Order Code RL34023
State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs:
FY2008 Appropriations
May 30, 2007
Connie Veillette
Specialist in Foreign Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Susan B. Epstein
Specialist in Foreign Policy and Trade
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs:
FY2008 Appropriations
Summary
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. Emergency supplementals enacted since the September 11, 2001,
terrorist attacks to assist the front-line states in the war on terrorism, fund
Afghanistan and Iraq reconstruction, and upgrade State Department operations and
security upgrades, also have pushed spending upward.
For the first time, House and Senate bills encompass both State Department and
foreign operations spending. In the 109th Congress, House and Senate jurisdictions
did not coincide, with the House including the State Department in the Science,
State, Justice and Commerce appropriations bill, and the Senate folding the State
Department into the Foreign Operations bill. Prior to the 109th Congress, the State
Department was funded in both the House and Senate Commerce, State, and Justice
bills, and Foreign Operations was funded in its own measure.
This report is divided into two parts. The first section analyzes the FY2008
budget request and funding trends, including major issues Congress may consider.
The second section tracks congressional action.
Major issues confronting the 110th Congress include:
! The overall size of the budget request that represents an 11%
increase over FY2007 enacted levels;
! A foreign aid reform plan that seeks to align assistance with U.S.
strategic objectives;
! Significant increases for Presidential initiatives;
! Continued costs relating to Iraq and Afghanistan; and
! Secretary Rice’s Transformational Diplomacy initiative for the State
Department.
On February 6, 2007, the Administration sent to Congress its FY2008 budget
that includes significant increases for the international affairs budget. Unlike in
previous years, the budget includes a request for emergency FY2008 funding relating
to Iraq operations and reconstruction. Congress may decide to handle the emergency
request either in the base FY2008 budget or as a supplemental bill. Congress
completed consideration of a $119.995 billion supplemental for FY2007 that
included $6.146 billion in additional foreign affairs spending (H.R. 2206). The
President signed the bill on May 25, 2007 (P.L. 110-28).
This report will be updated to reflect congressional action.

Key Policy Staff
Subject
Name
Telephone
E-Mail
General: Foreign Operations Policy
Connie Veillette
7-7127
cveillette@crs.loc.gov
Issues/Budget
Curt Tarnoff
7-7656
ctarnoff@crs.loc.gov
General: State Dept Policy Issues/Budget
Susan Epstein
7-6678
sepstein@crs.loc.gov
Africa Assistance
Ted Dagne
7-7646
tdagne@crs.loc.gov
Agency for International Development
Connie Veillette
7-7127
cveillette@crs.loc.gov
Curt Tarnoff
7-7656
ctarnoff@crs.loc.gov
Asia Assistance
Thomas Lum
7-7616
tlum@crs.loc.gov
Broadcasting, International
Susan Epstein
7-6678
sepstein@crs.loc.gov
Central Asia Assistance
Jim Nichol
7-2289
jnichol@crs.loc.gov
Debt Relief
Marty Weiss
7-5407
mweiss@crs.loc.gov
Development Assistance (bilateral)
Connie Veillette
7-7127
cveillette@crs.loc.gov
Curt Tarnoff
7-7656
ctarnoff@crs.loc.gov
Disaster/Humanitarian Aid
Rhoda Margesson
7-0425
rmargesson@crs.loc.gov
Drug/Counternarcotics Programs
Raphael Perl
7-7664
rperl@crs.loc.gov
Drug/Counternarcotics, Andean Region
Connie Veillette
7-7127
cveillette@crs.loc.gov
Export-Import Bank
James Jackson
7-7751
jjackson@crs.loc.gov
Family Planning Programs
Luisa Blanchfield
7-0856
lblanchfield@crs.loc.gov
Foreign Service Issues
Ken Nakamura
7-7677
knakamura@crs.loc.gov
Health Programs, including HIV/AIDS
Tiaji Salaam
7-7677
tsalaam@crs.loc.gov
Human Rights
Ken Nakamura
7-9514
knakamura@crs.loc.gov
International Affairs Budget
Connie Veillette
7-7127
cveillette@crs.loc.gov
International Organizations
Ken Nakamura
7-9514
knakamura@crs.loc.gov
Iraq Reconstruction
Curt Tarnoff
7-7656
ctarnoff@crs.loc.gov
Latin America Assistance
Connie Veillette
7-7127
cveillette@crs.loc.gov
Microenterprise
Curt Tarnoff
7-7656
ctarnoff@crs.loc.gov
Middle East Assistance
Jeremy Sharp
7-8687
jsharp@crs.loc.gov
Military Assistance
Richard Grimmett
7-7675
rgrimmett@crs.loc.gov
Millennium Challenge Account
Curt Tarnoff
7-7656
ctarnoff@crs.loc.gov
Multilateral Development Banks
Jonathan Sanford
7-7682
jsanford@crs.loc.gov
Marty Weiss
7-5407
mweiss@crs.loc.gov
Overseas Private Investment Corporation
James Jackson
7-7751
jjackson@crs.loc.gov
Peace Corps
Curt Tarnoff
7-7656
ctarnoff@crs.loc.gov
Peacekeeping
Marjorie Browne
7-7695
mbrowne@crs.loc.gov
Nina Serafino
7-7667
nserafino@crs.loc.gov
Public Diplomacy
Susan Epstein
7-6678
sepstein@crs.loc.gov
Refugee Aid
Rhoda Margesson
7-0452
rmargesson@crs.loc.gov
Russia/East Europe Assistance
Curt Tarnoff
7-7656
ctarnoff@crs.loc.gov
Terrorism
John Rollins
7-5529
jrollins@crs.loc.gov
U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA)
Luisa Blanchfield
7-0856
lblanchfield@crs.loc.gov
U.S. Institute of Peace
Susan Epstein
7-6678
sepstein@crs.loc.gov
U.N. Voluntary Contributions
Marjorie Browne
7-7695
mbrowne@crs.loc.gov

Contents
International Affairs FY2008 Budget Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background and Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
FY2008 Budget Request: State Department and Related Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Transformational Diplomacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
State Department — Administration of Foreign Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Diplomatic and Consular Programs (D&CP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance (ESCM) . . . . . . . . . 6
Educational and Cultural Exchanges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
The Capital Investment Fund (CIF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
International Organizations and Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA) . . . . . . 8
International Commissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Related State Department Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
The Asia Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
The International Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue
Trust Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
National Endowment for Democracy (NED) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
East-West and North-South Centers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
U.S. Institute of Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Broadcasting Board of Governors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Emergency FY2008 Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
FY2008 Budget Request: Foreign Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Transformational Development: The Request in the Context of Foreign
Aid Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Foreign Operations Budget in Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Major Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Regional Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Core Development versus Security Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Sector Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Presidential Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
HIV/AIDS and Tuberculosis Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
MCC Compacts and Other Aid Accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Use of Supplementals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Congressional Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Budget Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Appendix A. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Appendix B. Foreign Aid Country Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
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, FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Figure 2. Regional Distribution of Foreign Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 3. Supplemental Funding for Foreign Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
List of Tables
Table 1. International Affairs Appropriations, FY1999-FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Table 2. State Department and Related Agencies Appropriations,
FY1999 to FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Table 3. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY1999 to FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Table 4. Framework for Foreign Assistance: Country Categories
and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Table 5. Core Development versus Security/Economic Assistance by
Account, FY2006-FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Table 6. Core Development versus Security/Economic Assistance by
Strategic Objective, FY2006-FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Table 7. Selected Sector Funding, FY2006 and FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Table 8. Compact Countries, U.S. Assistance, FY2005-FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table 9. Funding for Iraq and Afghanistan, FY2002-FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24


State, Foreign Operations, and Related
Programs: FY2008 Appropriations
International Affairs FY2008 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 FY2008 budget request.
Figure 1. Composition of Foreign Affairs Budget, FY2008
Source: Fiscal Year 2008 Budget of the U.S. Government and CRS calculations.
Note: The total figure of $36.48 billion includes $159 million for mandatory retirement accounts.
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

CRS-2
education and health care, 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 human rights and religious freedom, and countering
trafficking in persons.
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.1 Large reconstruction programs in
Afghanistan and Iraq, which peaked in FY2004, are also part of the emphasis on
using foreign aid to combat terrorism. State Department efforts focused extensively
on building coalitions to assist in the war on terrorism 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, would reposition diplomats to global
trouble spots, create regional public diplomacy centers, localize small posts outside
of foreign capitals, and train diplomats in new skills. (See Transformational
Diplomacy section 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 the new “F bureau”
at State, the DFA has created a new Strategic Framework for Foreign Assistance with
the objectives of providing more coordination, coherence, transparency, and
accountability for aid programs. (See Transformational Development section for
more information.)
Other presidential initiatives address development and global health concerns.
The Millennium Challenge Corporation is a new 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
1 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.

