FY26 State Department Posture: Bureau of Political Affairs

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

from the third highest-ranking officer of the Department of State, the Under Secretary for Political Affairs, or P as the position is referred to inside of the State Department. P oversees and directs, via the regional bureaus, the work of all of our embassies abroad, and it has enormous influence over the deployment and the composition of the Foreign Service. This hearing will provide a greater insight into how the department's reorganization plan will change the division of labor between the so-called regional and functional bureaus, and how the president's America First foreign policy will be implemented in the field. And I will now recognize myself for an opening statement. Under the Biden administration, the State Department, in my opinion, operated without clear lines of command. I believe that it blurred responsibilities in many cases and that it had a culture that prioritized process over the outcomes that the State Department would produce. I would use the DEI office as an example, where they were worried about what the bucket of applicants would look like rather than the outcomes of those applicants and what they were delivering for the American taxpayer. That was a direct quote from the former DEI secretary, Abercrombie-Winstanley. That has changed under President Biden—President Trump and Secretary Rubio. This committee is working to restore real command and control at the State Department, something that the Pentagon has had for decades and something that the State Department desperately needs. We are crafting the first comprehensive, stand-alone State Department authorization bill in over 20 years. This is not meant as a gesture. It is meant as a serious institutional overhaul. We're not doing this for symbolism. We're doing it because there needs to be common sense and logic within our diplomacy. Our goal is simple: bring order, bring clarity, and bring effectiveness to a department that too often prioritized institutional interests above the American interest. A perfect example is how members of Congress, in too many cases, are more concerned about somebody being fired from the State Department after 10 or 15 years of employment when they should be asking how productive those employees were and what were the measurable outcomes that were provided by them approving transgender operas, or drag show tutorials, or DEI musicals, or LGBTQ comic books abroad. Under President Biden, the department suffered from a structural identity crisis. Maybe policy was delivered by one group, altered by another, and implemented by a third, often with no clear authority or accountability. Turf wars between regional and functional bureaus slowed everything down. The Under Secretary for Political Affairs is treated as first among equals, but that phrase itself reveals to me a problem: too many equals, not enough leadership. No mission succeeds without a chain of command, and I believe that diplomacy is no exception. The State Department must operate like a strategic institution, with a clear hierarchy, mission clarity, decisive leadership, and measurable outcomes. It should not be a think tank that looks at the world as an academic exercise with no measurable outcomes, and our reforms aim to correct that. Some will resist this. They'll defend the status quo as if it's sacred. But we've seen what the status quo produces: mission drift, strategic confusion, a sprawling bureaucracy that's often more focused on virtue-signaling than actually projecting American strength abroad. Let us be clear: this is not about copying the Pentagon. It's about applying common sense. At DOD, policy is made at the top through a chain of command that is recognizable to everybody. At the State Department, that discipline has been missing. We don't expect the State Department to be soldiers in uniform, but we should expect it to have a command structure that is recognizable and followed. We can't afford what has happened to happen again, not when adversaries like China and Iran are using every tool at their disposal to undermine American power. We can't have Foreign Service officers that freelance social experimentation. Our vision is straightforward. Functional bureaus and under secretaries should focus on developing policy—clear, coherent, and grounded in national interest. Regional bureaus, with their area expertise, should adapt and execute that policy on the ground. This creates a clear flow of authority, streamlines operations, and ensures accountability at every level. What we've had are regional bureaus providing loose oversight of embassies that frequently operate like personal fiefdoms rather than implementing—rather than the implementing arm of the State Department. Under President Biden, we had embassies funding gender-inclusive leadership through ultimate frisbee in India for $100,000, or spending $425,000 to help Indonesian coffee companies be more gender- and climate-friendly. This hearing is part of a broader effort to realign the State Department with the mission it was meant to serve: putting America first as the State Department of the United States of America. That requires more than tweaks. It requires structural change, cultural change, and a willingness to change the old order. I want to thank our witness for appearing today. We do look forward to your insight as we take the first step towards restoring command and control, discipline, and mission focus at the United States Department of State. And in that, I now recognize my friend and my colleague, the ranking member from New York, Representative Meeks.

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Under Secretary Hooker, for being here today. You've been given quite a job. Last week, your colleague Michael Rigas told the committee that the regional bureaus and the U.S. diplomatic posts that you oversee would somehow fill all the gaps left by this administration's haphazard and shortsighted reorganization of the State Department and its unlawful dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development. Now, that would make sense if this were a reorganization in name only. If the goal were to empower the regional bureaus, we'd expect them to be staffed up and properly resourced. But that's not what's happening. Instead, Secretary Rubio fired 1,300 civil and Foreign Service officers across the department, squandering expertise which American taxpayers paid for and talent your bureaus now need. And rather than fund your work, this administration clawed back, with the help of my colleagues across the aisle, $8 billion in congressionally appropriated funds that was done in a bipartisan manner. Add that on top of your paltry budget request for next year, you're staring at an 85% hole in the State Department's wallet. The department keeps repeating the talking points about having 1,500 domestic office units, but that's not the real issue. The question isn't whether we have too many offices, it's whether we have the right capabilities. In the limited briefings we've received, no one has demonstrated that you do. We shouldn't confuse complexity with inefficiency. America's diplomatic apparatus is specialized, and it needs to be. Many of domestic operations are essential. They provide critical support to our missions overseas. Madam Under Secretary, you said in your confirmation hearing in April, and I quote, "The United States requires a modern diplomatic corps that is ready to meet the challenges of a complex world," unquote. But I'm telling you, Madam Under Secretary, you've been set up to fail. This administration is asking you to do much more with much less. It's like being sent into a war zone with a water gun. You're expected to promote human rights without a Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. You're expected to prevent conflict without a Conflict and Stabilization Operations Bureau. You're expected to investigate war crimes without an Office of Global Criminal Justice. And that's just the beginning. But this is more than a logistical challenge, it's a values problem. This administration has openly declared its hostility to the values that center our foreign policy and give us influence and credibility around the world. Instead of defending democracy, President Trump and the MAGA Republicans cheer on its erosion in Hungary. Instead of standing for the rule of law, they strike lucrative crypto deals in the Gulf. And instead of condemning coup attempts, they cozy up to those who lead them in places like Brazil. And U.S. leadership is in retreat. The president is pulling the United States from multilateral organizations and handing our empty chair to who? China, with UNESCO being the latest example. Our allies are issuing travel warnings not to come to the United States after seeing the administration's assault on international students and arbitrary roundups of people they think look suspicious. And American household incomes and the dollar are both dropping as the president wages nonsensical and self-defeating trade war with the world. Our adversaries are watching all of this and celebrating. They see a United States that is disarming itself strategically, diplomatically, and morally. President Trump's petty, chaotic leadership, after yet another Oval Office meeting with a foreign leader turned into tabloid fodder, is signaling to the world that the United States foreign policy is not driven by values or national interests, but by a quid pro quo regime in service to one would-be king. Now is not the time to gut our diplomacy. Now is the time to strengthen it. But the Trump administration has no process, no vision or strategy to compete and win on the global stage, and it certainly won't achieve our strategic foreign policy goals on a shoestring budget with a hollowed-out staff. This administration's best explanation for all of this, a slogan: America First, that will only leave America last. Madam Secretary, I hope you'll be able to provide more than just slogans today. Thank you, and I yield back my time.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Other members of the committee are reminded that opening statements may be submitted for the record. We're pleased to have the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Allison Hooker, before us today. Your full statements will be made a part of the record, and I'll ask that you keep your spoken remarks to 5 minutes in order to allow time for member questions. And I now recognize you, Under Secretary Hooker, for your opening statement.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you very much, Chairman. Good morning, Chairman Mast, Ranking Member Meeks, and distinguished members of the committee. It's an honor to be here before you today as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. Since stepping into this role just over six weeks ago, I've had the opportunity to accompany Secretary Rubio on three overseas missions, two of which were in support of President Trump. These early engagements were not ceremonial. They were urgent, high-level diplomatic efforts demanding precision, speed, and strategic focus. They reflect the President's clear directive that our diplomacy be focused, effective, and firmly grounded in America First principles. The President's bold approach could not be more timely. The United States faces a global landscape defined by intensifying strategic competition, destabilizing mass migration, transnational crime, unfair trade practices, and the challenges of forging durable partnerships in a rapidly shifting world. Meeting these challenges requires a Department of State that is leaner, sharper, and more responsive, an institution built not for bureaucracy, but for results. Unfortunately, that is not the department we inherited. Let me be clear. As a former civil servant with over two decades of service, I have deep and abiding respect for the dedication and talent of the department's workforce—Foreign Service, civil service, locally employed staff, and others. But even the most skilled workforce cannot thrive within a system that is structurally flawed. For too long, our organization has been burdened by overlapping mandates, unclear chains of command, and a proliferation of single-issue offices detached from our broader national priorities. As the Deputy Secretary of Management and Resources testified before this committee last week, when Secretary Rubio unveiled the reorganization plan on April 22nd, the department had more than 1,500 domestic office units. That's an astonishing figure for an agency whose central mission is to represent American interests overseas. With this complexity has come a lack of accountability to the President and ultimately to the American people. When lines of responsibilities blur and decision-making is spread across multiple actors, it becomes hard to ensure that the department's work is fully aligned with the priorities of the elected leadership. This undermines not only efficiency, but also the most essential democratic principle: that our government agencies must be responsive and accountable to those they serve. Calls for reform are nothing new, but this time reform is not theoretical. It is happening. Under the leadership of President Trump and Secretary Rubio, we are executing a fundamental transformation of the department, one rooted in achieving operational effectiveness and institutional accountability. This reorganization was never about individual people or positions. It was about structure and strategic alignment. And at the heart of this transformation is the empowerment of our regional bureaus and, through them, our posts overseas. By consolidating policy tools under our regional bureaus, we are creating single lines of accountability that will allow us to move faster, speak with greater clarity, and deliver more impactful results. These changes will ensure that our diplomacy is no longer driven by dozens of different offices with competing priorities and authorities, but by a mission-focused corps fully empowered and aligned with the President's priorities. As part of this effort, we are also taking bold action on foreign assistance. For too long, development projects have lacked local buy-in, delivered limited impact, or reflected ideological agendas rather than U.S. strategic interests. In the process, we've alienated partners and created openings for our competitors to expand their influence. That era is over. As of July 1st, ongoing foreign assistance programs of the United States Agency for International Development have been transitioned to the Department of State. This historic transition brings us into alignment with how most of our allies operate, and enables us to treat foreign assistance not as a siloed enterprise, but as a core tool of U.S. foreign policy. This does not mean the United States is stepping back from the world. On the contrary, we remain the largest provider of foreign assistance globally. But moving forward, every dollar we invest abroad will be treated exactly as that: an investment. An investment in American security, an investment in American jobs, and an investment in our great nation's strength. Under President Trump's leadership and with Secretary Rubio's clear direction, we are executing an America First foreign policy that is principled, pragmatic, and unapologetically focused on delivering for the American people. The challenges are immense, but so is our resolve. And now we have an institution designed to meet this moment. I'm deeply honored to serve in this role and to help drive this transformation forward. I look forward to working with Congress in our shared mission to safeguard U.S. interests on the global stage. Thank you, and I welcome your questions.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Thank you, Secretary Hooker. Now I'm going to recognize members alternating between Republican and Democrat sides for 5 minutes of questioning. I'm going to begin by recognizing my colleague, the 435th most important member.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

435 on the chart. Number 1 in your heart. Number

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

1

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

in my heart.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Very good.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

Thank you, brother, and I want to thank ranking member, my fashion consultant and my workout partner. It's always good to see him here. He's an inspiration to me in the workout room. Thank you, ma'am. I kind of feel like The Jeffersons' theme song. I'm kind of moving on up, because this is the second day in a row I've been the first person to ask a dadgum question, so I'm kind of fired up about that, Mr. Chairman, so my question will not be asked 50 times by the time I get to it. So, thank you, ma'am. How do you plan to stop things like foreign aid from going to stuff like drag shows in Peru? I always hear, Well, that's just a small amount of money. But when you're talking tens of millions of dollars, dadgummit, people in East Tennessee, they'll never see that kind of money in their lifetimes, and to me, it just is very discouraging.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. And this is a huge concern of ours and one of the main reasons that those steps have been taken to transition our foreign assistance programs and those who govern our foreign assistance into the regional bureaus. This is one of the chief objectives we've been trying to achieve. You've mentioned just one program. There are dozens of these programs. Programs that would make your hair stand up. And I'm happy to give a list of those if you'd like to see, see additional ones. But

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

I would like for you to get that to me as well in something printed form. I'd appreciate that, ma'am.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, sir. I

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

always ask that and they always agree and say, oh, I'm going to get that to you, and I never get it. So I'd appreciate that, ma'am.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, sir. Well, I've got a good staff sitting behind me. They're taking notes and we'll make sure to get that to you.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

Thank you.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

But sir, just to underscore, this is one of the main objectives of moving foreign assistance into the bureaus so that we do have political leadership governing these programs. And not only are they going to not implement this type of programs with hard-earned American taxpayer money, but they're also going to be able to tailor programs to have the maximum impact in the regional area of responsibility that these bureaus cover. So with the reorganization, as Chairman Mast referred to in his opening remarks as well, we're going to make sure that our foreign assistance serves American interests and also something that American taxpayers can be proud of.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

Do you all have the appropriate channels to conduct oversight and provide transparency when it comes to foreign aid?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, sir. That's part of, again, part of moving the assistance programs that had been conducted under USAID into the department under the regional bureaus to make sure we have that kind of oversight.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

Yes, ma'am. You listed about 3 bureaucracies there, and that always scares me about the transparency. Are y'all concerned about Foreign Service officers advancing their own agendas?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you for that question, Congressman. The way— again, the way that we have structured this is to make sure that all of these programs are being implemented and conducted under political leadership, not just within the regional bureaus, but our ambassadors overseas. They're answerable to the president. They are the president's representative in each of the countries that they've been dispatched to. So I am confident that department— both Foreign Service officers civil service officers, and locally employed staff who will be implementing these programs as well, will be able to do so in a forum that, again, the American people can be proud of.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

Do y'all— how can you take more of the approach of teach a man to fish approach? I love to fish, but I love that analogy. Can y'all— are y'all doing that more now than just putting people in a food line?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, Congressman, thank you for that question. Indeed, that is another objective of our foreign assistance going forward, that we are able to graduate countries that we provide assistance to from just being dependent on that assistance to be able to provide for themselves, or that regional partners are also able to pick up part of the burden. The, the objective is that we will no longer have longstanding dependencies on U.S. foreign assistance, but that these countries, as I said, would graduate from those programs.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

Okay. The 2 things I would hope that we'd promote— this isn't in my notes, but I always— I think we do— we used to do a really good job of this before we got, I think, led astray— is we should promote democracy, and I think we ought to promote capitalism. I think we've done a pretty poor job of that in the past, and I would hope that would be at the top of y'all's agenda. I think that's a couple of things that, at least in the early years, we did a pretty dadgum good job of. So thank you, ma'am, and I yield back the remainder of my 1 second, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Thank you, Representative Burchett.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)SPEAKER_09

Please use it wisely.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Will do. I won't squander it. Ranking Member Meeks.

