"The sausage-making process of constructing legislation in Washington generally interests only DC insiders seeking to glean some benefit. But the 2020 State and Foreign Operations funding bill now under consideration in the House merits broader scrutiny. The bill is not only costly-allocating more than $2 billion higher than fiscal year 2019 and nearly $14 billion more than the president's budget request-it also includes numerous provisions that would reverse conservative policies implemented by the Trump administration and tie its hands going forward...
Restores Funding to the Human Rights Council
The Trump administration announced last summer that the United States would no longer participate in the UN Human Rights Council due to its anti-Israel bias, failure to condemn governments such as China that violate human rights, and the ability of abusive authoritarian governments to win election to the Council and use their positions to protect each other from scrutiny. The legislation makes funds available to the UNHRC unless the Secretary of State certifies that participation "does not serve the national interest of the United States" and that the "Council is not taking significant steps to remove Israel as a permanent agenda item" or improving the "integrity in the election of members to such Council."
The Trump administration earnestly sought adoption of these and other reforms and, if the UN membership had supported them, then the United States would have continued its participation in the UNHRC. It is positive that the House bill endorses these reforms, but the current construction opens the door for renewed funding based on "taking significant steps to" reforms that may never be realized. It would have been more constructive had funding been made contingent on the specific reforms, presenting a united front with the administration.
Restores Funding to UNRWA
Last year, the Trump administration ended all U.S. funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). Part of the administration's justification for the decision was the disproportionate level of U.S. financial support, but the more fundamental reason to end U.S. funding lies with the many flaws that have plagued the UN agency for decades. The House bill restores U.S. funding of UNRWA unless the Secretary of State determines and reports "that UNRWA is violating certain policies related to neutrality, impartiality, prohibiting weapons in their facilities, regular inspections, educational materials, financial transparency, and auditing practices.'
As with the Human Rights Council language, this reverse the proper burden of responsibility. International organizations are not entitled to U.S. funding-they must demonstrate that they are worthy of that funding. UNRWA's problems are long-standing and well established, and the organization has proven resistant to U.S. demands for reform even when American taxpayer dollars comprised its largest source of funding. Instead of demanding reforms from UNRWA, the House bill provides funding by default. In addition, the House bill would restore over $200 million in U.S. bilateral and multilateral assistance to Gaza and the West Bank despite Palestinian intransigence on peace negotiations with Israel.
The U.S. system of government is comprised of coequal branches, but there is a reason why the foreign-policy responsibilities reside primarily in the Executive branch. These provisions-and a number of others in the bill-would inappropriately tie the hands and flexibility of the administration to conduct foreign policy and create conflict and confusion in our dealing on these matters in the future. Conservatives in the House should seek to remove these provisions and Senate conservatives should endeavor to prevent similar language in the Senate appropriations."