CRS-3
President initially pledged $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.2 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.
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/Diplomacy/Broadcasting and Foreign Operations. Both components are
analyzed separately in the rest of this report. Taken together, the international affairs
budget has fluctuated in real terms in response to changing global events. Table 1
shows appropriations for the last decade in both current and constant dollars.
Table 1. International Affairs Appropriations, FY1999-FY2008
(discretionary budget authority in billions of current and constant 2008 dollars)
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
Current $
22.35
22.57
23.22
24.25
31.72
48.34
34.23
34.25
37.44
36.32
Constant
2008 $
27.96
27.55
27.71
28.48
36.48
54.21
37.19
35.86
38.39
36.32
Note: Amounts do not include mandatory Foreign Service retirement accounts that total
$159 million in FY2008. The FY2008 column reflects amounts requested by the
Administration. FY1999 excludes $17.61 billion for the International Monetary Fund. All
figures include regular and supplemental appropriations with the exception of FY2008.
2 PEPFAR countries include Botswana, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique,
Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Vietnam, Guyana, and
Haiti.

CRS-4
FY2008 Budget Request: State Department and
Related Agencies3
The Administration’s FY2008 budget request for the Department of State is
$10.014 billion, representing a 10.5% increase over the FY2007 estimate, but a
decline of 4.3% as compared with the FY2006 actual appropriation (the most recent
enacted appropriation for the Department of State), including rescissions and
supplementals. For international broadcasting, the FY2008 request of $668.2 million
represents a 3.8% increase over the FY2007 estimate, but a 1.7% decline from the
FY2006 level, including rescissions and supplementals. Related agencies, which are
also 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 2 shows
appropriations for the last decade in both current and constant dollars.
Table 2. State Department and Related Agencies
Appropriations, FY1999 to FY2008
(discretionary budget authority in billions of current and constant dollars)
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
Current $
6.91
6.16
6.91
7.71
8.05
9.29
10.78
11.12
10.83
10.68
Constant
FY08 $
8.64
7.52
8.25
9.06
9.26
10.42
11.71
11.64
11.11
10.68
Note: Amounts do not include mandatory Foreign Service retirement accounts that total
$123 million in FY2008. All figures include regular and supplemental appropriations with
the exception of FY2008.
Transformational Diplomacy
On January 18, 2006, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced her vision
for U.S. diplomacy in the 21st Century. She said that to match President Bush’s bold
mission of “supporting democracy around the world with the ultimate goal of ending
tyranny in our world,” the United States needs “an equally bold diplomacy that not
only reports about the world as it is, but seeks to change the world itself.”4 The
Secretary referred to this as “transformational diplomacy.” Specific aspects of
Secretary Rice’s Transformational Diplomacy include:
3 State Department and Related Agencies section written by Susan B. Epstein, Specialist in
Foreign Affairs and Trade.
4 Transformational Diplomacy: Remarks at Georgetown School of Foreign Service,
Department of State, January 18, 2006. [http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2006/59306.htm]

CRS-5
! Global repositioning. Beginning in FY2006 and continuing through
FY2007, the Department of State has decided on more than 200
positions to be moved largely from Europe and Washington, DC, to
strategically critical areas in Africa, South Asia, East Asia, the
Middle East and elsewhere in FY2007. Additional jobs are to be
targeted by the summer.
! Regional focus. The Department is creating regional public
diplomacy centers in Europe and the Middle East, as well as regional
centers for information technology to perform management support
activities such as human resources or financial management.
! Localization. As part of the U.S. public diplomacy mission,
American Presence Posts (APP) are to be operated by one diplomat
working away from the embassy in key population centers of a
country; Virtual Presence Posts (VPP) are to provide an Internet site
enabling millions of local citizens, particularly young people, to
interact with embassy personnel. IT Centralization would provide
the State Department workforce with real-time and cutting-edge
information whether at their desks or traveling. Creative use of the
Internet wouold enhance America’s presence through the Internet
interactive online discussions such as Café USA/Seoul.
! Plans for new skills challenges including enhanced training for
technology and languages; multi-region expertise requiring
diplomats to be experts in at least two regions and fluent in two
languages; post assignments criteria requiring diplomats to serve in
at least one of the more challenging posts; hands-on practice for
diplomats to be more involved in helping foreign citizens, promoting
democracy, running programs, starting businesses, improving
healthcare, and reforming education — overall recognizing public
diplomacy as an important part of every diplomat’s job.
! Empowering diplomats to work with other federal agencies —
especially with the U.S. military deployed abroad.
Within the Department of State’s FY2008 budget, the Administration is
requesting $124.8 million for Transformational Diplomacy. Included is $39.9
million for repositioning of jobs, $20.8 million for language, public diplomacy, and
technology training, $34.5 million for Foreign Service modernization, and $15
million for public diplomacy. The FY2007 budget request included $102.8 million
for Transformational Diplomacy.
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 50 U.S. government agencies and organizations in operating more than 260 posts

CRS-6
in over 180 countries around the world. Currently, the State Department employs
approximately 30,000 people, about 60% of whom work abroad. Highlights follow.
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 FY2008 budget, the Administration is requesting $4,942.7 million,
14.5% above the estimated FY2007 level, but a 13.2% decline from the FY2006
funding level of $5,692.3 million, reflecting rescissions and supplementals. Within
the FY2008 request, $964.8 million is designated for worldwide security upgrades.
The estimated FY2007 funding level is $4,314.0 million, of which more than $700
million is for supporting worldwide security upgrades.
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 $640 million for this account
for FY1999. However, following the embassy bombings in Africa in August 1998,
Congress agreed to more than $1 billion (a supplemental funding bill) for the
Security and Maintenance account by establishing a new subaccount referred to as
Worldwide Security Upgrades.
The Administration seeks $792.5 million for FY2008 for regular ESCM and
$806.9 million for worldwide security upgrades, for a total account level of $1,599.4
million, a 7.4% increase over both the FY2007 and FY2006 ESCM total
appropriations level of $1,489.7 million, reflecting 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 $486.4 million for exchanges in FY2008.
This represents a 9.1% increase over the FY2007 estimate and a 12.8% increase over
the FY2006 enacted level of $431.3 million. In addition, Congress, in the FY2006
appropriation, designated $329.7 million in the D&CP funds for public diplomacy.
The estimated FY2007 funding level for public diplomacy within D&CP is unclear
at this time.
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

CRS-7
information technology and capital equipment that would ensure the efficient
management, coordination, operation, and utilization of State’s resources.
The FY2008 budget request includes $70.7 million for CIF, which is 21.7%
higher than both the enacted FY2006 and estimated FY2007 levels of $58.1 million.
The request seeks no funding for the Centralized Information Technology
Modernization Program, which was funded in FY2006 at $68.5 million. In addition,
the FY2006 conference report (H.Rept. 109-272) stated that the conferees expect
$116 million from expedited passport fee collections would be used for Technology
Investments in FY2006. The Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution,
FY2007 (P.L. 109-289, as amended by P.L. 110-5) explicitly stated no funding would
be provided for the Centralized Information Technology Modernization Program in
FY2007.
International Organizations and Conferences
In recent years, U.S. contributions to the United Nations and its affiliated
agencies (CIO) and peacekeeping activities (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% legislative
cap on U.S. contributions to U.N. peacekeeping assessments to 27.1%.5
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 U.N. and its affiliated
agencies, the Inter-American Organizations, as well as other regional and
international organizations, are included in this account.
The President’s FY2008 request totaling $1,354.4 million for this account
represents a 17.6% increase over the estimated FY2007 level and the FY2006
enacted appropriation of $1,151.3 million, including rescissions.
5 For more information, see CRS Report RL33611 United Nations System Funding:
Congressional Issues
.