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Under Secretary, both Secretary Rubio and Deputy Secretary Rigas have said that the State Department's reorganization puts regional bureaus and posts in the lead after single-issue functional offices like Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Bureau, DRL, distorted foreign policy. They assured us that DRL's work isn't going away, but rather being transferred to regional bureaus. Now, i'll start out by saying I have serious concerns about that, because DRL was one of those departments that has enjoyed bipartisan congressional support for decades, where we've not hear heard any of the some of the things that are said now. Now, because some of the restrictions I have in time, I've got a few yes or no questions I would like to ask you so that I can really understand how you did this. Do you have a written plan for absorbing the work formerly done by DRL into the regional bureaus?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Chairman, uh, Ranking Member, for that question. Each bureau is going to tailor its programs to meet the needs of But my

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

question is, do we have one now?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Each regional bureau is formulating their plans for each of these areas. So

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

The answer to that is no. I have limited time. So the answer is that as of right now, you said this, there is no plan, right? There's nothing that you can provide now, but as of right now, there's no plan. Let me ask this question then. Did you consult senior DRL officials or stakeholders before making these changes?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Sir, as Deputy Secretary Rigas shared, there was great consultation taken through

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

Again, that's just a yes or no. Did you consult senior DRL officials or stakeholders before making these changes? Because it seems to me there's no plan now. So I guess the answer has to be that you have not, and some of them are gone. So, to make sure that you're doing something serious as far as policy's concerned to continue that work, you're already handicapped. If there's no plan now, you just decided we're going to cut it. You didn't make a decision. There was no determination that it was no need for it. You absorbed it. There was no consultation with senior DRL officials or stakeholders before deciding to make these changes. So there's nothing that you can provide because we have oversight committee to this committee so that we can look to see whether there was something intelligently done or not. Well, let me ask this question: Did you absorb any staff formerly assigned to DRL into the regional bureaus? Was any staff absorbed, former staff?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Sir, each of these functions are going, are going to continue in the bureau. It's a

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

simple question. You can just ask me yes

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

or no. To perform these functions in the regional bureau.

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

Was any formerly assigned to the DRL, were any of them absorbed into the regional bureau?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm happy to get back to you with a list of officers that are going to be performing these duties going forward.

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

So, I have to make the presumption that none of the individuals who have the expertise, who knew what was going on with reference to DRL, none of them have been absorbed. And so therefore, there is a great number of a brain drain that has taken place as a result of the 1,300 people at the State Department that was left on. Now, let me move on because time is running out. In your opening statement, you said, When lines of responsibility blur and decision-making is spread across multiple actors, it becomes harder to ensure that the department's work is fully aligned with the priorities of elected leadership. Do you think government agencies should reflect the priorities of elected leaders, yes or no?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes.

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

And that's because elected leaders represent the will of the American people. Is that correct?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

That's correct.

Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (D-NY)SPEAKER_02

Yes. So, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a July 18th New York Times article describing a cable from Secretary Rubio instructing the department's workforce to, and I quote, avoid opinion on the fairness or integrity of an electoral process, its legitimacy, or the democratic values of the country are in question. And I see that my time is just about expired, so I will give you additional questions, Madam Secretary, because I have a bunch more about the draft, who did it, and who, whether it was you, whether it was the secretary, or you had any part of it, as well as some other things. So I have much more to talk to you about. And hopefully, when our office sends a letter or phone call to request to have these dialogues and conversations with you, that we will get a response back because we do have oversight responsibilities as being a member of the United States Congress and the Foreign Affairs Committee. Both Democrats, both Republicans and Democrats has that responsibility. Thank you, and I yield back, Mr chair.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Chair now recognizes Representative Issa.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA)SPEAKER_03

You know, I adore my ranking member because there wasn't time for you to answer most of the questions fully, but there was an extra 50 seconds for his closing statement after the bell ran out. Let me switch subjects a little, and mine may be a little bit yes or no, but if they're not, you just tell me. The Millennium Challenge Corporation is an independent U.S. foreign aid agency focused on reducing poverty through economic growth and in a well-governed developing country, and it touts transparency and measurable results. Now, that corporation was formed under the man behind me, the late Henry Hyde. It was formed on a bipartisan basis, and it had, it made the assumption that everything was zero-based. You had to compete for it, you had to earn it, and then you would be checked and measured. If you didn't achieve it, it would be cut. Only if you were achieving it and there was still a need would there continue to be funding. Now, knowing that that's been its mission, and we won't argue whether it's achieved all of its missions or not, isn't that the mission that your administration is redirecting now for the rest of the aid program to meet those same criteria that we broadly created a whole separate corporation to do?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. Yes, but the— as I mentioned in my opening statements, the efforts that we have taken, that Secretary Rubio, that the president has taken, is meant to streamline these functions, meant to streamline these opportunities. If we have multiple siloed efforts underway, it just it takes more time to implement and

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA)SPEAKER_03

Madam Secretary, I couldn't agree with you more. And I want to narrow the question because I believe that you've just begun to do the right thing. I believe that Millennium Challenge Corporation was the right idea, except that I question today whether or not, when we're competing for hearts and minds and for effective helping of foreign countries, if that stated goal shouldn't be for one agency under the Secretary of State combined. So, I'm delighted to see USAID rolled back into State. During the Trump 1 administration, I was designated as the Trade Development Agency head. I would hope that we would do the same thing even further with the other fundings and loan programs. But you said something that I think is very important. You said that things should serve America's interest, and I just want to ask you a couple of questions. They're mostly yes or no. One, is America's interest in alleviating poverty with those countries that if our money were added, we would help them do that, meaning you don't put the money just anywhere, you put it where it can make a difference?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, that's what our assistance programs are aimed to do.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA)SPEAKER_03

Okay, and doesn't that mean that you inherited a countless amount of overlapping programs that have been around for a very long time that had not achieved their goal, were not achieving their goal, and in some cases with countries that were not currently structured to benefit from that money?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

So this is this is exactly the goal of the reorganization as it relates to foreign assistance programs. By putting the foreign assistance programs into the State Department under the governance of the regional bureaus, being executed overseas with oversight from the ambassadors who have been empowered to make sure these programs meet the needs that they were intended for, that's that's exactly the goal of Secretary Rubio.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA)SPEAKER_03

Now, if I can use my remaining time to be a little specific and parochial, recently there was an effort on the House floor in appropriations to defund the Lebanese Armed Forces in their effort to basically to eliminate Hezbollah's ability to regenerate itself and threaten its neighbors. The State Department has continued, along with DOD, the funding of the Lebanese Armed Forces, along with other aid to Lebanon in that effort. Do you stand by that as a good investment in a country trying to emerge from being an occupied state?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Sir, thank you for that question. As is true across the region in the Middle East, the president is aimed at seeing a ceasefire across all of the conflicts that are going on. As you probably are aware, Ambassador Barrack is very much engaged in Lebanon and working on—

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA)SPEAKER_03

in Syria. I appreciate him being special envoy to both.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

and Ambassador to Turkey. He wears multiple hats, as many do in our organization. But he's very much engaged in that, and it's the goal of the administration to ensure that the region returns to stability, peace, and prosperity in the future as well.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA)SPEAKER_03

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yield back.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Chair now recognizes Representative Sherman.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_14

Madam Secretary, I hope you'd focus on the aid that Armenia needs as a result of well over 100,000 people being ethnically cleansed from Artsakh and now living in Armenia. And I hope that you'd direct our ambassador to Pakistan to visit Imran Khan in prison to demonstrate our dedication to the rule of law and to visit Dr. Afridi in prison. This is the man that did more for America than any foreigner since Lafayette, and he languishes in a Pakistani jail. He helped us get bin Laden. Now, I'm inspired by our chair. He talks about Congress not doing its job for 15 years and not focusing on how the State Department was run. I was here I was here for the 20 years. We did, and if you'd watched us on C-SPAN3, you would have seen Congress do a good job. But today's Congress has been canceled because congressional leadership needs 6 weeks to figure out an excuse for not revealing the Epstein files or limiting those revelations only to the very few papers that are in the grand jury testimony. The chair talks about measurable outcomes. I've been here for 30 years. How many times before today have we canceled Congress in order to carry out a pedophile protection project? Zero. It's measurable until now. But measurable outcomes, you don't get that way by looking at 1/10th of one of 1/10th of 1/10th of 1% and finding one mistake or or even a collection of a few mistakes that the State Department and the USAID made. If we did that, we'd cancel the Dodger season because they committed an error last night. Measurable outcomes. We've got the Center for Global Development measuring that 3.3 million people will die this year because of the gutting of USAID. We've got Boston University demonstrating that 300,000 people have already died as a result of that. We've got Secretary Rubio coming to the table you're sitting at there and saying zero people have died. Do you stand by the Secretary in saying that when the richest man in the world took food and medicine from the poorest people in the world, that that has resulted in zero deaths? Because we want measurable outcomes. Is it zero?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. And Um,

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_14

I, I'm asking—

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_14

Asked a yes or no question, Madam Secretary. I asked a yes or no question. I want a yes or no answer. If you don't want to do that, I'll simply go on. Do you stand by the statement of the Secretary of State that zero people have died in the world as a result of the gutting of USAID? Do you stand by it or not? Yes or no?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for your question. I stand by what Secretary Rubio says, and I'm happy

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_14

you. Thank you, because I've got more questions.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Expound if I

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_14

would point out that those people will die chiefly as a result of malaria, AIDS, and tuberculosis. That disease will infect millions of people in poor countries. It will then replicate, mutate, and migrate back here in stronger form. And I know—so I won't ask the question—the State Department has no system to measure how many Americans will die when this more virulent disease comes here because the richest man in the world took medicine away from the poorest. But we've got U.S. taxpayer dollars buying 500 metric tons of emergency food that was destroyed by the State Department. That's measurable. And 80,000 doses of mpox vaccine that were pledged to African nations are about to be destroyed. Are you focused on how we're going to literally burn taxpayer dollars by burning vaccine that is in the State Department warehouse?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm focused on all these things.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_14

Thank you. Well, I hope you will give us a measurable result and tell us what the cost is of the loss, the burning already of the 500 000— 500 metric tons of emergency food and the 800,000 dosages of mpox vaccine. Please respond for the record: How many taxpayer dollars were burned? Finally, Kari Lake testified before us that we couldn't trust the viewership and listenership numbers from Voice of America. Can we trust those numbers? They are measurable. Do you trust the numbers as to what the listenership was?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm not sure that's relevant to the P family issues, but I'm happy to take that question.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)SPEAKER_14

diplomacy is very much part, and you can't do public diplomacy without broadcasting. Of course, we're going to try having gutted Voice of America and its sister stations. I'll point out that those were also Trump administration numbers that Kari Lake said we couldn't trust. So it's glad to know who she trusts. I yield back.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes Representative Moylan.

Rep. James Moylan (R-GU)SPEAKER_06

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Especially now as we're working with the State Department reorganization bill, it's essential that we do hear from the Bureau of Political Affairs, which serves— Of course, I appreciate you coming on over and your deep experience in East Asia affairs. And given Guam's critical role in the region, I look forward to working with you very closely. Now, when it comes to East Asia and the Pacific, of course, the PRC is there, and it's a great threat. They're undermining our maritime security and critical minerals, and we have great vulnerability in our supply chain. And we're confronting a broad, complex range of issues. So, it's important that we have especially this bipartisanship with our allies. And it's undeniable that we really need to work closely with ASEAN and Quad and AUKUS and U.S., Japan, and the Philippines, the trilateral cooperation there, for economic stability in this region. So therefore, it's significant that the Secretary reaffirm our Indo-Pacific focal point of the U.S. foreign policy during ASEAN's conference. And the role of your bureau is to analyze this region's dynamics and crafting strategies and effective engagement. So that's why I'm so happy that you're doing this overhaul and streamlining our strategies and looking at our resource allocations across the department so we can enhance our engagement with our foreign partners. So Under Secretary there, I want to ask you a question. Now, which regions and types of operations should be prioritized to effectively counter China's influence?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Congressman, thank you for that question and also for the opportunity to respond. And I, you know, very focused on East Asia throughout my entire career, but what I've truly enjoyed, not just over the past 6 weeks as I've taken this role, but also my previous work in the first Trump administration, looking at how we are mobilizing our efforts to to compete with China around the world. It's not just about the Indo-Pacific; it's about our engagement globally. So thank you for your focus on this as well. You noted the ASEAN conference that we just attended recently. I had the privilege of going with Secretary Rubio and and being with him for for all of those engagements. And as I mentioned in my opening statement, these were not just ceremonial. They're very urgent. We're talking about urgent issues like supply chains and overseas scam operations that are targeting not just Americans, but our allies and partners as well. So it's important, and the reason we're here today is to speak about the reorganization and its impact. But what we've done to reorganize the department, focusing the focusing power underneath the regional bureaus and also our embassies overseas really gives the purview to the leadership to be able to to plan for competition, not just in Indo-Pacific, but around the world. So we're working very closely with each of the bureau leads and with our ambassadors to ensure we're able to do that.

