2.4 — — $2.0 — $2.0$0.9
China Economic & Security Review Comm$3.0$4.0 — — $4.0 — $1.0$1.7
iki/CRS-RL34552nterparliamentary Groups$0.1$0.1 — — — — $0.2$0.04
g/w Institute of Peace$22.1$24.8 — — $33.033.1%$31.0$10.7
leak$36.7$37.5 — — $46.233.1%$41.4
TAL Title I State/Broadcasting/Related$10,910.8$11,504.1$1,993.6$174.7$12,201.36.1%$12,235.7
Y2007 actuals and FY2008 estimates include regular and supplementals included in Div. J, P.L. 110-161, as well as a rescission of 0.81% for FY2008.
e National Endowment for Democracy is in the Foreign Operations portion of the bill under the Democracy Fund.
ontinuing Resolution amounts are estimates derived from available information as of November 18, 2008.

Appendix D. Foreign Operations Appropriations
(millions of current dollars)
Enacted Enacted CR
FY2008FY2009October 1
Supp Supp FY2009through
FY2007aFY2008aP.L. 110-P.L. 110-FY2009as % +/-FY2009 March 6,e
Actualestimate 252252RequestFY2008Senate2009
Import Bank (net)$38.0($0.1) — — ($40.0)150.0%($40.0)
erseas Private Investment Corporation (net)($192.0)($166.6) — — ($170.0)3.0%($170.0)
Development Agency$50.4$49.9 — — $50.81.6%$50.8
Export Aid($103.6)($116.8) — — ($159.2)2.4%($159.2)
iki/CRS-RL34552ild Survival & Health (Global Health)b$1,901.4[$1,829.2] — 75.0 $1,577.815.9%$1,961.0
g/welopment Assistance$1,508.8$1,623.6 — 200.0$1,639.11.0%$1,850.0$698.3
s.or Famine Assistance$526.4$429.7220.0 200.0$298.1-30.6%$450.0$137.5
nitiatives$39.6$44.6 — — $40.0-10.3%$50.0$19.2
://wikielopment Credit Authority$7.9$8.1 — — $7.6-6.1%$9.0$3.5
httpelopment Credit Authority Subsidy[$21.0][$21.0] — — [$21.0] — [$25.0] —
D Operating Expenses$635.5$650.7150.593.0$767.217.9%$817.2$270.9
n Service Retirement and Disability — — $34.6 — —
D Capital Investment Fund$69.3$87.3 — — $171.095.9%$35.8$37.5
D Inspector General$39.3$$40.67.7%$42.6$16.2
reland$13.4$14.9 — — — — —
— — — — — — $150.0 —
ic Support Fund$5,117.7$2,975.01,882.51,124.8$3,153.75.5%$3,098.9$1,052.6
Baltic States (SEED)$462.9$293.6 — — $275.6-6.1%$661.7$126.3
er Soviet Union (FSA)$452.0$396.5 — — $346.1-12.7%d$170.5

Enacted Enacted CR
FY2008FY2009October 1
Supp Supp FY2009through
FY2007FY2008P.L. 110-P.L. 110-FY2009as % +/-FY2009March 6,e
ActualEstimate 252252RequestFY2008Senate2009
American Foundation$19.3$20.8 — — $20.0-3.8%$25.0
elopment Foundation$22.8$29.8 — — $30.00.6%$35.0
$319.7$330.8 — — $343.53.8%$337.0
Challenge Corporation$1,752.3$1,544.4 — — $2,225.044.1%$254.0
ival (State Dept.)$3,246.5[$4,661.9] — — $4,779.02.5%$4,779.0$2,005.1
ocracy Fund$354.1$162.776.0 — — — $117.5$70.0
Law Enforcement$724.6$553.9390.3199.0$1,202.1116.0%$925.0$238.2
iki/CRS-RL34552 Program$721.5$324.8 — — $406.827.2%$315.0$139.7
g/wration & Refugee Assistance$963.5$1,023.2315.0350.0$764.0-25.3%$1,100.0$354.0
leakergency Refugee & Migration Assistance Fund$110.0$44.631.0 — $45.00.9%$50.0$19.2
Terrorism, Demining$463.5$483.113.74.5$499.03.3%$564.0$207.8
://wiki Department Technical Assistance$22.6$20.2 — — $29.043.6%$29.0
$64.4$30.1 — — $141.0368.4%$85.0
itle III Bilateral Economic Assistance$19,545.6$17,621.23,083.02,247.3$18,835.86.9%$17,741.7
Education & Training$85.9$85.2 — — $90.562.2%$91.5
n Military Financing$4,825.8$4,551.9137.5302.5$4,812.05.2%$4,479.0
eeping Operations$453.3$261.4 — 95.0$247.2-5.4%$257.2$97.4
itle IV Military Assistance$5,365.0$4,898.5 137.5397.5$5,149.75.1%$4,827.7

Enacted Enacted CR
FY2008FY2009October 1
Supp SuppFY2009through
FY2007FY2008P.L. 110-P.L. 110-FY2009as % +/-FY2009March 6,e
Actualestimate 252252RequestFY2008Senate2009
ank: Global Environment Facility$79.2$81.1 — — $80.0-1.4%$100.0
echnology Fund — — — — $400.0 — $200.0
: Int’l. Development Association$940.5$942.3 — — $1,277.035.5%$1,177.0
ank: Multilateral Investment Guarantee Fund — — — — — — —
ericas MIF$1.7$24.8 — — $25.00.8% —
nter-American Investment Corporation — — — — — — $25.0
elopment Bank: Asian Development Fund$99.0$74.5 — — $115.254.8%$101.2
iki/CRS-RL34552elopment Bank$3.6$2.0 — — — — [$146.1]
g/welopment Fund$134.3$134.6 — — $156.116.0%$146.1
leak for Reconstruction & Development — $0.0 — — — — —
ricultural Development$14.9$17.9 — — $18.06.0%$18.0
://wikiations & Programs$303.9$316.9 — — $276.912.6%$364.0$136.3
Assistance$1,273.2$1,594.1 — — $2,348.262.2%$2,131.3
ood Aidc$1,664.7$1,210.2850.0395.0$1,225.91.2%$1,225.9
$27,744.9 $23,997.0 3,220.5 2,644.8 $26,174.5 8.9% $24,541.5
roadcasting Total $10,896.2$11,504.11,993.61,074.7$12,188.15.5%$12,235.7
oreign Ops & Related Agencies Total$38,641.1$35,501.16,064.14,114.5$38,362.67.9%$36,777.2
U.S. Department of State budget documents; House and Senate Appropriations Committees; and CRS calculations.
Figures may not total due to rounding.
cludes regular and supplemental appropriations. For FY2008, included supplementals are only those in Div. J P.L. 110-161.
he amount reflected here is an approximation of the portion of GHP that correlates with the CSH account in USAID.
. 480 is appropriated in the Agriculture Appropriations measure. Figure includes the Emerson Humanitarian Trust and Dole-McGovern program.
ate bill combines FSA and SEED. Funds included in $661.7 above.
ontinuing Resolution amounts are estimates derived from available information as of November 18, 2008.