CRS-8
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
FY2008 request totals $1,107.0 million. This represents nearly a 4% decline from
the FY2006 actual funding level of $1,152.1 million and a smaller decline of 2.5%
below the estimated FY2007 CIPA funding level of $1,135.3 million.
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 Commissions, the International Boundary Commission, the
International Joint Commission, and the Border Environment Cooperation
Commission. The FY2008 request of $113.5 million represents a 100.8% increase
over the FY2006 level of $66.5 million and a 99% increase over the estimated
FY2007 level of $67 million. The increase is largely due to plans for a water
treatment project near San Diego, California.
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 FY2008 is $10 million, the same as requested a year
earlier, but 27.5% below the enacted FY2006 level of $13.8 million (with
rescissions). The estimated government funding level for FY2007 is $13.8 million
for the Asia Foundation.
The International Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue
Trust Fund. The 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) provided $6.9 million for perpetual operations 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
$850,000 of interest and earnings from the Trust Fund for program funding in
FY2006. For FY2007, the Administration requested appropriation authority to spend
$750,000 of interest and earnings from the Trust Fund to be used for programming
activities and conferences at the Center. The FY2008 budget contains a request for
$875,000 from the Trust for the program account.
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

CRS-9
claim that it duplicates U.S. government democracy programs and either could be
eliminated or could operate entirely with private funding.
The Administration’s FY2008 budget request of $80 million for NED is the
same as its FY2005, FY2006, and FY2007 requests. The FY2008 request represents
an 8.1% increase over the enacted $74.0 million (after rescissions) for FY2006. In
addition, however, the 109th Congress created a Democracy Fund in the FY2006
Foreign Operations Appropriations (P.L. 109-102) which provided an additional
$15.25 million for NED that year. The estimated FY2007 funding level is estimated
to be $74 million.
East-West and North-South Centers. 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 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 is 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.
The Administration’s FY2008 request is for $10 million for the East-West
Center, a decrease of 47.4% from the FY2006 funding level of $19.0 million
(including rescissions). The FY2007 funding level is currently set at $19 million.
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
reasons.
For FY2008, the Administration is requesting $30 million, up nearly $8 million
from the FY2007 estimated level of $22.07 million, after rescissions.
Broadcasting Board of Governors
The United States International Broadcasting Act of 19946 reorganized within
USIA all U.S. government international broadcasting, including Voice of America
6 Title III of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995; P.L. 103-
236.

CRS-10
(VOA) radio and television, 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.
During the reorganization debate in 1999, the 106th Congress agreed that
credibility of U.S. international broadcasting was crucial to its effectiveness as a
public diplomacy tool. Therefore, Congress agreed not to merge broadcasting
functions into the State Department, but to maintain the Broadcasting Board of
Governors (BBG) as an independent agency as of October 1, 1999.
For FY2008 international broadcasting activities the President is requesting
$668.2 million, an increase of 3.8% over the FY2007 estimate of $644 million, but
a decrease of 1.7% from the FY2006 enacted level of $679.6 million, including
rescissions and supplementals. Of the $668.2 million request, $618.8 million would
be for broadcasting operations, such as VOA, $10.7 million for Capital
Improvements, and $38.7 million for Broadcasting to Cuba.
The BBG is planning to eliminate several VOA services including Uzbek,
Greek, and Cantonese as well as the RFE/RL Macedonia service. BBG also plans
to reduce several others, such as VOA and RFE/RL service in Ukrainian, Tibetan,
and Romanian. (Reportedly, eleven former VOA directors are appealing to Congress
to reverse the proposed Administration cuts.)7 At the same time, BBG’s FY2008
request would increase Middle East Broadcasting network funds by some $20
million.
Emergency FY2008 Request
Along with the FY2008 budget request, the White House sent to Congress two
supplemental funding requests — one for FY2007 amounting to $1.168 billion for
State and $10 million for international broadcasting; another for FY2008 amounting
to $1.935 billion for the Department of State. Both requests are primarily for U.S.
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Currently, the U.S. Embassy in Iraq has over 1,000 American and locally
engaged staff representing about 12 agencies. 156 U.S. direct hires and 155 locally
engaged staff represent the Department of State (DOS) in the U.S. Mission. The bulk
of the FY2007 and FY2008 supplemental requests would fund State Department
operations in Iraq.8 Of the $1.935 billion FY2008 emergency funding request,
$1.882 billion is for ongoing U.S. Mission operations in Iraq and $53 million would
fund U.N. Assistance Missions in Afghanistan and in Iraq. In addition, $35 million
is in the request for Migration and Refugee Assistance.
7 [http://www.freemediaonline.org/former_voa_directors_protest_program_cuts.doc].
8 For information on the FY2007 supplemental, see CRS Report RL33900 FY2007
Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, Foreign Affairs, and Other Purposes
.

CRS-11
On April 25 and 26, the House and Senate passed the conference report (H.Rept.
110-107) for the FY2007 Supplemental (H.R. 1591, U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’
Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007) that
provided $1.275 billion for State Department operations. The bulk of the funds
($871 million) would support U.S. operations, security, and mission in Iraq, and
other world wide security upgrades. Also included was $20 million for educational
and cultural exchanges, $10 million for international broadcasting, and $338 million
for contributions to international organizations and peacekeeping activities.
After the President vetoed the bill, Congress passed H.R. 2206, which the
President signed on May 25. It provided $1.27 billion including $871 million for
State Department operations in Iraq, and $333 million for contributions to
international organizations and peacekeeping activities. It also included $20 million
for educational and cultural exchanges, and $10 million for international
broadcasting.
Last year the Bush Administration requested an FY2006 Emergency
Supplemental of $1.497 billion within State’s Diplomatic and Consular Programs
budget account to cover Iraq operations and security. The House and Senate passed
the emergency supplemental conference report (H.R. 4939. H.Rept. 109-494) in June
2006. The final measure included $1.529 billion for D&CP in Iraq, $25.3 million for
State’s Inspector General, $5 million for exchanges in Iran, $178 million for U.N.
peacekeeping, and $36.1 million for international broadcasting in Iran. The President
signed the measure into law (P.L. 109-234) on June 15, 2006.
FY2008 Budget Request: Foreign Operations9
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 also includes funds for the Export-Import Bank, whose activities are
regarded more as trade promotion rather than foreign aid. Food aid, such as the P.L.
480 Food for Peace program, is funded in the Agriculture Appropriations bill,
although it is also considered foreign aid. The FY2008 request for food aid programs
totals $1.319 billion.
The foreign operations budget request for FY2008 totals $24.4 billion10 in
foreign assistance programs, representing a 12% increase from the previous year’s
9 Foreign Operations section written by Connie Veillette, Specialist in Foreign Affairs.
10 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.