Rep. James Moylan (R-GU)SPEAKER_06

Thank you. And you served as the special assistant for the Korean Peninsula at the National Security Council during the first Trump administration. As North Korea continues to pose serious threat in the region, how would you characterize the current administration North Korean policy compared to that time?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. Well, I think we can all agree that North Korea continues to pose a threat, not just to the United States, but to the world through its long-range missile program, through its nuclear program. And we are very much paying attention to that, as are our allies in the region. Some of the things we're doing, we're working with the trilateral engagement with Japan and Korea. We're increasing deterrence with both of those allies, also working with our INDOPACOM colleagues to make sure that we can defend the American homeland from any of those threats. And so I look forward to continuing to work on that with Secretary Rubio and with the president going forward. And thank you for your interest in that issue, and I'm happy to stay in touch with you as we develop those plans.

Rep. James Moylan (R-GU)SPEAKER_06

I appreciate that very much. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Chair recognizes Representative Bera.

Rep. Ami Bera (D-CA)SPEAKER_07

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Hooker, I don't know you and we've not met, so I'm going to give you my observations. Prior to coming to Congress, I was medical director of care management for five hospital systems, thousands of employees, then went to the public sector, was chief medical officer for Sacramento County, again, thousands of employees, multiple departments. It's not the same magnitude as the State Department or the United States federal government, but when we did reorganizations, and I'm not against taking a look at programs, looking at efficacy, looking at where we are, we didn't just lay off all the employees. We looked at the folks that we had, looked at their talents, evaluated where they were, came up with a plan, understood what that plan was, what that reorganization, and then where it was appropriate, matched that. We've had several hearings here asking if you would provide us what that strategic plan is, what that looks like, how you're evaluating personnel, who's getting laid off, who's not getting laid off. Again, I appreciate your two decades of service, and I'm sure you've worked with Foreign Service officers, you've worked with men and women that represent the United States of America around the world. I think these are patriotic Americans. I think these folks have been mistreated. I think what DOGE did immediately, laying people off, bringing them back, laying them off, bringing them back, was haphazard. It was dangerous and it's reckless. Again, I'm not sitting up here saying we shouldn't rethink what diplomacy and development in the 21st century looks like. Clearly, the world is different today than it was in the 75 years post-World War II. But we did this in a bipartisan way. What we did after World War II was quite remarkable, creating peace and stability. What we did winning the Cold War in a bipartisan way with Congress, not Democrats and Republicans, but American strategy, was quite remarkable. We won the Cold War without actually going to war. What I would argue is what's happening right now is being done in a partisan way with the executive branch not involving Congress. I appreciate the chairman's desire to do a State Department authorization bill. I appreciate the markup that we had yesterday. And I would urge the administration to work closely with Congress, because if all you do is reorganize diplomacy and development by yourself, we will get the White House one day, hopefully in three years. We will get the majority one day, hopefully in a year and a half. We don't want to keep going back and forth. We want to come up with an American strategy that's not a Republican strategy or a Democratic strategy, one that reflects the world that we live in today. You talked about those challenges: mass migration, trade practices, economic practices that don't reflect today's world, transnational crime, just to name a few, war in Europe, modernizing what NATO looks like, avoiding World War III in Asia. Those are all hugely important things that we have to do to best protect the American people. Again, I would urge you, Secretary Hooker, to work with us on this, to think about what that looks like, to look at the efficiency of programs, to create new programs. I appreciate my colleague from Tennessee saying, you know, we don't want to just give folks fish, we want to teach them how to fish. That is going to run into huge political challenges because many of my red-state Republicans have programs that support farmers to have them grow food to send that food overseas. I would much rather we take our best scientists, have them go to Africa, look at the best modern farming practices, teach them how to farm and feed themselves. That would be a much better way to alleviate hunger in Africa. That isn't how the political system's been set up in the United States. I would much rather us think about global health security and ways to reorganize that so we don't have malaria over here, tuberculosis over here, HIV over here, but is there a better way to do this? Again, I would urge you to work with Congress, with Democrats and Republicans, to think about what a modern State Department, modern aid and development look like, how we work through the interagency operations. But I would also urge you to not haphazardly lay off some of our best foreign policy folks, our best Foreign Service officers, the folks that are actually there to prepare you to do your job, to prepare Secretary Rubio to do his job, the folks that prepared you for that ASEAN conference, they've all been laid off. I just worry about how we're weakening the United States, we're weakening our role in the world. The world is a much better place with the United States. We should work with our allies and friends and modernize what that looks like for the 21st century. For the sake of our kids and our grandkids. We want them to have the same peace, prosperity, and stability as the world. So there's no question here. There's just advice: Work with us on this. Otherwise, we'll just be going back and forth, and it'll weaken the United States. So thank you. I yield back.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Representative yields back. Chair recognizes Representative McCormick.

Rep. Richard McCormick (R-GA)SPEAKER_18

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you for being here today with us. I was kind of chuckling to myself to watch people kind of walk in here, ask you a bunch of questions, not allow you to answer, and then leave, basically painting this administration, yourself, as somebody who has no feelings towards anybody else or the world or any impact on the United States, which is absolutely ridiculous. I think a lot of people right now are getting confused between American-first and American-only interests around the world. I think we just recently passed a bill that shored up our support for the Cox's Bazar region with about a million Rohingya refugees from Myanmar in about 13 square kilometers, which I visited last year with great interest. We have about 26 million refugees around the world right now that are displaced that could cause great upheaval in the social fabric of the world, which could impact us financially and otherwise, which I'm sure you're well aware of, especially with your expertise. For those who don't realize how this this plays out, a person in the Cox's Bazar Rohingya refugee camp survives off about $8 per person per month. Per month, $8 per person per month. A lot of that's from our aid and other people's aid around the world. Let's compare that to a Biden administration that a person who comes across the southern border and then gets put into a non-for-bid contract where they put somebody on a cot and give them three meals a day for $800 per person per day. And then they want to criticize us for mismanagement. I think that's hilarious. I want you to comment on the ridiculous statements that you were not allowed to give in response to on our waste, fraud, and abuse as if we're the bad guys in this when comparing those two examples that are blatant disregard for factual content. I'm going to give you the remainder of my time to respond to things that the other side have not given you an opportunity up to this point. With that, it's your floor.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Congressman, thank you so much for your question and thank you for your interest in the Rohingya in the region. I will start by saying that part of what we've done with our foreign assistance so far is to provide $77 million to Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh. We care very deeply about that issue and will continue to work with our Bureau of South and Central Asia to address those issues and also with other partners in the region to look for ways to bring care and comfort to the refugees there. So, I appreciate the opportunity to respond. There have been so many questions I've not been able to respond to. I'm trying to figure out which one might be the most fun to react to. But just to your initial question about the kinds of foreign assistance that we have terminated, I'd just like to run through a couple of those programs. Maybe a couple of them have been mentioned already today. But there was $1.5 million to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in Serbia's workplace and business communities under the previous administration, under USAID performance. There was $70,000 for production of a DEI musical in Ireland, $2.5 million for electric vehicles in Vietnam, $47,000 for transgender opera in Colombia, $32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru, $2 million for sex changes and LGBT activism in Guatemala, $6 million to fund tourism in Egypt. And I was asked to provide a list of these kinds of programs that we've ended and made sure will not resurface under our leadership and under the reorganization. We will provide a full list of that. But I'd just like to say that it is the President's greatest privilege and his highest priority to make sure that the American people are best and well served, not just here domestically but abroad, and that taxpayer dollars are being spent well and in a way that the American people can be proud of. This reorganization, as I mentioned in my opening statement, was not aimed, just to respond to Representative Sherman question, was not aimed at eliminating the expertise out of the State Department. The State Department is full of, remains full of very capable experts, people that I'm very proud to continue to serve with. The reorganization was aimed at reducing redundancies and to make sure that we've streamlined the policy process so that we can execute effectively and efficiently on the President's priorities, both at home and abroad. Thank you, Congressman, for your question.

Rep. Richard McCormick (R-GA)SPEAKER_18

And thank you. I just want to point out once again, just reinforce all that money— DEI, musicals, operas, comic books, and transitions abroad. I rest my case without a yield.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

The Chair recognizes Representative Jacobs.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just note those are six programs of the over hundreds and hundreds of programs that the State Department and USAID implemented over the years, I know as a former State Department employee myself. But Under Secretary Hooker, I wanted to ask you about the Global Fragility Act and the future of it in this administration. Last week I questioned Deputy Secretary Rigas on this, and as you may already be familiar, hopefully, because it's the law, the Global Fragility Act is a bipartisan landmark law that passed in 2019 that was designed to implement many of the lessons learned from years of costly and unsuccessful U.S. stabilization efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and Somalia. It was designed to make foreign assistance more strategic and effective and more aligned with our policies, something that this current administration talks about. Congress has also made clear its continued bipartisan support. I recently introduced a reauthorization bill with Chair Emeritus McCaul, and the House National Security Appropriations bill just appropriated money for GFA implementation. In response to my questions, Deputy Secretary Rigas testified that GFA would now be implemented by regional bureaus, dismantling the CSO Bureau and firing all of its staff that had previously been in charge of implementing this. Under Secretary Hooker, given this, can you describe your plans to oversee the implementation of this landmark bipartisan law?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman, for your question. I did have the opportunity to watch Undersecretary—excuse me, Deputy Secretary Rigas's hearing, and I do recall your question on that issue. And Deputy Secretary Rigas's answer is still accurate. The regional bureaus will be performing the function of those offices.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Okay. And how will you ensure that this is a priority for regional bureaus to implement and that staff with relevant conflict expertise and background on this legislation are leading its implementation?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Well, that— thank you, Congresswoman, um, for your follow-up question. The entire intention of the reorg was to make sure that regional bureaus are able to execute on just these kinds of issues.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

No, I understand that that's the intention. I want to know how you plan on doing that.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I plan on overseeing the, the bureaus and their leadership and making sure that not just this issue that, um, is very important, but every other issue that we've talked about, um, some of which I had not had a chance to respond, that each of these issues will be integrated fully into each regional bureau. That's my responsibility, is overseeing the bureaus and When it comes to specific issues, I'm happy to work with the senior bureau official to work with you so that you understand how that's being implemented going forward.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Okay, I appreciate that. Almost all of the GFA programs have now been canceled. So I guess what I would like is a written plan to this committee on how you plan on actually ensuring conflict expertise is integrated into the P family, how you are planning on implementing the Global Fragility Act, including ensuring that conflict expertise is going to be housed and prioritized in the regional bureaus, and how you will be carrying out the monitoring, evaluation, and learning requirements, not just of the foreign assistance programs, but of the strategies themselves. Will you commit to providing that plan?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I commit to work with you and with the bureaus to provide answers to your questions.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Okay, not quite committing to provide a plan, but I will look forward to working with you on that. I also want to turn to Sudan. As I'm sure you know, Sudan is now not only the largest and fastest displacement crisis in the world, but now the largest humanitarian crisis ever recorded. Do you agree with the Biden administration's determination that the RSF has committed genocide in Sudan?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for your question on this important issue. We are paying very close attention to Sudan. As you may know, both the leaders of the RSF and the opposition group have both been sanctioned. This is

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

it's a simple question. Do you agree with the genocide determination?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm not familiar with that, with the determination. I'm happy to look into that. But what I can tell you is that we are conducting a review of our policy on Sudan in the Bureau of African Affairs, and I'm happy to be in touch with you as we do that.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Wonderful. Also, because you do not yet have a confirmed Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of African Affairs, nor do you have a special envoy for Sudan as mandated by law, so my time is running out, but I look forward to working with you to make sure that you actually have the relevant expertise in the bureau and in the department to actually be able to prioritize this very important humanitarian crisis. Thank you. I yield back.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you. We do still have expertise on Africa in the department, in the Bureau of African Affairs. Thank you.

Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY)SPEAKER_17

The gentlelady's time has expired. The chair now recognizes himself for 5 minutes. Under Secretary Hooker, thank you for your service and your time here today with us. For the past few Congresses, I've led bills restricting outbound investments into Chinese military and surveillance companies. This Congress, Senator Cornyn and I are leading the FIGHT China Act, which takes both an entity-based and sensitive technology-based approach to outbound investment restrictions and aligns with President Trump's national security memorandum titled America First Investment Policy. Restricting investments into entities and sensitive technologies that threaten the U.S. national security means that these investments could be redirected elsewhere. How should we use outbound investment restrictions to bring ASEAN countries in particular closer to the United States, redirecting investments that have been going from the West into China to other allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. As I was just speaking with Representative Moylan, the Secretary just returned from KL, where he attended the ASEAN Regional Forum, the Foreign Ministers' Meeting, and investment and our bilateral trade relationships and ways to bring greater prosperity to the region were very much on the list of of topics that we talked about with— in each of our bilateral meetings and and ASEAN as a whole. I think this speaks directly to the intention of the reorganization in making sure that our East Asia-Pacific bureau is empowered to have these kind of conversations with our bilateral partners in the region, and that our ambassadors, who are now even more, also more empowered to use their embassies to engage on these topics, that they'll be able to do so going forward with great oversight over each of these.

Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY)SPEAKER_17

Yeah, I think it's beneficial as we look at outbound investment restrictions in China. This is also a way to bring allies in the ASEAN closer to within our orbit. I want to follow up with trade. You mentioned trade. Critics of this administration's trade policy have argued that it risks alienating our allies and driving them toward Xi Jinping's so-called charm offensive. But that narrative totally ignores the reality on the ground. This Indonesia— this announcement of this Indonesia trade agreement is a great example of how the narrative is inconsistent with the reality. Under President Trump's leadership, we're witnessing an unprecedented level of engagement, negotiation, and strategic alignment with partners across the Indo-Pacific. Far from isolating the United States from these partners, this approach is actually reinforcing our economic and security leadership while ensuring that trade deals are fair, reciprocal, and beneficial to the American worker. Can you speak to that, about how this trade policy is advancing our national security and leading to more, not less, economic integration with ASEAN, in particular with this Indonesia deal?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, sir, for that question. You took the words right out of my mouth. We've seen multiple trade deals come through over the past few days. Japan was also announced this morning, the Philippines following the Oval Office meeting between President Marcos and President Trump yesterday. Trade is just one tool in the toolbox that that the president has and that we're using this around the world. It's not just trade for trade's sake. The president has been very focused on restoring the American economy, and this is one way to do that. By focusing on trade, including through the use of tariffs as a tool, the president is able to correct trade imbalances, reduce deficits, and basically bring the American worker jobs back to America. But as you said, sir, this is another tool of our foreign policy.

Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY)SPEAKER_17

One final question about the South China Sea. What form of diplomatic engagement is the is the department using to support the Department of Defense in the strategic prepositioning of defensive assets across the Indo-Pacific theater? We've heard about the drawdown of Marines from Okinawa, repositioning in Guam. We do have these EDCA sites in the Philippines, Subic Bay. When can we get back? When can the Navy get back into Subic Bay? And what is the State Department doing diplomatically to help the Department of Defense position assets for deterrence on a Taiwan scenario?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, sir, for that question. And on the specific movements, I will refer you to the Department of Defense. But to your question of how we're using diplomacy, our ambassador to the Philippines has been here for the visit of President Marcos, who is meeting with President Trump. And she detailed to Secretary Rubio and myself this week just the work that she's doing to meet with all representatives. She has the authority of the president to operate in the Philippines, and so she's meeting with all representatives of the Philippine government to ensure that that diplomacy is taking place. And one final comment, that's been one of the entire purposes of this reorganization, to make sure our ambassadors are enabled and empowered to do just that.

Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY)SPEAKER_17

Thank you very much. My time has expired. Mr. Amo is now recognized.

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to our witness. President Trump's actions are sabotaging America's global standing. Illegally shuttering USAID, freezing foreign assistance programs, and haphazardly firing thousands of State Department employees has weakened our leadership on the world stage and damaged our relationship with our allies. Abandoning our partners and putting international agreements under review at the whim of the administration undermines our credibility and makes our allies less likely to work with us in the future. In June, President Trump announced a review of the Australia-United Kingdom-United States security partnership, known as AUKUS. This review erodes trust with two of our closest allies. It is contrary to the strong bipartisan support for AUKUS here in this Congress. Yesterday, our committee, this very committee, passed Representatives Kim and Dean's bipartisan ARMOR Act, a bill that I am proud to cosponsor that would streamline the work of AUKUS. But despite robust bipartisan support, President Trump is continuing to question our need for AUKUS. It makes me wonder why. So, Secretary Hooker, for this next few questions, please provide a yes or no answer: Do you agree that strengthening security and technological cooperation with the United Kingdom and Australia is good for our national security and supports a free and open Indo-Pacific?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I think there's several components to that. But could you— difficult to say yes or no to each one of

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

them. Pardon?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I said there are different components to that. So yes

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

or no?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

We are cooperating, so yes.

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

Great. As part of AUKUS Pillar 1, the Australian government committed to making a $3 billion investment in the U.S. defense industrial base, of which the first installment of $500 million arrived in February 2025. Is that true?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm not going to get into the specifics of AUKUS, but both the president and Secretary Rubio have expressed support for AUKUS. So I'm interested in— Well, I'm

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

going to continue to ask you some questions about AUKUS. So, because the State Department has a role, so you can choose to not answer. I would I would ask if it is an important thing for us to continue to see Australia directly investing in the United States, contributing to our defense industrial base and supporting good-paying jobs across our country. This should This should be easy. Great. Thank

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX)SPEAKER_19

you. Yes,

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

It seems very clear that the AUKUS partnership is essential for our national security and domestic defense industrial base. So, Madam Secretary, are you willing to commit to us right now that the administration will not pull out of AUKUS? Can you affirm that we will not reduce our commitments under AUKUS?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

So that is not within my authority to be able to do today for you. But what I can say in response to your questions so far is that both the president and Secretary Rubio have expressed support for AUKUS. So I'd be interested in the quotes that you're referring to saying the president isn't supporting this. And actually, it's the Department of Defense having an internal review on AUKUS. Again, that's not my purview to speak about. I welcome— Well, the State

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

Department— excuse me, the State Department does have a role. So don't abdicate the responsibility of the State Department here, because according to public reports, it appears that the Department of Defense is driving the review of AUKUS without the input from the Secretary of State. Shouldn't the State Department have input on one of our closest alliances?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

The Secretary of state has said that if there is any review, that the State Department would take place in that. So that is not, um, I think we have a different view of the quotes that have been said by our leadership.

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

Well, look, I will tell you this, there is a disconnect here, and this is a challenge in the Trump administration. Because a question for you I have now is, did the Department of Defense give the State Department advance notice when the DOD initiated a review of AUKUS in June? Is the State Department participating?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Sir, thank you for your question. I will reiterate, the president and the secretary of state have expressed support for AUKUS. That's the leadership that I follow.

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

Okay. So you agree

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

to the Department of Defense on on their rev- any review they might be doing?

Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI)SPEAKER_26

Well, my point here is, you— the State Department has a role. You have communicated that you agree with me that this is an important agreement and alliance for our national security. So I am hoping that your words are connected to the actions of the president, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense in ensuring that we preserve this essential partnership for our national security and our priorities to our defense industrial base here, and so much more that is positive from international agreements which have been challenged by this administration. The gentleman's time has

Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY)SPEAKER_17

expired. The gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Baird, is now recognized.

Rep. James Baird (R-IN)SPEAKER_20

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, and Madam Under Secretary Hooker. We appreciate you being here, appreciate the job that you do, and we want to make sure that we have the United States well represented in some of these countries. But I really congratulate you on hosting a version of an African leadership summit, and that had the heads of five African nations recently visiting the Oval Office, and those countries included Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mauritania, and Senegal, and they focused on trade and investment opportunities. So, I'm interested in what your takeaway was from that

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. We were very proud of this meeting taking place, and I think that it just demonstrates the commitment to the African continent that President Trump has himself and that the administration has. In terms of the focus, as you said, there was focus on trade, there's focus on diplomacy, and increased attention being paid to not just those countries but to the region as a whole to bring stability, security, and prosperity to the African continent. And that's the goal, and this meeting is just one step in the direction of that goal.

Rep. James Baird (R-IN)SPEAKER_20

So did you find them receptive to the positions you were taking? Because I'm concerned about our adversaries like China moving into some of these countries, and so—

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, sir, for that question. As I said earlier, What we've done with the reorganization is aimed at making sure each of the bureaus and our ambassadors in the region have everything they need to engage in diplomacy and commercial diplomacy in the region. And to your specific question, every diplomatic engagement builds on the other, so we will continue to build and we continue to emphasize the messages that were delivered during those meetings, and I expect there to be great results from that.

Rep. James Baird (R-IN)SPEAKER_20

So, can you add on to to what you what the bureau is doing to reshape and ensure that the U.S. remains the number one preferred trading partner in Africa? You know, I'm interested in agriculture and I've been involved in agriculture all my life, and the commodities that we produce here are second to none. So, we've got that quality, and we also have the logistic capability to get that anywhere in the world. So, so I would just be interested in your thoughts about how America stands in these countries that we mentioned as trading partners.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, sir. Well, as you are, I'm sure, very well aware, President Trump is extraordinarily focused on trade, not just for our diplomatic engagements, but for the benefit of the American voter and taxpayer. So trade will be part of any conversation that we have in our individual relationships in Africa and everywhere else around the world as well.

Rep. James Baird (R-IN)SPEAKER_20

So could you share with me or share with us what you think the opinion is of those countries? For agricultural commodities related to agriculture?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Sir, I'm not able to discuss the details of those specific engagements at this time, but I'm happy to be in touch with you as we continue to engage and as results come from those engagements.

Rep. James Baird (R-IN)SPEAKER_20

Well, you know, I'm interested. I'm interested. I've been interested in where those commodities go. We as a people are very giving, and agriculture is also an important part of that. Those commodities can end up being fungible when they get in-country, and so I'm interested in making sure that the people we designated those for are actually receiving it. So I would appreciate your response and your idea about how we stand in that regard.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, sir, and ensuring that Um, whether it's assistance or commodities that are being traded. Again, one of the main focus points of our reorganization was making sure there's oversight at every single turn. So I will be happy to work with you on that.

Rep. James Baird (R-IN)SPEAKER_20

Thank you, appreciate your response. And, uh, my time's up. I yield back.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Gentleman yields back. Chair recognizes Representative Kamlager-Dove.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member, and thank you, Under Secretary Hooker, for being here today. So, Ms. Hooker, in your nomination hearing, you stated that your priorities as under secretary would be to strengthen our diplomatic workforce, reinforce our relationships with partners, and confront our adversaries with strength and resolve. Is that correct?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes. Okay,

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

Great. So I'd like to focus on how the Trump administration has measured up to those goals in South Asia. So I want to talk about Sri Lanka. Are you familiar with Sri Lanka?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, I'm familiar.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

Okay, great. And so I'm sure then you're aware that Sri Lanka has defaulted on its foreign debt in 2022 and owes significant loans to China, and China is capitalizing on Sri Lanka's inability to pay that debt by taking over control of key infrastructure. Yes? Would you agree?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm aware of the circumstances.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

Okay great. So for Sri Lanka to repay its debt and avoid having to give up more strategic assets to the PRC, it needs to reform its economy and boost economic growth. So can you explain how the Trump administration's proposed 30% tariffs on Sri Lanka helps improve the country's economic outlook and its ability to repay its debt?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question. President Trump's first priority is the American people and ensuring that our economic situation here at home is improving. One tool in his toolbox for doing that, for improving the economy, for ensuring there's balanced trade, are tariffs.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

Right. So I understand that. So if the priority is the American voter and the taxpayer, I'm are you saying that President Trump wants the American taxpayer to pay higher prices for goods?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Could you explain further?

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

Well, do you— is— are you saying that the president wants us to pay more for the goods that we purchase?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm saying that tariffs are a tool in the toolbox. When working with our individual— I

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

understand that—

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

counterparts in other countries. So,

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

Yes. So are you committing that there will be a trade agreement reached with Sri Lanka by August 1st?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

That, Congresswoman, is up to the government of Sri Lanka and how they negotiate that.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

Well, but it's also up to us. And I'm raising this because I don't think—well, I don't know what the president thinks, but I know my constituents in my district don't want to have to pay higher prices. And I also know that, last I checked, we're not onshoring or we're not trying to onshore apparel and garment industries, and we know that Sri Lanka is actually responsible for manufacturing a lot of goods that American businesses sell to American consumers. And so it would make sense that we are able to keep those relationships with Sri Lanka. And in order for that to continue, they need some kind of support as a partner with us, an economic partner with us, so that they can keep those facilities and allow American businesses to continue to produce goods and sell to American consumers at a good price. So, can you commit to anything as it relates to Sri Lanka and this deal?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

For the trade deals, I refer you to the Commerce Department and the USTR Ambassador Jamieson Greer, but they're conducting those negotiations.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

So, how does the tariffs— how do the tariffs improve Sri Lanka's economic outlook with us, for us, in partnership with us?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Congresswoman, thank you for your question. As I mentioned, the tariffs are are aimed at balancing trade. That's the president's objective, and that's how he's using them. On trade issues, again, I would like to defer you— to refer you to my colleagues at the Commerce Department and USTR for the details of the trade deal. But Ms. Hooker,

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

reclaiming my time, I'm asking you these questions because according to your bio, you are the Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs. So you have responsibility, jurisdiction over all of the regional bureaus. You should be able to be talking about this from a policy standpoint to say, what are the pros and what are the cons? I mean, I'm actually curious, listening to your testimony, about what you are actually responsible for.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Oh, I'm happy to talk about that.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

I don't need you to answer that question, but I do want you to think about it. We also have challenges with the Maldives. PRC is making incredible inroads into that region with the Indian Ocean. Trump 1 wanted an embassy. Trump 2 is talking about closing down embassies.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I have to disagree on that point. There is no discussion of closing any embassies or any consulates abroad.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

I don't know where you're getting that information. We've had multiple conversations about the administration wanting to close down embassies. I think in strategic regions, there should be some discussion. And I would think that your role is to actually bring up reasons why we would want to continue to have a presence in strategic regions where China is making inroads.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman. Um, we, we are paying very close attention to that. I can tell you that there are no closures. I can tell you authoritatively that there are no closures planned at this moment. I mean, it is my job to oversee each of the regional.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA)SPEAKER_04

So you're committing, you're committing that you're not going to close any— Thank you, Mr. Chair. But I'm glad that the Undersecretary committed to us not closing down any region, any embassies. So

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

thank you, Mr. Chairman. May I finish my sentence,

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

please?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you. It's my responsibility to oversee each of the bureaus, each of the regional bureaus and the Bureau of International Organization Affairs. And yes, overall of their foreign policy. But as I said, and I'd just like to state clearly, for the specifics of the trade engagements, I refer you to the Department of Commerce and also USTR. Thank you for allowing me to finish my sentence.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Thank you for answering a paradoxical question of, I want to know what you actually do, but I don't want to hear you answer that question. That to me was an odd statement. Representative Kim is recognized.

