The Cable

Romney calls for a broad rethink of foreign aid

Mitt Romney pledged Tuesday to shift foreign aid toward the private sector and deprioritize humanitarian aid in favor of promoting free enterprise and business development around the world.

In remarks at the Clinton Global Initiative, Romney laid out his most detailed proposals on foreign aid thus far, including his plan to move foreign aid to rely more on public-private partnerships that enlist American corporations to the cause of helping the developing world.

"Free enterprise has done more to bless humanity than any other economic system not only because it is the only system that creates a prosperous middle class, but also because it is the only system where the individual enjoys the freedom to guide and build his or her own life. Free enterprise cannot only make us better off financially, it can make us better people," Romney said.

He said that America was a compassionate nation but that Americans wonder why foreign aid often falls victim to corruption and doesn't seem to solve the problems of the developing world. Romney believes that is because the private sector is now playing a much larger role in the developing world than foreign governments.

"If foreign aid can leverage this massive investment by private enterprise, it may exponentially expand the ability to not only care for those who suffer, but also to change lives," Romney said. "For American foreign aid to become more effective, it must embrace the power of partnerships, access the transformative nature of free enterprise, and leverage the abundant resources that can come from the private sector."

Romney then said he would lower the priority of foreign aid as a means to address humanitarian needs, such as health, as well as foreign aid as a means to promote U.S. strategic interests. He said the foreign aid goal that will receive "more attention and a much higher priority" if he is elected would be "aid that elevates people and brings about lasting change in communities and in nations."

Romney invoked the name of Muhammed Bouazizi of Tunisia, "the street vendor whose self-immolation sparked the Arab Spring," and said his protest was based on his desire to work to provide for his family.

"Work. That must be at the heart of our effort to help people build economies that can create jobs for people, young and old alike," Romney said. "Work builds self-esteem. It transforms minds from fantasy and fanaticism to reality and grounding. Work will not long tolerate corruption nor quietly endure the brazen theft by government of the product of hard-working men and women."

A Romney administration would initiate "Prosperity Pacts" through which the U.S. government would work with the private sector to eliminate trade and investment barriers in developing nations in exchange for U.S. aid packages that focus on "developing the institutions of liberty, the rule of law, and property rights," he said.

"The aim of a much larger share of our aid must be the promotion of work and the fostering of free enterprise," said Romney. "Nothing we can do as a nation will change lives and nations more effectively and permanently than sharing the insight that lies at the foundation of America's own economy--free people pursuing happiness in their own ways build a strong and prosperous nation."

"I've laid out a new approach for a new era," he said. "We'll couple aid with trade and private investment to empower individuals, encourage innovators, and reward entrepreneurs."

Romney started his speech with a joke about Clinton's speech endorsing President Barack Obama during the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte.

"If there's one thing we've learned this election season, it's that a few words from Bill Clinton can do any man a lot of good," Romney said. "After that introduction, I guess all I have to do is wait a day or two for the bounce."

Note: The headline on this story has been changed to better reflect Romney's proposals.

Mario Tama/Getty Images

The Cable

Defense bill stalls as Republicans and Democrats blame each other

Every year, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is the one bill that gets significant floor debate and legions of amendments before being passed, but this year could be different. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Armed Services ranking Republican John McCain (R-AZ) are fighting over the issue now.

Reid actually tried to bring the NDAA up for debate on Saturday, Sept. 22, at 1:40 in the morning, after the Senate had discharged all of its business and well after almost all senators had left town for their pre-election recess.

Senate Minority Jon Kyl (R-AZ) objected to Reid's move because Reid wanted unanimous consent to structure the debate with limited amendments and because Kyl couldn't check with his caucus, as almost all senators had left the chamber.

McCain wants open amendments, as has been the practice in the past. McCain's office accused Reid of calling up the bill just to be able to say he gave Republicans the chance to debate the NDAA, even if that chance came in the middle of the night when no one was around.

"This was nothing more than a cheap procedural ploy to divert blame for the Senate's failure -- for the first time in a half-century -- to debate and pass the most important piece of national security legislation that Congress considers," a McCain spokesman told The Cable.

"Ever since the bill was reported out of the Senate Armed Services Committee in May, Senator McCain has gone to the floor time and again asking Senator Reid to bring the NDAA to the floor for debate, as has been the Senate's practice for 50 years. For four months, Senator Reid has refused these requests, and the Senate under his leadership has been declared the least productive since 1947," the spokesman said.

"So literally in the dead of night -- at 1:40 a.m. Saturday morning and after the last vote when all but a few Senators had gone home -- Senator Reid puts forward this gambit to ask for a Unanimous Consent agreement to move to NDAA with limited amendments at some unspecified time during the lame-duck session after the elections," the spokesman said. "As Senator Kyl correctly pointed out that morning on the floor, Senator Reid intentionally posed this request -- which requires Unanimous Consent from all 100 senators -- after the Senate's business was essentially done and most senators had gone home. Even by Senator Reid's standards, this was not a serious attempt to address this critical legislation."

In the past, the bill has become the vehicle for legislative items of all shapes and sizes, such as legislation increasing penalties for hate crimes, because it is the most likely bill to be completed before year's end and is sure to pass.

After Reid tried to call up the bill and limit debate to only "relevant" amendments, Kyl decried the tactic and said Reid was ignoring the fact that McCain and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) had been working on an agreement to move the bill.

"Everybody knows that you can't get unanimous consent of your colleagues when they're all gone at 1:40 a.m. in the morning without any advance notice that the request was going to be made," Kyl said. "We don't know what our members would agree to, whether they would agree to limiting this to relevant amendments or not... What mostly bothers me is the implications, therefore, that the leader's all for taking it up and it's Republicans that are objecting."

Reid is indeed arguing that Kyl's objection means that Republicans are in fact holding up the bill and that the GOP has been holding up the defense bill for six months. A Democratic Senate leadership aide told The Cable Monday that Democrats intended to point to Kyl's objection to argue that the GOP is holding up the defense bill.

"It's odd that Republicans would lament the Defense Authorization bill's status when one of their own leaders objected to Senator Reid's request to take it up and pass it on Saturday," the aide said. "Senator Reid has been telling Senator McCain and others for over two months now that he'd bring Defense Authorization to the floor once Republicans agreed to actually debate the bill and forego irrelevant amendments. For over two months, his offer has been rejected. Saturday made it clear yet again: Republicans would rather play political games than advance important legislation."