CRS-12
enacted level of $21.7 billion. This level of increase is the largest within the budget
request government-wide, and continues the general trend of increases since
September 11, 2001. Table 3 provides funding levels for foreign operations since
FY1999 in both current and constant dollars.
Table 3. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY1999 to FY2008
(discretionary budget authority in billions of current and constant dollars)
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
Current $
15.44
16.41
16.31
16.54
23.67
39.05
23.45
23.13
26.15
24.38
Constant
2008 $
19.31
20.03
19.46
19.43
27.23
43.79
25.48
24.22
26.82
24.38
Note: Amounts do not include mandatory Foreign Service retirement accounts that total $36
million in FY2008. FY1999 excludes $17.61 billion for the IMF. All figures include
regular and supplemental appropriations with the exception of FY2008.
Transformational Development: The Request in the Context
of Foreign Aid Reform

A new dimension to this year’s budget request is the Administration’s
transformational development agenda and the creation of the new State Department
position of Director of Foreign Assistance (DFA).11 The DFA, who is also
concurrently the USAID Administrator, has been given authority over foreign
assistance programs managed by the State Department and USAID. In addition, the
DFA is to “provide guidance” for foreign assistance delivered through other
government agencies. Randall Tobias, previously the State Department’s Global
AIDS Coordinator, served as the DFA and USAID Administrator until April 27,
2007.
The DFA is charged with two missions: to develop a coordinated foreign
assistance strategy; and to direct a transformation of foreign assistance to achieve the
President’s Transformational Development Goals.12 To that end, he presented a new
Strategic Framework for Foreign Assistance13 that links aid programs to U.S.
strategic objectives. Countries are grouped in categories representing common
development challenges. (See appendix B for a list of countries and their categories.)
The FY2008 budget is the first opportunity to evaluate the effects of the reform plan
on funding levels for accounts, sectors and specific countries.
11 For more information on the DFA and restructuring of foreign assistance, see CRS Report
RL33491Restructuring U.S. Foreign Assistance: The Role of the Director of Foreign
Assistance (DFA) in Transformational Development
.
12 U.S. Department of State Fact Sheet: New Direction for U.S. Foreign Assistance, January
19, 2007.
13 The Framework is available at [http://state.gov/f/reform/].

CRS-13
The Strategic Framework creates five categories of countries. The first —
Rebuilding — includes countries in, or emerging from, internal or external conflicts.
Transforming countries include low and lower-middle income countries that meet
certain performance criteria based on good governance and sound economic policies.
The category of Developing countries includes low and lower-middle income
countries that are not yet meeting performance criteria. Sustaining Partnership
countries include upper-middle income countries with which the United States
maintains economic, trade, and security relationships beyond foreign aid. Restrictive
countries include authoritarian regimes with significant freedom and human rights
issues, most of which are ineligible for U.S. aid. Programs in these countries operate
through non-governmental organizations or through entities outside the country. A
sixth category was created to encompass global or regional programs that transcend
any one country’s borders.
Each category represents common development challenges around which aid
programs are to be designed and coordinated. Strategic objectives have been created
and linked to country categories. Strategic objectives include peace and security;
governing justly and democratically; investing in people; economic growth; and
humanitarian assistance. Table 4 illustrates the linkages between country category
and aid objective. Countries in each category are expected to receive most of their
assistance based on a primary objective, but they may in fact receive assistance under
several or all objectives.
Table 4. Framework for Foreign Assistance: Country Categories
and Objectives
Country
Objective
Category Focus
Program Focus
Accounts
Peace & Security Rebuilding
Terrorism,
FMF, TI, IMET,
Sustaining Partners Stabilization, Defense
ESF, INCLE, NADR,
Reform, Drugs, Crime,
PKO, ACI, FSA,
Conflict Mitigation
SEED
Governing
Rebuilding
Rule of Law, Human
DA, TI, SEED, FSA,
Justly/Democ.
Restrictive
Rights, Governance,
DF, ESF, INCLE,
Civil Society
ACI
Investing in
Developing
Health, Education,
DA, CSH, ESF,
People
Transforming
Vulnerable Populations IDFA, GHAI, PL 480
Economic
Transforming
Trade, Agriculture,
DA, ESF, SEED,
Growth
Rebuilding
Infrastructure,
FSA, ACI, PL 480
Developing
Environment, Micro-
enterprise
Humanitarian
Rebuilding
Migration, Refugees,
IDFA, MRA, ERMA,
Assistance
Restrictive
Disasters
PL 480
Global
Note: See Appendix A for a list of account acronyms.

CRS-14
Foreign Operations Budget in Detail
Despite a proposed 12% increase in the foreign aid budget, most of the
additional funds are concentrated in a few areas. The FY2008 budget continues a
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 large increases include
three of the President’s cornerstone initiatives — the Millennium Challenge
Corporation, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), and the
President’s Malaria Initiative. Africa continues to see higher levels of assistance than
other regions, but most of the funds are concentrated in HIV/AIDS programs, with
other types of assistance, such as basic education and agriculture, decreasing.
Major Changes. One major change in the FY2008 budget was the decision
to transfer some Development Assistance (DA) funds to Economic Support Fund
(ESF). This was a strategic decision that resulted from the new Framework — some
programs previously funded with DA were considered to fit better with the strategic
objectives that are to be primarily funded with ESF. Consequently, ESF increases
by 35% from FY2007, while DA decreases by 31%. A similar change occurs in the
Andean Counterdrug Initiative (ACI) with funds for alternative development
transferred to ESF.
Those programs scheduled for significant increases include the Millennium
Challenge Corporation (up 71%); International Narcotics Control and Law
Enforcement (up 35%); Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and Related
Programs (up 14%); Global HIV/AIDS Initiative (up 28%); and debt restructuring
(up 223%).14
Programs that would see significant decreases include Child Survival and Health
(down 9%); International Disaster and Famine Assistance (down 18%); Assistance
to the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union (down 22%); Migration and
Refugee Assistance (down 7%); and International Organizations and Programs (down
11%). The U.S. contribution to the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria is
scheduled for a 58% reduction, from $724 million to $300 million. Unlike in
previous years when the contribution was taken from Child Survival and Health
(CSH), the Global HIV/AIDS Initiative (GHAI), and the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS), the Administration proposes that the entire $300 million
would come from HHS. The CSH contribution was $247.5 million in FY2007; if
this transfer is taken into account, the CSH request would represent a 5% increase
over last year’s level.
Regional Distribution. Relatively few regions see large increases when
excluding funds from Millennium Challenge Compacts. (Such compacts are large
grants that go to a few countries in each region.15) Africa would benefit from a
53.8% increase, largely in HIV/AIDS funds, with other programs cut, including basic
14 The large percentage increase for debt relief is due to funds requested to cover the cost
of completing Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) bilateral debt relief for the
Democratic Republic of the Congo.
15 For more information, see CRS Report RL32427 Millennium Challenge Account.

CRS-15
education, agricultural sector productivity, water supply and sanitation, and family
planning and reproductive health.16 South and Central Asia would see a slight
increase of 5.5%, largely due to assistance to Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Near
East would receive a 3.6% increase, mainly due to Iraq assistance.
Other regions would receive either static funding or see decreases in aid. A
25.6% decrease for Europe and Eurasia is a result of the graduation of some countries
in Europe from aid programs. Latin America’s decrease of 9.1% mainly affects basic
education, environment, and humanitarian assistance. Funding to the East Asia and
the Pacific region would generally remain unchanged.
Effects of HIV/AIDS Funding on Regional Distribution. One of the
major focuses of the FY2008 budget is a continuation of funding to address the
HIV/AIDS pandemic in many countries with high prevalence rates. The 15 PEPFAR
focus countries are the main beneficiaries, although CSH funds are used in non-focus
countries as well.17 When PEPFAR money from the Global HIV/AIDS Initiative
(GHAI) account are included in totals, most regions receive slight increases (with the
exception of Africa, which receives a very large increase), or slight decreases from
FY2006 levels. (See Figure 2.)
A concern of some aid analysts is the effect that this focus has on other types of
development assistance. The largest effect can be seen in Africa. If GHAI funds are
excluded, then Africa would see an 11% decrease in aid rather than a 53.8% increase
in aid for FY2008. Two Latin American and Caribbean countries benefit from
PEPFAR — Haiti and Guyana — raising the region’s foreign aid totals. If these
funds are excluded, aid to Latin America and the Caribbean would decrease by 12%.
Similarly, if Vietnam’s AIDS funding were subtracted, aid levels to East Asia and the
Pacific would fall by nearly 11%.
16 Because of the February 2007 enactment of the FY2007 Continuing Resolution, final aid
figures for 2007 are not yet available. Comparisons here are to FY2006. When 2007 figures
are available, this analysis will be updated.
17 For more information, see CRS Report RL33485 U.S. International HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Spending: FY2004-FY2008
, by Tiaji Salaam.