Rep. Young Kim (R-CA)SPEAKER_01

Thank you, Chairman Mast. Thank you for joining us today. I know under President Trump's first administration, you served as Special Assistant to the President and also Senior Director for the Korean Peninsula at the National Security Council. So, I think you understand and agree that Korean Peninsula remains a focal point of global security. As you know, North Korea's continued nuclear ambitions, missile provocations, cyberattacks, and human rights abuses, they pose persistent challenges to the U.S. and our allied interests. So, can you talk to me about the lessons that you've learned from your time in the first Trump administration that will inform the current administration's approach dealing with North Korea?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman, and thank you for your attention on this issue. As you may recall, we have worked very closely with our Japanese and South Korean allies on North Korean issues, not just them, but others in the region as well. That is a major lesson learned and takeaway from the first Trump administration, that close coordination, close cooperation with our allies and partners in the region is really one of the most effective ways we can meet the threat, deter the threat, and continue to strategize on a way forward. The president also very much engaged in the Indo-Pacific region, and North Korea's growing nuclear and missile program remain a concern of ours. Not just that, but also their engagement and cooperation with Russia.

Rep. Young Kim (R-CA)SPEAKER_01

North Korea has really become a country with nuclear weapons. It is a nuclear state, so we have to recognize it as such. It's definitely different than what we've known North Korea to be even 20, 30 years ago, and especially during the Trump administration's first term. So I hope that we can continue to talk about North Korea in a sense that we need a complete and secure CVID, a complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization of North Korea. So can you talk to us about how does the America First agenda define or prioritize this objective?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question. The president uses all available tools on each of these problem set issues, so I won't speak in specific details about our— perhaps our future approach to North Korea, but I can assure you that we're very concerned about the— their nuclear capability, their missile capability, and the threat and the destabilizing effect that that can have on the region.

Rep. Young Kim (R-CA)SPEAKER_01

Can you then talk about maybe not specifically, but some diplomatic or economic strategies under consideration, such as like America First Opportunity Fund, to move closer to reaching that goal?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman, for that, for your question. The America First Opportunities Fund will be we'll be able to use that for a number of different issues. It'll be a consolidated fund that whether we're using it for foreign assistance, disaster assistance, really it's going to be a very flexible and multipurpose fund. There may be opportunities to use it on this issue.

Rep. Young Kim (R-CA)SPEAKER_01

What about when you talk about multipurpose? Purpose areas. Can you also allocate that fund for other activities to counter North Korea's illicit activities and support defector communities or expose human rights violations? Those are really important policy priorities of mine as well as to this committee as well.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Well, very much paying attention to those issues as well and can take that into consideration when we're looking at applying the fund going forward.

Rep. Young Kim (R-CA)SPEAKER_01

Thanks. As I understand, you, as the Under Secretary for Political Affairs, you oversee the department's six regional bureaus, covering virtually all foreign policy matters that is considered by the State Department. And at times, the Under Secretary will elevate a high-profile issue from a regional Assistant Secretary and lead on the matter directly. So I think this happened under President Bush, and your predecessor, Ambassador Nick Burns, led on Iran policy for the department. So do you intend to similarly lead on China policy during your tenure? And talk about what that might look like.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, ma'am. Well, I'd just like to reiterate, I serve at the pleasure of the president and also the pleasure of the secretary. I work very closely with Secretary Rubio and with Deputy Secretary Landau on issues that span around the world. So I don't— I really don't have anything to say in terms of specific target issues except for that, as you noted, my responsibilities are global, and I'm here to support the secretary and the deputy secretary as we address each of those issues. Thank you.

Rep. Young Kim (R-CA)SPEAKER_01

Well, thank you. I yield back, Chairman.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

recognize Representative Jayapal.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for being here, Madam Under Secretary. In your confirmation hearing, you stated that China was trying to, quote, "reshape the global order." In your opinion, is it in our national interest to have our American bilateral and multilateral relationships overtaken by China?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I would disagree with the premise that they are.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

I'm just asking you, in your opinion. I assume the answer is no, that it's not in our interest, and I agree with you. But, in fact, that is exactly what the Trump administration is allowing to happen with all the cuts to USAID funding. As we slash foreign assistance, China is stepping up its investments in the in the Silk Road. For too many countries, it's becoming the only place to turn to backfill previous U.S. investments. And General Michael Langley, the commander of U.S. Africa Command, stated that China is, quote, "trying to replicate specific USAID programs in Africa that the United States has cut, and that this trend has been seen globally." Madam Under Secretary, are you aware of how the USAID cuts and Trump's isolationism have have what they've done to America's and China's respective global favorability?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Congresswoman, I would disagree with the premise of multiple components of your statement.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

Do you know what's happened to U.S. favorability relative to China's favorability?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Um, in fact, we've had a great response in some of our countries that we're providing aid, that we're moving from a dependency. Do you have

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

any numbers for me?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

See, well, I can tell you that we're continuing our PEPFAR lifesaving— I'm

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

asking about favorability. Are you aware that in January of 2024, a year before Trump came into office, the US favorability rating was above 20 and China was in negative territory? And at the end of May, after just 5 months of Trump of coming into office, China had a net favorability of 8.8 compared to -1.5 for the United States. Were you aware of that?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I am not sure what the sources of your numbers are.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

So you're not aware of that?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm not aware of the sources of your numbers.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

Let me read you some statistics about how your administration's cuts will increase Chinese influence around the globe. Because of these cuts, Chinese investments in assistance programs will now surpass American investments in 40 more countries. China will now operate 16 more diplomatic posts abroad than the United States. And if the president's budget request is enacted into law and the U.S. fails to pay its UN-assessed contributions, China would actually be the biggest contributor to the UN regular budget and UN peacekeeping operations. Is this what making America great again means to you, ceding America's global leadership in the world to China?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Congresswoman, at our funding currently, we remain the world's largest donor of aid. Next to the next 10 countries, we are still the greatest donor.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

Madam Undersecretary, you may want to look at those statistics that I sent you and look at what these cuts mean. Would you agree that Mandarin language skills are a valuable tool for U.S. diplomats working on China and strategic competition issues? It's not a hard question, Madam Undersecretary.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm still wondering if we're going to be able to respond to some of the other—

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

it's my time, so you are welcome to send me a written response, but I'm asking you about Mandarin language skills. Do you think they're valuable?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

We have Mandarin language skills at the Department of State, yes.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

So you think they're valuable?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

And the department just fired over 1,300 staff to meet an arbitrary firing target. Do you know what percent of the department's total Mandarin language capacity was lost in that RIF?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Congresswoman, these— the reorganization was not arbitrary, nor was it haphazard.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

Do you know how many of the department's total Mandarin language capacity was lost? I'm

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

unaware of that. So

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

You don't know even how we're staffing our relationship with China, and you're the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. Can you at least tell me if language skills, in this case Mandarin, weigh into the department's evaluation of individual staff that were RIFed?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you. And thank you, Congresswoman, for that question. The Office of China Affairs falls under my purview.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

And you don't know how many— do you know how many people we have that speak Mandarin now?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm responsible for the diplomacy that is conducted out of the office. And you

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

think diplomacy can be done without people that speak the skills?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

And also the embassy,. and I have confidence in our training programs at the Department of State.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

Sounds like you're not really aware of what skills we have to actually build that relationship.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Time has expired.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)SPEAKER_25

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

back. Is recognized.

Rep. Jefferson Shreve (R-IN)SPEAKER_15

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Secretary Hooker, for sharing some time with us this morning. I represent part of Indiana. And I've been working on a problem that's certainly a problem back in my district, back in my state, but more broadly across our country and beyond. And it's a problem that's growing briskly related to scam centers, these industrial-sized scam centers, so many of which are anchored in Southeast Asia. Following the COVID crackdowns, some of the bad actors in China pivoted from these illegal casinos and standing up these massive industrial-sized scam centers. And of course, some of my constituents have been bilked out of money as a consequence of these. Last year, the reported losses were $125 billion, but these are chronically underreported because it's embarrassing when people are bilked out of money from these scam centers. Last month, I led on a letter to Secretary Rubio highlighting the need for action before the crisis spirals further out of control and offering our assistance in fighting this. And I was thankfully joined by 23 other members of this committee in that letter to Secretary Rubio. So it's got broad recognition that this is a spiraling challenge, which will be made more so as AI makes it even harder to discern the real from the scammy. And so my question of you is simply, how is State working to address this transnational crime issue comprehensively?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. As I mentioned earlier, Secretary Rubio just attended the ASEAN Regional Forum in Kuala Lumpur, and this issue was a focus point of our conversations with allies and partners in the region and of ASEAN as a whole. In fact, in his conversation with Prime Minister Anwar of Malaysia and with his other bilateral engagements, he spoke specifically about this issue and the need to counter it. There's a consolidated, unified approach from ASEAN to deal with this. So we're going to work bilaterally with the countries where where these kind of scam centers are operating, going to work bilaterally with them and also work with ASEAN to address the issue. And very much appreciate your letter and your interest on this subject.

Rep. Jefferson Shreve (R-IN)SPEAKER_15

Well, thank you for that. Are there additional statutory authorities that State is looking for to, uh, to put more teeth into the, the toolkit that you've got to work with presently?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Um, I think that that's something that we can follow up with you on as we have these conversations in our bilateral relationships to see what else we might need.

Rep. Jefferson Shreve (R-IN)SPEAKER_15

All right, and I appreciate that very much. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, sir.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Gentleman yields back. Chair recognizes Representative McBride.

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE)SPEAKER_22

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Under Secretary Hooker, for being here today. I'd like to hone in on Secretary Rubio's decision to decimate the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, or DRL. Most USAID programs and all but a handful of human rights programs have either ended or reportedly have been transferred to bureaus that lack the experience in this work. You you just mentioned to Representative Jayapal that the reorganization, quote, unquote, of the State Department was not haphazard, but you also told Ranking Member Meeks earlier today, as of right now, there's no plan for absorbing the work formerly done by formerly done by DRL into the regional bureaus. You said a plan is, quote, "in process." That does sound like a haphazard reorganization to me. Legal requirements for reporting to Congress on democracy and human rights programs have not been relaxed by law, yet many of the staff and systems to ensure compliance are gone. So I want to start, Madam Under Secretary, how many State Department staffers and contractors have you all fired that worked in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I don't have that number in front of me right now, Congresswoman.

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE)SPEAKER_22

So you don't have the number of folks that were in this bureau that presumably its work and they have been consolidated under your purview under the bureaus? You don't have a sense of how many remain?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

From the nature of your question, I think you're interested in understanding whether these functions are continuing in the in the bureaus. And I can assure you that the functions are continuing in the bureaus, whether it's for DRL, PRM, foreign assistance, our CT functions as well. Each of those functions are being integrated into the bureaus, each of the regional bureaus that I am responsible for.

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE)SPEAKER_22

Well, to that point, if the work is still being done, I want to hone in then on the annual human rights reports, which are of great importance to human rights experts around the world. But going back to 2017, the latest the latest that the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices was published was April 22nd. It's now July 23rd, and we have yet to see this year's report. Can you explain this delay and when we should expect to see this year's annual required report?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you for that interest. I'm happy to look into it. I don't have an answer for you at the moment. I'll take that back. Happy to report back.

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE)SPEAKER_22

Well, so it doesn't seem like the work of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor is moving forward if they're not releasing reports in the same timely fashion that they did previously. I want to move on to ask on this topic, and of course, these bureaus absorbing this work, and presumably it's in some form or fashion moving forward, although not clearly as rigorously as it used to. Since assuming your position, how many times have you convened regional bureaus to assess or discuss a major human rights challenge, or for that matter, any human rights issues?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I convene the bureaus weekly to talk about whatever issues they're facing.

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE)SPEAKER_22

And have you discussed major human rights challenges in those meetings?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm not going to talk about specifics of our conversations with each of those regional bureaus.

Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE)SPEAKER_22

I got to be honest, I appreciate you taking the time, but I just don't know what to make of these actions, or quite frankly, inactions by the administration. Either this administration is appallingly indifferent to human rights abuses and human trafficking, as we heard last week in Secretary Regas's testimony, or this administration is trying to cover up and paper over the scale of human rights abuses and human trafficking around the world. And quite frankly, given this administration's efforts to cover up abuses committed by Jeffrey Epstein and other powerful men, it appears that there is a pattern here with this administration. The powerful get to do what they want, whether it's powerful men here or strongmen around the world, and this administration will cover for them. And it is deeply disturbing to me. And I hope, I hope that these regional bureaus under your leadership, because I believe that you personally want to do this work, I hope that this administration will fulfill its legal and moral obligation to report on, to investigate, and to hold other countries accountable for human rights abuses. Abuses And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Representative yields back. I would challenge anybody: Who has done more to stop trafficking into the United States of America than President Trump? Objectively, any side of the aisle, nobody's done more to stop trafficking than President Trump, from the people that were being drug across the American border. Thank you, President Trump. Chair recognizes Representative Kean.