CRS-16
Figure 2. Regional Distribution of Foreign Aid
Source: U.S. Department of State.
Note: Includes GHAI funds. Figures are in billions of current U.S. dollars. AFR = Africa;
EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EUR = Europe and Eurasia; NE = Near East; SCA = South
and Central Asia; WH = Western Hemisphere.
Core Development versus Security Assistance. A long-running debate
in the foreign assistance community is whether the ratio of “core” development
assistance to security and economic assistance is appropriate. Proponents of core
development define it as those programs having a primary focus on poverty
alleviation and health concerns. The accounts that fund these types of programs are
Development Assistance (DA), Child Survival and Health (CSH), and the Global
HIV/AIDS Initiative (GHAI). Some observers also include the Millennium
Challenge Account, and some of the contingency accounts that respond to
emergencies, such as Migration and Refugee Assistance, Emergency Refugee and
Migration Assistance, Transition Initiatives, and International Disaster and Famine
Assistance.
For the most part, non-governmental organizations tend to exclude Economic
Support Funds (ESF) from their definition of core development assistance for two
reasons. First, there is the perception that ESF is given to strategic allies regardless
of need, largely due to historic levels of ESF that have gone to such countries as
Egypt and Israel. Second, a sizeable portion of ESF funds has been used for budget
support rather than development projects. On the ground, the characterization that
ESF does not promote development is difficult to make because some ESF-funded
programs have the same or similar purposes as those funded by DA.

CRS-17
The FY2008 budget request proposes a major change by transferring some
programs funded by DA into the ESF account. This change complicates the analysis
because ESF no longer cleanly fits in the non-core development assistance category,
if it ever really did. Table 5 compares the FY2008 request with FY2007 estimates
based on accounts with ESF disaggregated by budget support and development.
When including the three major development accounts (Development
Assistance, Child Survival and Health, and the Global HIV/AIDS Initiative),
development assistance is proposed to increase in FY2008 by 4.5% from FY2007.
The largest portion of this increase is in the HIV/AIDS initiative, with both DA and
CSH falling from last year’s levels. If one also includes other accounts (Millennium
Challenge, Transition Initiatives, disaster and famine aid, food aid, and migration and
refugee assistance), the increase from last year is 13%. However, virtually all of this
increase can be attributed to the 71% increase in funds for the Millennium Challenge
Corporation. All other accounts receive the same or decreased funding.
Dividing the ESF account into budget support versus program funding helps
clarify the debate of how to characterize ESF. Of the amount requested for
Economic Support Fund, approximately $478 million would go for budget support
with the remainder presumably funding development projects. Using this scenario,
the ratio of core to non-core for FY2008 is 86% to 14%.
Table 5. Core Development versus Security/Economic
Assistance by Account, FY2006-FY2008
(millions current U.S. dollars)
Core Development
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
% Change
Accounts
Actual
Estimate
Request
FY07-FY08
Development Assistance
1,525.3
1,508.8
1,041.2
-31.0%
Child Survival & Health
1,652.2
1,718.2
1,564.3
-9.0%
Global AIDS Initiative
1,975.1
3,246.5
4,150.0
27.8%
Subtotal — Core
5,152.6
6,463.5
6,755.5
4.5%
Economic Support Fund — Corea
1,763.7
1,738.0
2,841.6
63.5%
Subtotal — Core with ESF
6,916.3
8,201.5
9,597.1
17.0%
Other accounts:
Millennium Challenge
1,752.3
1,752.3
3,000.0
71.2%
Transition Initiatives
39.6
39.6
37.2
-6.1%
Disaster/Famine IDFA
579.0
361.4
297.3
-17.7%
Food Aid
1,588.0
1,314.0
1,319.0
0.4%
Migration/Refugee
888.5
887.9
828.5
-6.7%
Total — All Core
11,763.7
12,556.7
15,079.1
20.1%
Non-Core Assistance
SEED/FSA
866.3
725.9
640.9
-11.7%
Non-proliferation, Anti-
terrorism, & Demining
406.0
406.0
464.0
14.3%

CRS-18
Core Development
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
% Change
Accounts
Actual
Estimate
Request
FY07-FY08
Narcotics/Law Enforcement
1,307.3
1,193.9
1,077.4
-9.8%
Military (FMF/IMET)
4,540.9
4,636.7
4,625.5
-0.2%
Peacekeeping Ops
351.3
223.3
221.2
-0.9%
ESF - Budget Support
844.0
717.0
478.0
-33.3%
Subtotal — Non-Core
8,315.8
7,902.8
7,507.0
-5.0%
a. ESF core and non-core do not include supplemental funding. The core figure is obtained
by subtracting funds for budget support from the total.
The Administration prefers that the focus be on strategic objectives rather than
accounts. Table 6 provides a breakout of funding for each objective. It is plausible
to conceptualize Investing in People, Economic Growth, and Humanitarian
Assistance as correlating to core programs, although some would argue that since
Economic Growth receives ESF funding, it should not be included. The proposal to
transfer some Development Assistance funds to ESF makes casting Economic
Growth as a core program unavoidable.
Table 6. Core Development versus Security/Economic
Assistance by Strategic Objective, FY2006-FY2008
(millions of current U.S. dollars)
Strategic Objective
FY2006
FY2008
% Change
Core:
Investing in People
4,957.4
6,954.3
40.3%
Economic Growth
2,826.2
2,370.3
-16.1%
Humanitarian Assistance
1,814.1
2,124.3
17.1%
Subtotal
9,597.7
11,448.9
19.3%
Non-Core:
Peace & Security
6,817.1
6,879.1
0.9%
Governing Justly & Democratically
1,233.2
1,448.0
17.4%
Subtotal
8,050.3
8,327.1
3.4%
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification Foreign Operations, and CRS
calculations.
Note: The Administration does not use the terms core versus non-core that are commonly used by the
development community. [The objectives listed here in each category fund programs from accounts
that are identified (as in Table 5) as corresponding to poverty and health-focused programs versus
security.] This table does not include funding for the Millennium Challenge Corporation that would
total $3 billion in FY2008.

CRS-19
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 7 provides the funding levels for many of these sectors for FY2006 and the
FY2008 request. Some sectors are cut significantly, as listed below, while others
receive sizeable increases. Increases in health-related programs, up nearly 50%,
occur largely in HIV/AIDS, malaria, and avian flu programs. Two sub-sectors —
maternal and child health, and family planning and reproductive health — see hefty
decreases. Funds in the Peace and Security objective are targeted for increases,
particularly for counter-terrorism and rule of law programs.
Table 7. Selected Sector Funding, FY2006 and FY2008
(millions of current U.S. dollars)
FY2008
%
Sector
FY2006
Request
Change
Good Governance
354.22
507.39
43.2%
Human Rights
90.32
81.98
-9.2%
Maternal and Child Health
738.85
608.53
-17.6%
Family Planning/Reproductive Health
429.82
332.29
-22.7%
Basic Education
520.80
535.30
2.8%
Trade and Investment
408.74
238.58
-41.6%
Agriculture
561.99
498.72
-11.3%
Environment
292.11
248.73
-14.9%
Counter-terrorism
157.05
185.27
18.0%
Rule of Law
210.73
317.28
50.6%
Source: U.S. Department of State Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification,
FY2008, and CRS calculations.
Presidential Initiatives. The Bush Administration has made several pledges
for multi-year increases in foreign aid that affect the FY2008 budget. Two initiatives
focus on health issues — HIV/AIDS and malaria — while another promises to
double assistance to Africa. The Millennium Challenge Corporation, launched in
2004, administers performance-based aid to countries showing a strong commitment
to sound economic policies and good governance.
HIV/AIDS. In launching this five-year initiative in 2003, the President pledged
to provide a total of $15 billion by FY2008. With the $4.15 billion request in Global
HIV/AIDS Initiative (GHAI) funds, $346 million in CSH, and a $300 million
contribution to the Global Fund from the Department of Health and Human Services,
total funding over the five year period would meet the pledge. On May 30, 2007,