Rep. Thomas Kean (R-NJ)SPEAKER_10

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Under Secretary Hooker, for being here today. As we evaluate the work that is being done at the U.S. Department of State, it is vital that we understand how the reorganization will impact America's global health programs. I look forward to hearing how the State Department is continuing to implement its global health priorities. One of the key elements of the reorganization of the Department of State has been ensuring that regional bureaus play a more influential role in foreign assistance. Can you please clarify how that dynamic interplays with programmatic foreign assistance that requires centralized oversight, such as global health programming?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for your question. As I'm sure you heard from Deputy Secretary Rigas last week as well, the integration of USAID was complete on July 1st into the department. The goal of that was to make sure there is very strong oversight over each of those programs, making sure as well that our—as you said, our regional bureaus are able to implement foreign assistance that makes sense for their area of responsibility. One of the ways that we are ensuring these programs continue—those are lifesaving programs, those are programs that are tailored to each of the region's needs and each of the region's objectives. One way we're doing that is bringing on 400 U.S. staff into the department, into the regional bureaus, to implement those programs. About 300 of them are coming from USAID, others are U.S. direct hires. Also overseas in our embassies, we're adding another 400 locally employed staff to operate and conduct and perform these programs as well. So the effort there is to make sure that the bureaus not only have the direct political oversight over each of the programs, but that they have the staff that are capable of conducting those programs as well.

Rep. Thomas Kean (R-NJ)SPEAKER_10

And as a follow-up to that, are the regional bureaus empowered to raise concerns such as health commodity stockouts or rising health security threats when they are made aware of such concerns?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, and again, a major objective of this reorganization is to make sure the bureaus, the bureau leadership are empowered, but also our ambassadors and our embassies overseas are empowered address those issues as well.

Rep. Thomas Kean (R-NJ)SPEAKER_10

And could you share how the regional bureaus are structured so that they can coordinate with the other bureaus at the State Department that reside outside of the P family?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Oh, yes, happy to talk about that a little bit. I should also say that each of the— just back on foreign assistance for one moment— each of these bureaus will be formulating a foreign assistance office within the bureau that will be focused on implementing those things, but implementing those programs. But to your point, to your question about how functional offices will operate with regionals, as you know, there are additional undersecretaries that are meant to be in place, and our hope is that they, the ones that have been nominated, and have been voted out of committee will be confirmed soon so that I can work with my colleagues at the undersecretary level. But I am working already with the senior bureau leadership in the department and also the acting undersecretaries for arms control, for economic affairs. Our structure is such that we can have lateral engagement. We don't have to just talk at the top as undersecretaries, but each of these functional offices has regular engagement with their regional bureau colleagues.

Rep. Thomas Kean (R-NJ)SPEAKER_10

And so how will this overall new structure of regional bureaus—I guess following up on that answer a little bit—ensure greater efficiency at the State Department?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman. One of the main objectives of this reorganization was to eliminate the redundancies. And that's meant to make it more efficient. Of course, if you have— let's just say you have a policy paper that needs to be coordinated within the department. If it's having to be cleared by multiple offices with the same— with similar functions, it's going to hold up the process of clearance. Maybe that policy doesn't get implemented in a time that makes it relevant to what's happening. You just have a slowing down of the overall policy process. So by eliminating those redundant offices, we're able to streamline the policy process, make sure the bureaus are able to implement, and as well as our embassies overseas.

Rep. Thomas Kean (R-NJ)SPEAKER_10

Thank you for being here today, and I yield back my time.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, sir.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Thank you. Chair now recognizes Representative Johnson.

Rep. Julie Johnson (D-TX)SPEAKER_12

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Madam Under Secretary, thank you so much for joining us today. I was glad to hear Deputy Secretary Rigas, in his testimony last week, affirm the importance of keeping our commitment to our Afghan allies. These are family members of Afghan-American U.S. military personnel, children cleared to reunite with their parents, relatives of Afghans who have already admitted, and tens of thousands of Afghans who have worked for the United States government during the 20-year war who were promised a pathway and fully vetted, but now are stranded and waiting. But the department's fiscal year 2026 budget did not include funding to continue Operation Enduring Welcome, the whole-of-government relocation effort, and the State Department reorganization abolishes the offices that were going to do this work. And the administration has ended Temporary Protected Status for Afghans, putting these brave individuals at risk of being sent back as sitting ducks for the Taliban to target. They face retribution for believing in America's promise and something better. But many of the Afghan allies who were able to make it here to the United States still cannot feel safe. In fact, I have a constituent who is an Afghan ally now detained by ICE with no given reason and sent to another state. So my question, ma'am, is what is the State Department doing to work with the Department of Homeland Security to make sure that DHS does not swoop in and steal our Afghan allies who are here legally?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question, and I will defer you to DHS for those specific cases and how they're working on those issues. What I can tell you is that the administration cares very deeply about our Afghan former colleagues and those who were committed to helping the United States in Afghanistan. As you noted, there have been quite a number of Afghans who have been resettled Afghans who have been resettled in the United States. There have been 400,000 who have been resettled in the U.S. since 2021. We're continuing—

Rep. Julie Johnson (D-TX)SPEAKER_12

But the State Department is revoking their protected status. And so, what are we going to do to help those folks? That's my question, is why are we doing this? And has the department, the State Department, assessed whether Afghans who were connected to the U.S. mission or the former Afghan government are at greater risk of retaliation once they return to Afghanistan?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question. The vetting process for bringing Afghans here to the United States is— we take that as a very serious issue. Every visa that we have that we have provided, it's a national security decision. So just, you raised earlier, the vetting process, and so we're taking that into— we're very serious about about that process. We've seen failures of our vetting process produce almost catastrophic results. There was a situation last fall where someone who had been admitted to the United States had been planning a terrorist attack in in Oklahoma City. Fortunately, that was thwarted. But it just highlights just how serious that each of these visa conversations—

Rep. Julie Johnson (D-TX)SPEAKER_12

I understand that, ma'am, but that doesn't imply that one bad apple spoils the bunch. There's always criminal threats from every sector of every society, every country, every race, every everything. And we have the best law enforcement in the world to be able to assess out those threats, but that doesn't mean that you retaliate and punish all those who are here, who are doing good, who put their lives on the line. I'm also concerned that, now that administration has terminated all of our assistance to Afghanistan, our remaining leverage comes from the world standing united against recognizing the Taliban as a legitimate government. But on July 3rd, Russia became the first country to fully diplomatically recognize the Taliban. Did the administration take any action to punish Russia for this outrageous move?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman. I do have to say that the United States has not terminated all of its assistance to Afghanistan. The office formerly known as CARE, all of those functions continue, as we've talked about today, under the oversight and direction of our regional bureau responsible, which is the South and Central Asia Bureau in the Department of State. So all those functions with regard to assistance to Afghanistan and to Afghans that remain in the region, all of that continues. I just want to be clear on that point.

Rep. Julie Johnson (D-TX)SPEAKER_12

Thank you, ma'am. Unfortunately, I'm out of time. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Representative yields back. Representative Huizenga is recognized.

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI)SPEAKER_11

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. Under Secretary Hooker, earlier this year Secretary Rubio engaged the Central African nations over their treatment of U.S. oil and gas companies. The Bank of Central African States continues to hold a very hostile view of how restoration funds are managed. These environmental restoration funds paid for by American companies should not be raided to shore up monetary reserves in Central Africa. According to the IMF's Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual, these restoration funds by definition cannot be used for foreign exchange reserves. In an effort to protect American investment in the region, I introduced the Central African Exploitation and Manipulation of American Companies, or CEMAC, Act, instructing the United States to oppose any effort by the IMF related to to the CEMAC countries until the IMF issues guidance regarding the status of American companies' restoration funds being held in escrow. Will you commit to working with the Department of the Treasury to support the U.S. industry's proposal and report back to me on the progress?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. I am not familiar with that issue, so I am happy to take that back and consult with Treasury and work with you on that issue.

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI)SPEAKER_11

Are you aware of any of those issues in, in the, with the central bank?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I am, to be honest with you, I am not aware of those specific issues, but I will take that back. I will become very aware of it and make sure I get back, we get

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI)SPEAKER_11

to

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

work with you on that.

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI)SPEAKER_11

Please do. All right, and as chairman of the newly created South and Central Asia Subcommittee, it's not a newly—well, I guess it sort of was newly created. We had decided to follow the State Department's delineations on those things. But as chair of that South and Central Asia Subcommittee, I've been actively engaged in dialogues with regional partners on China's rapid expansion of port access through its Maritime Belt and Road Initiative, especially in the Indian Ocean, which is central to global trade and home to essential choke points. I'm also aware of the String of Pearls strategy in which the CCP is attempting to encircle India through a network of military and commercial facilities extending from mainland China to the Horn of Africa. What actions has the department taken to counter the Belt and Road Initiative in the region and cement U.S. and allied dominance in the Indian Ocean?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. I'd like to highlight the work of Secretary Rubio— I'm just speaking of India for a moment, highlight the work of Secretary Rubio is working with the Quad, which is I'm sure you're familiar with that, the Quad: Japan, India, and Australia. He hosted two of these gatherings at the Department of State here in Washington, including on his very first day on the job.

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI)SPEAKER_11

which, by the way, was a great statement. Chair Young Kim and I hosted the ambassadors recently, and it was It's been a very good statement, I think, of solidarity.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Great. And so, on July 1st, we had another one of those meetings at the department, and I just mention that because the Quad is a key forum for countering China's efforts in the region, whether whether in the Indo-Pacific in general, but also specifically to the areas that you've mentioned. We have just, again, just to focus on the Quad for a moment because of its great importance, the efforts under Secretary Rubio to streamline and and really highlight specific areas of cooperation where we can, as Quad nations, cooperate on issues that that touch on China. Mainly, I think the—in addition to ports issues, supply chain issues, which I'm sure you're also very aware of, these have been highlighted as as areas where we can cooperate together, in addition to the kinds of things you've mentioned.

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI)SPEAKER_11

And in my final 45 seconds here, I want to quickly get to this, and we may need to get this in writing from you as well. But obviously, Central Asia holds vast reserves of critical minerals and is key to the world supply of that. Just yesterday, I sat down with the First Deputy Chairman of the Uzbek Senate, where we discussed their copper deposits in Uzbekistan and their desire to work with the Trump administration to realize some profits in that. Obviously, copper is extremely important in so many various whether it's AI, and defense, electric grid. But how is the department engaging with Central Asian countries to secure non-PRC supply chains, and what measures are being taken to ensure that the United States remains a partner of choice, even in nations receiving significant Chinese investment?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

And I know we're out of time on that, but and happy to follow up with you in greater detail. But we are very much engaged with our Central Asia partners and not just them. Diversifying supply chains, securing supply chains is a, as you know, huge priority for the president and for Secretary Rubio. We're doing it in all regions around the world. Happy to follow up with you.

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI)SPEAKER_11

I look forward to this. Follow-ups. Thank

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

you, sir.

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI)SPEAKER_11

I yield back.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Recognize Representative Titus.

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV)SPEAKER_05

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Madam Secretary. Just to change the direction a little bit, I would like to talk about what's happening in the Eastern Mediterranean. I sent a letter to the president with 21 of my colleagues just recently about a meeting between President Trump and President Erdoğan. This came as he was having a number of phone calls and we anticipated a meeting. I wanted to ask the—or we wanted to ask the president to bring up certain topics that are important both with our relations to Turkey and with Turkey's relations to Greece and other countries in the area, whether it's the missile incursions or it's the airspace, or the water rights, or the F-35s. All of those things we wanted to hear about. We got a letter back, but after there was a meeting, and it was just kind of pablum. It was just boilerplate. I have the letter that we sent. I'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter it into the record, Mr. Chairman, so you can see more detail about what we were asking about. So we sent the letter. We got back some boilerplate answer that didn't really answer anything, wasn't worth the paper it was written on. And then we find out that a meeting did take place. It was on the sidelines of the NATO summit. It finally happened after the phone calls. And so we reached out to the State Department asking for a briefing about what occurred because there was no readout, and we didn't know what went on in that meeting except we heard something from Erdoğan's office saying everything was great and there was positive movement on the F-35s. So we didn't get any information back from the department. You circumvented our attempts to do oversight. Meantime, the president's saying this is the most transparent administration you've ever seen. So now I'm fortunate to have you here before us, so maybe we can get an answer. I'd like to ask you, what happened at that meeting between the president and President Erdoğan?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman, and thank you for your letter. I have not seen your letter, but I look forward to seeing it since it's been put into the record.

SPEAKER_UNKNOWN

I

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I'm not able to speak to the specifics of what was spoken at those meetings. As you know, those meetings are bilateral engagements are, the very specific issues are confidential. But I can say our Turkey, our policy on the F-35 program, on on Turkey, and that issue have not changed. As long as the, as long as Turkey has their S-400 program, we're not able to move forward with the F-35 program.

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV)SPEAKER_05

Well, that part's reassuring. So that's one of the things we addressed. But if you'll look at that letter and maybe get back to us on some of the other things that we're concerned about, because Turkey is not a very reliable ally in a number of areas, and this is such an important geopolitical area right now with Israel, with Cyprus, with Greece, with Turkey that we—I think we need to be more informed about it and your office as well. I want to go back to the RIF issue, too. I wonder, you know, you mentioned that maybe some mistakes were made with the RIFing, and did y'all do a written analysis showing that the people who were dismissed were indeed the lowest performers, that there was some reason that these people were chosen? And if you did do an analysis, can you share it with us? And if you didn't, how'd you pick these people that you just gave the ax to?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Congresswoman, thank you for your question. I don't, um, I don't think I said that I thought mistakes were made. I just want to clarify for the record the beginning of your, your statement there. Um, I haven't— I didn't say that mistakes were made in the reduction in force.

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV)SPEAKER_05

So you don't think any mistakes were made?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

But you, you said that I had mentioned that.

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV)SPEAKER_05

I guess maybe I should have been more precise. That was the implication I got. Maybe, maybe you didn't. Maybe you don't think any mistakes were made. And if you don't, can you tell us how you made those choices?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question. The reduction-in-force effort, I think Deputy Secretary Rigas went through in great detail last week and the process that was conducted to make those determinations. There was consultation taken both at senior levels and at the workforce levels, where comments were provided from, and I think Deputy Secretary Rigas mentioned the number 650, around 650 comments that were provided to State Department leadership.