CRS-20
President Bush announced a follow-on plan to provide a total of $30 billion through
FY2013.
Malaria. The President announced an increased focus on malaria in 2006,
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.
Africa. Prior to the 2005 G-8 Summit, the Administration announced that it
would double U.S. assistance to Africa by 2010. The FY2008 request keeps the
doubling pledge on track. Excluding Millennium Challenge compacts, bilateral
assistance to the region would increase by 53% in 2008, largely driven by HIV/AIDS
funds.
MCC. In announcing the creation of the new independent Millennium
Challenge Corporation, the President pledged $5 billion annual funding by FY2006.
In fact, requests have never topped $3 billion a year, which is also the amount
requested for FY2008. 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.
HIV/AIDS and Tuberculosis Funding. Increased levels of funding for
HIV/AIDS and TB programs drive the overall increase in the foreign aid budget.
Funded through a number of accounts, the largest share is managed by the State
Department’s Office of the Global HIV/AIDS Coordinator for PEPFAR-focus
countries. Other AIDS funding is provided through the Child Survival and Health,
ESF, SEED, and FSA accounts. Other funds are provided in the Departments of
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bills for the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health, and the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
In previous budget requests, the Administration proposed making a contribution
to the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and TB from three accounts: the Global
HIV/AIDS Initiative; Child Survival and Health; and the Department of Health and
Human Services. The Administration’s requests have totaled $300 million each year,
shared equally among the three sources. This year, the Administration proposes
making the $300 million contribution entirely from HHS. In previous years,
Congress has provided increased resources for the Global Fund beyond that requested
by the Administration, providing it with $544.5 million in FY2006 and $625 million
in FY2007. (These figures do not include the HHS portion of the contribution that
has ranged between $99 million in fiscal years 2003, 2005, 2006, and 2007, and $149
million in FY2004.)
This year’s budget request includes a substantial increase for the Global
HIV/AIDS Initiative (GHAI), the account that funds the 15 focus countries under the
PEPFAR initiative. Funding for GHAI would reach $4.15 billion, up from $3.25
billion in FY2007. The CSH account would fund most other HIV/AIDS programs
in non-focus countries at about $314 million. Funds to address tuberculosis would

CRS-21
total $89.9, with most of the funds coming from the CSH account. Total foreign
operations funding for AIDS and TB programs would top $4.5 billion.18
MCC Compacts and Other Aid Accounts. When first announced in 2002,
the initiative was portrayed as being in addition to, not a substitute for, existing U.S.
aid programs. This portrayal led to the expectation that a country that signed a
Compact would not see funding for other programs decrease. As the program got up
and running in 2004, and in subsequent fiscal years, a stronger argument can be made
that Compact countries are seeing cuts in other types of aid programs. With the
FY2008 budget request, the correlation between MCC and other types of assistance
became more apparent with Administration officials stating the aid coordination
process included linkages between the two aid sources. In addition, officials said that
the promise made at the time of MCC’s creation of it being additive in nature did not
apply at the country level, but rather to overall U.S. foreign assistance funding levels.
The new budgeting process created by State’s F bureau sought to coordinate all
foreign aid programs within State, USAID, and some related independent agencies,
including MCC. Of the eleven compact countries, all but Vanuatu have seen cuts in
other aid programs since FY2006. It should be noted, however, that Armenia and
Georgia were already scheduled for reduced assistance as FSA (Assistance for the
Independent States of the Former Soviet Union) countries are eventually graduated
from aid. Table 8 provides compact countries and their levels of assistance for the
last four years. USAID also provides assistance to help countries become eligible for
the MCC program.19
Table 8. Compact Countries, U.S. Assistance, FY2005-FY2008
(millions of current U.S. dollars)
MCC
FY2007
FY2008
Country
Compact
FY2005
FY2006
Requesta
Request
$236 million
Armenia
85.47
76.31
58.14
40.78
over 5 years
$307 million
Benin
17.14
16.73
12.01
14.01
over 5 years
$110 million
Cape Verde
1.85
7.01
1.95
2.42
over 5 years
$461 million
El Salvador
40.39
47.78
35.09
27.51
over 5 years
$295 million
Georgia
107.32
87.39
75.84
66.42
over 5 years
$547 million
Ghana
40.77
72.10
37.92
44.29
over 5 years
18 For more information, see CRS Report RL33485 U.S. International HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Spending: FY2004-FY2008
.
19 For more information, see CRS Report RL32427 Millennium Challenge Account.

CRS-22
MCC
FY2007
FY2008
Country
Compact
FY2005
FY2006
Requesta
Request
$215 million
Honduras
40.15
53.11
30.76
42.51
over 5 years
$110 million
Madagascar
25.24
40.67
22.01
35.66
over 4 years
$461 million
Mali
42.25
42.48
37.70
32.88
over 4 years
$175 million
Nicaragua
42.71
50.18
26.33
32.01
over 5 years
$66 million over
Vanuatu
2.34
2.22
2.35
2.31
5 years
Source: Millennium Challenge Corporation ([www.mcc.gov]); U.S. Department of State Summary
Tables, Congressional Budget Justifications, FY2008 and FY2007.
a. Estimates for FY2007 have not been finalized. Figures used here reflect requested amounts.
Use of Supplementals. Supplemental resources for Foreign Operations
programs, which in FY2004 exceeded regular Foreign Operations funding, have
become a significant channel 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 and that
some items, particularly relating to Iraq, should be incorporated into the regular
appropriations cycle. 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. Figure 3 shows
the growing reliance on Foreign Operations supplementals. A supplemental request
for FY2007 totaled $5.99 billion, including $350 million in P.L. 480 food aid.20
Congress approved a FY2007 supplemental bill (H.R. 2206) that was signed by the
President on May 25 providing $6.146 million in international affairs spending,
including $460 million in international food assistance.
20 For more information, on the FY2007 Supplemental, see CRS Report RL33900 FY2007
Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, Foreign Affairs, and Other Purposes.



CRS-23
Figure 3. Supplemental Funding for
Foreign Operations
Source: CRS calculations based on enacted appropriations measures.
Note: Figures are in current U.S. dollars. All figures include regular and supplemental appropriations
with the exception of FY2008.
FY2008 Emergency Request. With the FY2008 regular budget, the
Administration also presented Congress with an FY2008 GWOT emergency request.
The FY2008 GWOT request is not described as a supplemental by the
Administration, but designates the spending as emergency. It is unclear whether
Congress will consider this request as part of the FY2008 regular budget, or
separately as an emergency supplemental measure. The package includes a total of
$3.301 billion: $1.367 billion for foreign operations and $1.935 billion for State
Department operations. Foreign aid programs would receive $1.11 billion for Iraq
($772 million) and Afghanistan ($339 million) in ESF funds for reconstruction and
stability programs. Iraq would also receive $159 million in International Narcotics
Control and Law Enforcement funds for human rights, anti-corruption and rule of law
programs.
The total also includes a $35 million request to assist Iraqi refugees in
neighboring countries and conflict-affected populations in Iraq. Operating expenses
for USAID would total $61.8 million for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
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. Assistance to Iraq consisted of small sums to support Iraqi
opposition groups in the early 2000s, but picked up precipitously in FY2004, and
then fell to $1.6 billion in FY2006 and roughly $4 billion in FY2007. Table 9 tracks