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV)SPEAKER_05

Okay, well, you say you have some rationale, so maybe we could see that rationale so we can explain to these people why they got fired. There were some expectant mothers in this group, some families that just got the ax overnight. How are they getting home, and how's their health insurance covering them for these babies that they're expecting to have that they weren't anticipating? Anticipating just being laid off suddenly. Did you take that into account?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for your follow-up question. As I said and as Deputy Secretary Rigas said, the determinations that were made on the closures of offices and the resulting reduction in force cuts that were made, that was to eliminate redundancies and to streamline processes in the State Department. It was not a personal matter. It was removal of

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV)SPEAKER_05

redundant functions. Women in any kind of soft landing.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Gentlelady's time has expired.

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV)SPEAKER_05

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr chairman.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Chair recognizes Representative Davidson.

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH)SPEAKER_13

Thank you, Chairman. And I thank you earlier for pushing back on the nonsensical idea that the Trump administration has somehow been soft on human trafficking, and rightly pointing out that the border is now closed and secure. We know the biggest human traffickers in the world were the cartels. They were making over $13 billion a year trafficking people across our southern border and flooding our country with people who were illegally here. They were massively exploited along the way, and potentially some of that exploitation is still going on. And I'm encouraged by the efforts at all levels to shut that down. So with that, Secretary Hooker, thank you so much for your testimony today and your service in our State Department. I'd like to thank you and Secretary Rubio for your hard work in reorganizing the State Department so that we could put America's interests first with America's resources. So thank you. The reorganization of the Political Affairs Bureau is an important reform, prioritizing regional experts with on-the-ground knowledge and relationships to lead State Department policy. It never made sense to allow anti-growth climate change activists in the Environmental Bureau to run policy. I've heard from people around the world who felt like they're putting ideology ahead of interests between our country and other countries. As they wanted to have bilateral relations that were focused on real issues, we saw in whether it's environmental policy or social agendas like LGBTQ+, that the administration had a different agenda than just listening and building relationships. So let me turn to Greenland. I'm proud to be the founding chairman of the Congressional Greenland Caucus earlier this year. Arctic security is critical for our national security and ensuring that we keep Russia and China in their place as we confront not just Arctic security, but Arctic opportunities. And I'm glad there were components of the big, beautiful bill that advanced that. Could you elaborate on how the State Department's working to address that issue?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for your question and and for your comments as well. You've hit on a number of issues that are of great importance to this administration, whether it's supply chain or our security in the Arctic, all of those issues are can be found central in in Greenland. And our engagement with Denmark continues. As you know, we have we have a a base there in in Greenland, which keeps us very tied to it. So, I guess the the most the the best thing I can say about it is that we're paying close attention to this issue. Our Bureau of European Affairs has under its responsibility Greenland and we'll continue to to work this issue going forward for the administration.

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH)SPEAKER_13

Thank you so much, and I'd love to build an interface there with the State Department to specifically talk about Greenland issues, both with the people of Greenland and with, you know, folks of Denmark. And if we could arrange travel there just to build rapport and relationships, we'd have a a congressional delegation that would love to participate with the State Department in strengthening our ties. As the chairman of National Security and Illicit Finance, every day we have malign foreign actors, and Representative Shreve highlighted, you know, one of those issues, where you're seeing transnational criminal organizations exploit our seniors. And, you know, thank you for highlighting the response there. Do you have any thoughts on how the financial services lane and using all the tools, whether it's OFAC or things that are in Treasury, could work with the State Department to provide additional leverage in your negotiations?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman. I think we have to keep all of our tools on the table, so to speak. We have to use all available tools in dealing with these issues. So as we go forward, if there is a need to work with you more closely on that, we are we're very much interested in doing so.

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH)SPEAKER_13

Thank you for that. And then lastly, I just talk about, Vice President Vance really spoke to— he's from my congressional district, and frankly, if my constituents could have been in Munich, Germany, they might have not said it as eloquently, but we're concerned. What exactly are we defending when you look at people who are having to flee the United Kingdom, flee Germany, even Poland for asylum in Hungary, where they're defending civil liberties in Hungary? How are you working in the State Department to make sure that the values that we share that defined our alliances are actually still represented in our alliances?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman. I mean, I don't I don't think I have to say that the U.S., the United States, considers freedom of expression to be a foundational component of our of our functioning democracy. And so this will can be part of our diplomatic engagement with these countries that you just mentioned, that we continue to stand for the very freedoms that we hold dear, and with our fellow democracies around the world, ensure that they continue to see this as a as a value and that we're emphasizing it.

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH)SPEAKER_13

Thank you so much. My time's expired, and I yield back.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Representative Castro.

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX)SPEAKER_19

Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Under Secretary, for your testimony and for being here today. What's happening in Gaza is a horror of mass starvation, mass murder, and even a plan for ethnic cleansing that Americans are helping to pay for. Every day brings us fresh horrors of starving children, in fact, some of them starving to the bone, civilians killed by snipers while they seek out food, and entire families wiped out by the IDF. And as I mentioned, and as you know, Americans are helping to pay for it. I wanted to ask you what the Trump administration's plan is to stop it. As we and the world witnesses these horrors, what is your plan to stop it?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Representative Castro, thank you for your question and for allowing me to respond. When we talk about Israel-Gaza, I think it's important to remember two specific things. First, this situation started on October 7th when Hamas invaded Israel and killed nearly 1,200 Israelis, mostly civilians, in the most heinous and barbaric ways. Second, I think we should also emphasize that Hamas could end this conflict today. It could put down their arms, they could return the hostages,

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX)SPEAKER_19

Certainly you're not suggesting—hold on, I'm going to reclaim my time for a second. You're not suggesting that those five- and six-year-old kids have any control over what Hamas does, are you? In fact, the people who make up Hamas, many of them are hidden away in tunnels or out of Gaza and are not the ones who are being subjected to these bombs and missiles and starvation, and so forth.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

What I was going to say, Congressman, was that we mourn the loss of any civilian life, whether that's Israeli, Palestinian, whomever. And that's why we're focused on achieving a ceasefire. It's the laser focus of President Trump and of this administration. We're also focus-- Under Secretary,

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX)SPEAKER_19

I guess I want to tell you, just for a second, I want to tell you when Antony Blinken sat where you're sitting in December, I believe, I told him that I was disappointed with how the Biden administration approached this and that we didn't do enough during that time to stop these horrors. And I will say the same thing to you as part of the Trump administration, that our government is not doing enough. We have all on this dais called out Hamas for the horrors of October 7th. We have labeled them even before this as terrorists and penalized nations or anyone who has associated with them. But what actions have we taken against Benjamin Netanyahu's government for the horrors that they've committed? Where are the consequences for their action?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Well, thank you, Congressman. What I was going to say was that we're very focused on achieving a ceasefire and delivering humanitarian assistance. As you may be aware, and I think there was some press reporting overnight, that Special Envoy Witkoff is going to be leading the engagement. He's headed to the region right now to work to finalize the aid corridor and reach a ceasefire. So to you asked what we're doing. That's one of the things we're doing is Special Envoy Witkoff will be traveling to the region to work on this issue.

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX)SPEAKER_19

Let me raise another issue with you, because Israeli settlers in the West Bank attacked the Palestinian Christian village of Taybeh, setting fire to a cemetery and a 5th-century church. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, who's been a very strong supporter of Israel, called the attack, quote, "an act of terror," and that they should be, quote, "found and prosecuted, not just reprimanded," unquote. He similarly described the lynching of Palestinian-American from Tampa, Florida, Sayfollah Musallet, by Israeli settlers in the West Bank as, quote, "a criminal and terrorist act. That's two acts of terrorism within weeks by the same group of people, Israeli settlers in the West Bank. I want to ask you, will the United States be pursuing independent investigations into these terrorist attacks by Israeli settlers?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman. I understand that the IDF is investigating incidents that— Will the

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX)SPEAKER_19

United States government launch an investigation into these attacks?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

And as I said, Special Envoy Witkoff is traveling to the region, and it's very much in President Trump's interest and his objective to reach stability in the region. He's working on ceasefires.

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX)SPEAKER_19

Will you guys commit to an independent United States investigation into these attacks?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you for asking that question. I don't have an answer for you at this moment, but I've provided you with an answer to your question on what we've been doing on this issue and how we're working towards a ceasefire.

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX)SPEAKER_19

I yield back.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Gentleman yields back. Representative Perry is recognized.

Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA)SPEAKER_24

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Hooker— over here. Sorry about that— the State Department's 75,000 employees, including 13,000 Foreign Service officers and 11,000 civil service staff, cost taxpayers over $16 billion annually in salaries and benefits. Yet evidence suggests that many of the employees advocate socialist or communist ideologies that clash with American values or certainly any oath that any of the employees might take. A 2024 whistleblower report from the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs revealed diplomats praising collectivist policies in meeting with EU counterparts, undermining our free market stance. Are we going to continue funding a diplomatic corps that seems more aligned with Marx than Madison? And I'm serious about that. What is the plan here? Does the department even recognize this as an issue? And I'm not talking about restricting the exercise of free thought or free speech, but if we're going to have people in our State Department advocating for the policies and beliefs of our adversaries, I think that's problematic. So that's a serious question to you.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for your question. I'm just going to refer to the reorg for a moment, but it's in line with answering your question. And that is, as I've said, the reorganization is meant to bring the power over foreign policy back into the bureaus, but underneath senior bureau leadership that is aligned with this administration. And so under the leadership of not just myself, but the heads of those bureaus, and of course Secretary Rubio, I'm confident that we'll be able to operate as a democracy and operate on these foreign policy objectives that the president has laid out.

Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA)SPEAKER_24

And I appreciate that. And again, we're not asking for fealty to an individual. But I think many of us are frustrated over time with a State Department that seems to be antithetical to the values of the of the country and the citizens it supports. And as an example here, the department's 2022 Equity Action Plan costing $12 million last year, projected at $15 million for FY26, promotes DEI initiatives that prioritize identity over merit, mirroring socialist frameworks. A 2023 internal survey showed 62% of Foreign Service officers supported policies like wealth taxes or nationalized industries that are—those ideas are just rejected by by Americans. And furthermore, let's see here. Here's a true story. In 2024, a whistleblower in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor revealed a clique of employees circulating a petition to soften sanctions on Cuba, citing humanitarian concerns while ignoring Havana's repression. The petition, signed by 22 staff members, was exposed by a Freedom of Information Act request. Again, we just prefer people that are loyal to the United States of America. Ana Montes is cooling her heels in a prison for being the most prolific operative working inside the United States of America yet promoting Cuban communist policies. We simply can't have that. So I understand there's a reorganization going on, but if you can elucidate for us any of the policies in that reorganization that would kind of get a gauge on loyalty to the Constitution of the United States of America. For instance, do employees take an oath regarding their loyalty to the Constitution of the United States of America?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Each employee of the Department of State takes an oath when they begin their service to the Constitution. I did too when I started on June 5th. And so,

Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA)SPEAKER_24

And so if employees of the State Department then advocate for the Communist Party of Cuba, is that seen as a violation, or will that be seen moving forward as a violation of that oath?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for that question. I work every day with absolutely fabulous colleagues in the Department of State, Foreign Service, Civil Service, other staff in the department. And I appreciate your concerns and thank you for highlighting each of those issues. I will work with my colleagues in the Management Bureau to see how we might be able to address this if it arises as a problem.

Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA)SPEAKER_24

I appreciate your time. In fact, I didn't mean to cut you off, but I just want to close here before the chairman has to cut me off. We need a State Department that works in concert with the views of the Constitution of the United States of America and moves that agenda, the agenda of America, forward abroad. And we can't have employees, whether they're convicted of sedition or treason like Ana Montes was, or whether they're just expressing antithetical positions that help our enemies. We can't have them being the spokespersons and the policymakers for the United States of America, and there's got to be some repercussions for those kind of things in the Department of State. With that, I yield the balance.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Gentleman yields back. Representative Cherfilus-McCormick is recognized.

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL)SPEAKER_21

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Under Secretary, for being here. Quite frequently we hear our House Republicans talk about this policy of putting America first, America's interest first, but I'm failing to see real processes and thought-out procedures to implement to achieve this goal. So I'm hoping that today you'll give us some insight as far as the strategy and policies on how we can get there. And I'm hoping that these strategies and policies would actually have within it some mitigation procedures, any corrective actions, but really having the implementation by experts. Since we have so many people who are being fired, we want to make sure that experts are at that table. And so I can't wait for you to shed light on this so these won't just be slogans of putting America's interest first, but we'll see tangible acquisition or actually getting to that. So I want to shift our attention to Haiti and find out what is the strategy with Haiti.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman, for your questions. With the empowerment of each of the regional bureaus, I'm just trying to edit what I've repeated and what you've heard me say about the reorganization. You've heard me say how it's empowered each of the regional bureaus and our embassies overseas. What that does is it allows each bureau and their area of responsibility to—

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL)SPEAKER_21

Specifically, I wanted to hear about Haiti, because Haiti's a, a unique situation, especially in the region, and right now the Office of Haitian Affairs is eliminated. So I wanted to hear what is the strategy behind eliminating it, especially since it's such a huge crisis for the entire Western Hemisphere and there is a significant amount of guns which are coming from the United States into Haiti and drugs that are going throughout the entire Caribbean. So it seems to me that eliminating the Office of Haitian Affairs would be contrary to the goal of actually containing and controlling this region. So what is the strategy behind eliminating it in this climate?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I apologize, Congresswoman. I misunderstood the end of your question. I apologize for that. The Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs is responsible for Haiti, so it's not that our focus on Haiti has changed. We, I assure you, very focused on Haiti.