CRS-24
funding to both countries from FY2002 through FY2008 and includes both regular
budgets and supplemental funds. Amounts for FY2008 represent requested amounts.
FY2007 regular and supplemental funding for Iraq and Afghanistan together
comprises about 15% of total foreign aid spending. The share of the FY2008 budget
would be about 14%.
Table 9. Funding for Iraq and Afghanistan, FY2002-FY2008
(millions of current U.S. dollars)
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
Iraq
25.0
2,890.0
17,849.5
27.7
1,635.8
2,291.6
1,322.8
Afghan
686.1
589.6
1,798.7
2,674.1
920.3
1,721.8
1,406.1
Source: U.S. Department of State, Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justifications, FY2004
through FY2008, and CRS calculations.
Notes: FY2007 estimates are preliminary numbers provided by the State Department. For more
information on U.S. assistance to Iraq, see CRS Report RL31833 Iraq: Reconstruction Assistance, by
Curt Tarnoff.
Congressional Action
Budget Resolution
The annual budget resolution is non-binding legislation that expresses
Congressional intent with regard to broad spending issues, and provides guidance to
the Appropriations Committees on spending limits. The Appropriations Committees
use the budget resolution to arrive at discretionary allocations (called 302b
allocations) for each of the spending panel’s subcommittees which act as spending
ceilings for each bill.
On March 23, 2007, the Senate passed the FY2008 Budget Resolution
(S.Con.Res. 21) that included $39.8 billion in international affairs spending authority.
This amount includes $1.2 billion more than the President’s request, as well as his
request for $3.3 billion in emergency funds for Iraq and Afghanistan. The Senate
Budget Committee had reported out the budget resolution with a cut to the request.
During floor consideration, the Senate approved an amendment to restore $2.2 billion
to the foreign affairs budget. The House passed its version of the FY2008 Budget
Resolution (H.Con.Res. 99) on March 29, providing $35.3 billion for international
affairs. This is $1.2 billion less than the President’s request.
The House and Senate approved the conference report on May 17, 2007 in
which the lower house figure for international affairs was adopted. The overall
budget sets a total discretionary figure of $954 billion from which allocations will be
derived that will guide the Appropriations Committees in writing the FY2008
spending measures. The House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on State,

CRS-25
Foreign Operations and Related Agencies have held hearings on the FY2008 budget,
but neither have yet marked up a bill. House and Senate Appropriations Committee
chairmen have announced their intentions to have bills completed by July 4. The
State, Foreign Operations bill is tentatively set expected to move in June.

CRS-26
Appendix A. Acronyms
Funding Accounts:
ACI
Andean Counterdrug Initiative
CSH
Child Survival and Health
DA
Development Assistance
DF
Democracy Fund
ERMA
Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance
ESF
Economic Support Fund
FMF
Foreign Military Financing
FSA
Freedom Support Act — Assistance to the Independent States of
the Former Soviet Union
GHAI
Global HIV/AIDS Initiative
IDFA
International Disaster and Famine Assistance
IMET
International Military Education and Training
INCLE
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement
MCC
Millennium Challenge Corporation
MRA
Migration and Refugee Assistance
NADR
Non-proliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining, and Related
Programs
PEPFAR
President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief
PKO
Peacekeeping Operations
PL 480
Food aid
PMI
President’s Malaria Initiative
SEED
Support for Eastern European Democracy Act — Assistance for
Eastern Europe and the Baltic States
TI
Transition Initiatives

CRS-27
Other:
DFA
Director of Foreign Assistance
AFR
Africa
EAP
East Asia and Pacific
EUR
Europe and Eurasia
LAC
Latin America and Caribbean
NE
Near East
SCA
South and Central Asia
USAID
U.S. Agency for International Development

CRS-28
Appendix B. Foreign Aid Country Categories
Rebuilding: Countries in or emerging from internal or external conflict.
Afghanistan
Lebanon
Colombia
Liberia
Cote d’Ivoire
Nepal
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Sierra Leone
Haiti
Somalia
Iraq
Sudan
Kosovo
Transforming: Low or lower-middle income, meeting performance criteria.
Benin
Mali
Bolivia
Mongolia
Brazil
Mozambique
Bulgaria
Namibia
East Timor
Nicaragua
El Salvador
Philippines
Gambia
Samoa
Ghana
Sri Lanka
Honduras
Tanzania
India
Thailand
Lesotho
Uruguay
Madagascar
Vanuatu
Sustaining Partnership: Upper-middle income; aid sustains partnerships.
Argentina
Marshall Islands
Bahamas
Mauritius
Bahrain
Mexico
Belize
Oman
Botswana
Panama

CRS-29
Chile
Poland
Costa Rica
Portugal
Croatia
Qatar
Cyprus
Russia
Czech Republic
Saudi Arabia
Eastern Caribbean
Seychelles
Equatorial Guinea
Singapore
Estonia
Slovakia
Gabon
Slovenia
Greece
South Africa
Hungary
Taiwan
Ireland
Trinidad & Tobago
Israel
Turkey
Kuwait
United Arab Emirates
Latvia
Developing: Low or lower-middle income, not yet meeting performance criteria.
Albania
Laos
Algeria
Macedonia
Angola
Malawi
Armenia
Maldives
Azerbaijan
Mauritania
Bangladesh
Moldova
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Montenegro
Burkina Faso
Morocco
Burundi
Niger
Cambodia
Nigeria
Cameroon
Pakistan
Cape Verde
Papua New Guinea
Central African Republic
Paraguay

CRS-30
Chad
Peru
Comoros
Republic of the Congo
Djibouti
Romania
Dominican Republic
Senegal
Ecuador
Serbia
Egypt
Solomon Islands
Ethiopia
Suriname
Fiji
Swaziland
Georgia
Tajikistan
Guatemala
Togo
Guinea
Tonga
Guinea-Bissau
Tunisia
Guyana
Turkmenistan
Indonesia
Uganda
Jamaica
Ukraine
Jordan
Uzbekistan
Kazakhstan
Vietnam
Kenya
Yemen
Kyrgyz Republic
Zambia
Restrictive: Significant freedom and human rights issues.
The State Department does not provide a list of restrictive countries. The list
is determined by those countries that have restrictions on the receipt of U.S.
assistance either by statute or Secretarial determination. Such countries could
include Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Syria and Sudan.

CRS-31
Appendix C. State Department and Related Agencies Appropriations
(millions of current dollars)
FY2006
FY2007
FY2007
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
Actuala
Estimate
Supp.
Request
Emergency
House
Senate
Final
State Department
Diplomatic & Consular Program
5,692.3
4,314.0
870.7
4,942.7
1,881.6
Public Diplomacy
(334.7)
(329.7)
(20.0)
(358.9)
0.0
Worldwide Security Upgrades
(730.8)
(766.0)
(96.5)
(964.8)
0.0
Ed & cultural exchange prog. (U.S. Information
Agency)
431.3
445.3
20.0
486.4
0.0
Office of Inspector General
30.9
30.0
36.5
32.5
0.0
Representation allowances
8.2
8.2
0.0
8.2
0.0
Protection of foreign missions & officials
9.3
9.3
0.0
18.0
0.0
Embassy security/constr/maintenance
591.1
593.0
0.0
792.5
0.0
Worldwide security upgrades
898.6
897.0
0.0
806.9
0.0
Emergency-diplomatic & consular services
43.9
4.9
0.0
19.0
0.0
Repatriation loans
1.3
1.3
0.0
1.3
0.0
Payment American Inst. Taiwan
19.5
15.8
0.0
16.4
0.0
Foreign Service Retirement Fund
131.7
125.0
0.0
122.5
0.0
Capital Investment Fund
58.1
58.1
0.0
70.7
0.0
Centralized Information Tech Modernization
68.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total, Administration of Foreign Affairs
7,984.7
6,501.9
927.2
7,317.1
1,881.6

CRS-32
FY2006
FY2007
FY2007
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
Actuala
Estimate
Supp.
Request
Emergency
House
Senate
Final
International Organ. & Conf.
Contributions to international organizations
1,151.3
1,151.3
50.0
1,354.4
53.0
Contributions to international peacekeeping
1,152.1
1,135.3
283.0
1,107.0
0.0
Total International Organ. & Conf.
2,303.4
2,286.6
333.0
2,461.4
53.0
Total International Commissions
66.5
67.0
0.0
133.5
0.0
Related Appropriations
Int’l Cntr for Middle East-West Dialogue-Trust
4.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Int’l Cntr for Middle East-West Dialogue Program
0.7
0.9
0.0
0.9
0.0
Asia Foundation
13.8
13.8
0.0
10.0
0.0
National Endowment for Democracy
74.0
74.0
0.0
80.0
0.0
East-West Center
19.0
19.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
Eisenhower Exchange
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.0
Israeli Arab Scholarship
0.4
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.0
Total Related Appropriations
113.3
108.6
0.0
101.8
0.0
Total State Department
10,467.9
8,964.1
1,260.2
10,013.8
1,934.6
International Broadcasting
Capital Improvements
10.8
8.0
0.0
10.7
0.0
Broadcasting Operations
668.3
602.4
10.0
618.8
0.0
Broadcasting to Cuba
0.0
33.6
0.0
38.7
0.0

CRS-33
FY2006
FY2007
FY2007
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
Actuala
Estimate
Supp.
Request
Emergency
House
Senate
Final
Total International Broadcasting
679.6
644.0
10.0
668.2
0.0
TOTAL State & Broadcasting
11,147.5
9,608.1
1,270.2
10,682.0
1,934.6
a. FY2006 estimates include FY2006 supplemental funding (P.L. 109-234) and reflect a 0.28% rescission within Sec. 638, P.L. 109-234 and a 1.0% across-the-board rescission.

CRS-34
Appendix D. Foreign Operations Appropriations
(millions of current dollars)
FY2006
FY2007
FY2007
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
Actuala
Estimate
Supp
Request
Emergency
House
Senate
Final
Export-Import Bank (net)
97.5
55.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
Overseas Private Investment Corporation (net)
(161.1)
(196.0)
0.0
(159.5)
0.0
Trade & Development Agency
50.4
50.3
0.0
50.4
0.0
Subtotal, Export Aid
(13.2)
(90.7)
0.0
(108.1)
0.0
Child Survival & Health
1,652.2
1,718.2
161.0
1,564.3
0.0
Development Assistance
1,525.3
1,508.8
0.0
1,041.2
0.0
International Disaster & Famine Assistance
579.0
361.4
165.0
297.3
0.0
Transition Initiatives
39.6
39.6
0.0
37.2
0.0
Development Credit Authority
7.9
8.4
0.0
7.4
0.0
Development Credit Authority Subsidy
(21.0)
0.0
0.0
(21.0)
0.0
USAID Operating Expenses
724.7
623.7
8.7
609.0
61.8
USAID Capital Investment Fund
69.3
69.3
0.0
126.0
0.0
USAID Inspector General
35.6
35.6
3.5
38.0
0.0
Economic Support Fund
4,293.7
2,455.0
2,624.3
3,319.6
1,111.0
Iraqi Relief & Reconstruction FundB
5.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
International Fund for Ireland
13.4
13.4
0.0
0.0c
0.0
Eastern Europe & Baltic States (SEED)
357.4
273.9
214.0
289.3
0.0
Independent States Former Soviet Union (FSA)
508.9
452.0
0.0
351.6
0.0

CRS-35
FY2006
FY2007
FY2007
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
Actuala
Estimate
Supp
Request
Emergency
House
Senate
Final
Inter-American Foundation
19.3
19.3
0.0
19.0
0.0
African Development Foundation
22.8
22.8
0.0
30.0
0.0
Peace Corps
319.9
318.8
0.0
333.5
0.0
Millennium Challenge Corporation
1,752.3
1,752.3
0.0
3,000.0
0.0
Global HIV/AIDS Initiative
1,975.1
3,246.5
0.0
4,150.0
0.0
Democracy Fund
116.6
94.1
260.0
0.0
0.0
International Narcotics Control & Law Enforcement
580.1
472.4
252.0
634.6
159.0
Andean Counterdrug Initiative
727.2
721.5
0.0
442.8
0.0
Migration & Refugee Assistance
858.8
832.9
130.5
773.5
35.0
Emergency Refugee & Migration Assistance Fund
29.7
55.0
55.0
55.0
0.0
Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining
406.0
406.0
57.5
464.0
0.0
Conflict Response Fund
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Treasury Department Technical Assistance
32.8
19.8
2.8
24.8
0.0
Debt Restructuring
64.4
64.4
0.0
207.3
0.0
Subtotal, Bilateral Economic Assistance
16,696.0
15,585.1
3,934.3
17,794.4
1,366.8
International Military Education & Training
85.9
85.9
0.0
89.5
0.0
Foreign Military Financing
4,464.9
4,550.8
265.0
4,536.0
0.0
Peacekeeping Operations
351.3
223.3
230.0
221.2
0.0
Subtotal, Military Assistance
4,902.1
4,860.0
495.0
4,846.7
0.0

CRS-36
FY2006
FY2007
FY2007
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
Actuala
Estimate
Supp
Request
Emergency
House
Senate
Final
World Bank: Global Environment Facility
79.2
79.2
0.0
106.8
0.0
World Bank: Int’l. Development Association
940.5
940.5
0.0
1,060.0
0.0
World Bank: Multilateral Investment Guarantee Fund
1.3
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
IADB: Enterprise for Americas MIF
1.7
1.7
0.0
29.2
0.0
IADB: Inter-American Investment Corporation
1.7
0.0
0.0
7.3
0.0
Asian Development Bank: Asian Development Fund
99.0
99.0
0.0
133.9
0.0
African Development Bank
3.6
3.6
0.0
2.0
0.0
African Development Fund
134.3
134.3
0.0
140.6
0.0
European Bank for Reconstruction & Development
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
International Fund for Agricultural Development
14.9
14.9
0.0
18.1
0.0
International Organizations & Programs
326.2
326.2
0.0
289.4
0.0
Subtotal, Multilateral Assistance
1,603.4
1,599.4
0.0
1,788.4
0.0
Rescissions - ESF
(47.0)
(200.0)
(13.0)
0.0
0.0
Rescission - PKO
0.0
(7.0)
0.0
0.0
0.0
Foreign Service Retirement & Disability Fund
(mandatory)
42.0
38.7
0.0
36.4
0.0
Foreign Operations Total
23,183.3
21,785.5
4,416.3
24,357.8
1,366.8
Related Independent Agencies
Comm for Preservation/Heritage Abroad
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.0
Comm Int’l Religious Freedom
3.0
3.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
Comm Sec and Cooperation in Europe
2.0
2.0
0.0
2.0
0.0

CRS-37
FY2006
FY2007
FY2007
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
FY2008
Actuala
Estimate
Supp
Request
Emergency
House
Senate
Final
Cong-Exec Comm People’s Republic of China
7.0
6.0
0.0
5.0
0.0
HELP Commission
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
US-China Economic & Security Review Comm
3.0
3.0
0.0
4.0
0.0
US Senate Interparliamentary Groups


0.0

0.0
US Institute of Peace
22.1
22.1
0.0
30.0
0.0
State & Broadcasting Total
11,147.5
9,608.1
1,270.2
10,682.0
1,934.6
State Dept, Foreign Ops & Related Agencies Total
34,368.4
31,430.2
5,686.5
35,084.3
3,301.4
P.L.480 Food AidD
1,489.0
1,215.0
460.0
1,219.4
0.0
Source: U.S. Department of State budget documents; House and Senate Appropriations Committees; and CRS calculations.
a. Includes regular and supplemental appropriations.
b. Funds for Iraq reconstruction were drawn from a separate Iraqi Relief and Reconstruction Fund (IRRF) prior to FY2007, after which assistance has come from traditional aid
accounts.
c. A $1 million level is included in ESF for Ireland.
d. P.L. 480 is appropriated in the Agriculture Appropriations measure. Figure includes $10 million for the Emerson Humanitarian Trust