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL)SPEAKER_21

Haiti had an Office of Haitian Affairs specifically because of the uniqueness of what's going on in Haiti. Right now, Haiti is in crisis mode, and in this crisis mode, what we're finding is that you guys are eliminating the office, and the elimination of the office seems contrary to what is needed at this present moment. So could you please expand on what is the strategy for success in Haiti, in its crisis situation, which is so close to South Florida, which is actually affecting the United States every single day? What is the strategy behind—

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

So the elimination of the Office of Haiti Affairs does not mean that the function of overseeing Haiti issues has been eliminated. Secretary Rubio has assigned Ambassador Henry Wooster, who is now chargé d'affaires in Haiti, to evaluate the situation in Haiti in a whole-of-government approach. Okay. And so that's the strateg— I'm sorry,

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL)SPEAKER_21

that's the strategy in place before. It was just eliminate it and then think through it and create a strategy, because you're saying he's going to be analyzing it, but there was no current strategy before implementation.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

He has analyzed it. He has been working on this issue for the past for the past month. The strategy was to continue to work on Haiti affairs with the with the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs focused on Haiti, and Ambassador Wooster has been assigned to work in a whole-of-government approach on the issue.

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL)SPEAKER_21

So with closing of the action of that office, will the personnel be shifting also? Will it be— will it have the same attention, same personnel, the experts?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

It has the same attention, for sure. The functions of the Office of Haiti Affairs have been absorbed into the full bureau, and these functions are continuing.

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL)SPEAKER_21

So why close that office and leave other offices, such as the office on Cuba? Why close this office and have it absorbed into Western Hemisphere? The Western Hemisphere, most of those countries aren't having the same issues, and that's why traditionally it has its own office. Why do that?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

All of these functions are being covered. I can assure you of that. I mean, that's, that's the purpose. There were

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL)SPEAKER_21

redundancies that have been eliminated. My time is running out, and I thank you so much for being here today, but I'm afraid that I hear a lot about making America's priorities first, but as I said, it's looking more and more like a slogan because we're not seeing real policies, real strategy, real implementation. We're seeing these haphazard ideas of closing the Haitian Affairs Office when right now we so desperately need the attention for that office. I'm not hearing about the personnel, the experts who will be continuing the work that is done in Haiti. I'm hearing more about, well, we just close or eliminated the office, and now we're going to analyze to make sure we have everything going forward. That forethought should have been there in the beginning so we can guarantee that we won't see any kind of issues. But what we've been seeing consistently have been issue after issue, lack of forethought, lack of experts, lack of mitigation processes when they do find an issue, and also lack of corrective actions. So going forward, I would love to be able to work with the administration so we can put these procedures in place, so we can actually attain that reality of having policies that strengthen the United States while edifying our allies. Thank you, and I yield back.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

I don't think you had much time to yield back, but thank you for relinquishing the microphone. I'm now going to recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning. In my opening remarks, I used the term outcome a couple times, and I think that's one of the most important things to recognize about what's been lacking with the State Department and what needs to be the focus of the State Department. State Department is not a think tank. It's not all— it's also not the Department of Defense. We don't have people in uniforms in the same way, but it is lacking some of the important things that the Department of Defense has. As I mentioned, a very clear hierarchy, a very clear structure that people follow in the same way. That has been lacking in the State Department. And I believe the measurable outcomes, again, have been lacking in the same way. I want to start by giving you a chance, in part, to respond to a few things, because there's been accusations made about somehow there's a lack of outcomes because of the actions taken by the Trump administration. And so my colleague said the State Department was not properly resourced. Now, I know you were in the State Department previously in your career as well. The budget's grown by about $45 billion over the last 25 years. So when we're talking about outcomes, has the State Department been $45 billion more effective over that time?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I don't believe so, sir.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

I think that's a plain way to put it. I don't believe so, either. And I think, objectively, I'd be hard-pressed to find somebody that could say that it has been. The State Department, it added between 2007 and 2024 23,000 additional jobs in that window of time. You have almost 80,000 employees, and you have accusations being leveled against you that you just don't have the resources that you need, you don't have the people in place, and how on God's green earth could you get rid of 1,500 employees in this place? Well, again, we have to look at the outcomes of what was taking place. We are not a jobs program. The State Department is not. It has to be measured in outcomes. And so, given that you have almost 80,000 employees, are you properly resourced or are you lacking? Do you need to be at 90,000?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Congressman. I would like to just respond by saying, as you alluded to in your opening statement, that reorganization has been necessary for a long time. And as I said, multiple administrations have tried and failed to do that. The Trump administration, under President Trump's leadership, under Secretary Rubio, has taken a very bold step to eliminate the redundant offices, to eliminate the redundant roles that were being played out under the previous structure, and with, as you said, an amount of employees and with the budget that could be streamlined. And so definitely, the Secretary has taken steps to do that, and not just to do that, but to make sure that our foreign policy is being implemented in a way that's streamlined, that's expedient, that meets the needs not just of our diplomatic partners, more importantly, that it's in line with our American interests, our national interests, our national security interests, our economic security interests, and to ensure that the future is safer and more prosperous and more secure.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

I thank you for those respective outcomes that you're seeking. Those are all worthy outcomes that I believe in. I wouldn't say that seeking a set number of employees is a worthy outcome. That's not a metric that I think the State Department should care about, whether it has 80,000 or whether it has 78,500. Doesn't matter. What matters are the outcomes that are achieved. And the fact of the matter is, under the Biden administration, it wasn't one or two incidents, as one of my colleagues put it, of, well, there might have been some drag shows in Ecuador, there might have been some expanded atheism in Nepal, or there might have been some little bit of transgender here. It was systemic across every continent, every country prioritized to use the State Department for social experimentation and virtue signaling instead of measurable outcomes that made America the partner of choice, real diplomacy. And I applaud the work that's going on in the State Department to return it to what it needs to do, which is make sure that the policies being put in place are putting the United States of America first. And I'll just close my questioning by this, by saying I believe you put the United States of America first with the State Department by always asking the questions: what does America need from a country or region? What does that country or region want from the United States of America? And if we choose to provide something, whether it's PEPFAR or anything else or an aid program or, God forbid, a transgender job fair or something else stupid like that, does it get the United States of America what it needs? Because if it doesn't, then somehow we were talking past one another. We didn't have the right conversation. And I want to ensure that you have the right conversations to get this country what it needs. I guess I'm yielding my time. I don't have any more time left. I don't know that I can yield it back to myself. I don't know that that's a real thing, but I'm going to now recognize Representative Stanton nonetheless.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ)SPEAKER_08

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. In the diplomatic arena, we are ceding ground to China. This administration is cutting staff, haphazardly restructuring the State Department without congressional input, and proposing steep funding cuts. These are policy choices that create a vacuum of power, and China is taking notice. I'm open to having a real conversation about necessary changes to our foreign policy apparatus, but we cannot say that we are serious about competing with China when our restructuring means cutting 1,300 employees and rescinding almost $9 billion in spending on foreign affairs while China has proposed an 8.4% increase in their diplomatic budget, closing the office that has coordinated the diplomatic response to China's aggression in the South China Sea, and closing the Office of Security and Transnational Affairs in the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs, which had specific expertise in countering China's assertiveness in the region. Under Secretary Hooker, is it true that the East Asia-Pacific Bureau's Multilateral Affairs office was scrapped in the reorganization?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

That office has been eliminated, and its functions have been integrated into the rest of the offices in the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ)SPEAKER_08

Is it true that the entire team that had prepped Secretary Rubio for his meetings in Malaysia as part of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations were fired while the Secretary was in meetings that they had planned?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

As I mentioned, that office was eliminated, and the staff that were staffing that office were also eliminated. I would also like to point out that the efforts to move forward with reorganization began on May 29th when Secretary Rubio notified Congress, and of course were held up for months by the court cases.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ)SPEAKER_08

Is there anyone in Washington, D.C. at the State Department in charge of leading engagement with ASEAN, the Pacific Islands Forum, the East Asia Summit, or the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Yes, sir. There are staff and officers in the Bureau of East Asia and Pacific Affairs that are responsible for each of those engagements.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ)SPEAKER_08

Under Secretary Hooker, Secretary Rubio has consistently said that China is the geopolitical challenge we face. It is the greatest geopolitical challenge that we face, and we need people in the department that can face directly that threat. That requires Mandarin language skills and an understanding of Chinese culture. To follow up on my colleague's earlier questions about laying off Mandarin speakers, of the Mandarin speakers who were RIF'd, how many received language training funded by the Department of State?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Sir, I don't have those numbers in front of me, but I can assure you, as I would Representative Jayapal if she were still here, that we do continue to have Mandarin speakers. Some of them are on my staff and are sitting behind me.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ)SPEAKER_08

What was the average cost per person of the department's investment in Mandarin language training for those staff?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

I am happy to look into those figures for you. That is something that I do not have under my purview, but I can work with you to get those numbers back to you from the Bureau of Management.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ)SPEAKER_08

How long, on average, does it take to replace a Mandarin-speaking China-specialized staff member from recruitment to deployment?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you for your question, sir. I'm happy to look into that. I know, as I said, we still have Mandarin capability in the department and out in the field, and I don't know how long each of those individuals have spent learning the language.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ)SPEAKER_08

What percent of the department's total Mandarin language capacity was lost in this RIF?

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

So thank you for your questions. Happy to look into all of these, all of these questions, all the answers to these questions. But I do want to underscore that the functions of the offices that have been eliminated continue. I also want to underscore the expertise that we maintain in the department. 1,300, not quite that number, almost 1,300 talented individuals who served their country very well, and we appreciate their service, were affected by the reduction in force. It doesn't mean that we don't respect them for that, but we have been engaged in this reform in order to make our foreign policy more effective, more nimble. Thank you, sir.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ)SPEAKER_08

Under Secretary Hooker, your answers have not convinced me that this administration fully grasps or even has a plan to mitigate the damage it has done with its half-hearted reorganization to one of the most useful language skills we need, we absolutely need in our diplomatic corps. We are facing a critical moment right now with the Chinese challenge to the United States. We cannot afford to give up ownership in this critical arena. I yield back.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Gentleman yields back. Uh, we've reached the end of our question period for this time. I would like to yield to the gentleman for any closing statement that the minority may have.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ)SPEAKER_08

I'd like to make a statement on behalf of the Ranking Member Meeks. Secretary Hooker, you served our nation as a national security professional for more than 20 years. Your expertise on the Korean Peninsula, nonproliferation, and the Indo-Pacific has helped advance American interests on the global stage. Your public service is appreciated. So I know that you recognize the value of our career Civil and Foreign Service officers and the unique expertise that they bring to the job every single day. I know that you know and you recognize that the personnel in the State Department's Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs and those working on nuclear issues are essential to achieving our most urgent national security goals. Which is why I also know that you understand just how much harder your job has become after Secretary Rubio fired almost 1,300 national security experts from the State Department. Unfortunately, the Trump administration's dismantling of the State Department is a far cry from the modern diplomatic corps that is ready to meet the challenges of a complex world that you spoke of in April. The fact of the matter is that the State Department is now unquestionably less prepared to meet those challenges and succeed given the massive cuts, reduction in force, and reorganization, and, frankly, lost talent. America's national security is compromised by these shortsighted, self-inflicted wounds, and we have heard nothing from you today to ease those critical concerns. Thank you.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Gentleman yields back. For my closing statement, I'll simply recognize you to answer any questions that you felt as though you didn't have the opportunity to answer, or make any statements that you wish to make in closing.

The Honorable Allison HookerSPEAKER_23

Thank you, Chairman. Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before this body and to have the opportunity to tell a good news story, actually. And first of all, I'd like to just reject the premise that the reorganization that Secretary Rubio has undertaken, a historic reorganization that he has undertaken at the Department of State, was haphazard. It was not haphazard. It was methodical. It was considered. It was conducted by engaging senior leadership at the undersecretary level that is both career and political. It was conducted by engaging the workforce, in which we've talked about here today that more than 650 comments went into the consideration. It was conducted to streamline redundancies and meet the needs of our foreign policy going forward, to eliminate some of the the waste, some of the inefficiencies that you've actually also mentioned and your colleagues have mentioned here today. And we're on the way to doing that. The Secretary has taken great strides by eliminating these offices. As I mentioned, these were done—these reorganization steps were taken in a way where they're not personal, were not individual. They were aimed at streamlining functions, streamlining our efforts to make sure that both the President's priorities and the interests of the American people are being met in the most efficient way possible. I also want to answer the assertion that we have now a lack of expertise at the State Department. There are still thousands of experts who also speak Mandarin at the department and who are working every day to—with pride, with great pride, working every day to implement the foreign policy of this great nation. And so some of our—some of your colleagues have just mentioned with the elimination of certain offices that that expertise was just lost forever. No, there are other experts that are working on these issues. These functions have been integrated. And as I said, I commit to working with this body to answer some of the questions that you've raised today that maybe I didn't have the answers in front of me, but it'd be my great honor to do that, as it is my great honor to return to the State Department in this role to serve President Trump and to serve Secretary Rubio. And with that, sir, I'd just like to say thank you very much.

Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL)SPEAKER_16

Thank you for your testimony today. Thank you for your comments. I think saying not haphazard is a perfect way to place this. I spent a lot of time kicking in doors, kicking in doors. It was rapid, it was violent, there were risks, but it was necessary. But being all of those things, it was the farthest thing from haphazard. It was something that needed to take place, and there were some real doors that needed to be kicked in at the State Department. And I thank Secretary Rubio for everything he's undertaken to do that, and I thank you for your lane in that as well. Pursuant to committee rules, all— Maybe one more. Hold on. Gotta find the right page. All right. I thank you for your valuable testimony today. I thank all members for their questions. Members of this committee may have some additional questions for you, Under Secretary, and they will ask you to respond to those in writing pursuant to committee rules. All members may have 5 days to submit those statements, questions, and extraneous materials for the record, subject to length limitations. And without objection, this committee stands adjourned.