Lawmakers want more info on State Department redesign as proposal comes due

Already, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has looked for ways to cut costs at State. | Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo

As Secretary of State Rex Tillerson prepares to restructure the State Department, top lawmakers are demanding more details from the White House about the contentious plan, the outlines of which could be unveiled as soon as this month.

In a letter released Tuesday, a bipartisan group of House members asked White House budget director Mick Mulvaney to brief them on his role in the changes coming to the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, both of which are slated for deep budget cuts that have alarmed lawmakers and the diplomatic community.

The lawmakers’ letter comes as State and USAID are due to send Mulvaney a reorganization proposal as early as this week, following up on an executive order issued by President Donald Trump six months ago. The letter also follows a Senate panel’s vote last week to fully fund State and USAID — a rebuke to Trump’s proposal to slash their budgets by a third.

“We firmly believe that reforming the diplomatic and development architecture of the United States should enhance — not impede — the ability of the State Department and USAID to advance our most pressing foreign policy priorities,” the letter states.

It was signed by Reps. Ed Royce (R-Calif.), Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) and Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.). All four hold top posts on committees or subcommittees that deal with State and USAID.

While Trump has ordered a broad rethink of how executive-branch agencies as a whole are structured, the State Department and USAID are expected to see some of the most substantial changes, including the possibility that the latter will merge into the former.

At Tillerson’s direction, Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan has been leading working groups to accept and develop ideas for the restructuring. Given the fairly tight timeline, the proposal is expected to be largely conceptual at this stage.

But one of the big questions for diplomats at Foggy Bottom and lawmakers on Capitol Hill is whether the reorganization plan will make the assumption that Trump’s proposed budget cuts will take effect.

Already, Tillerson has looked for ways to cut costs at State. He has slowed down hiring and been stingy on programmatic spending. For example, the department is sending a much smaller delegation than normal to the U.N. General Assembly this month as a way to save money.

But few things have united Republicans and Democrats this year as much as opposition to Trump’s push to cut funding for State and USAID. Last week, the Senate Appropriations Committee passed a bill that gave State and related agencies $51 billion for fiscal 2018, roughly on par with past years’ funding.

The legislation also included a number of amendments that could hinder Tillerson s efforts to shake up his department.

One amendment would limit the size of the Policy Planning section at the State Department. Traditionally, Policy Planning has been an in-house think tank for the secretary that does medium- to long-term strategizing. But under Tillerson, the division has taken a more active part in day-to-day decision-making, according to multiple sources on the Hill and at State. The division is led by Brian Hook, whose position does not require Senate confirmation.

On Tuesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a confirmation hearing for Eric Ueland, a former Republican Senate staffer nominated to serve as the undersecretary of state for management. Ueland has been hailed by conservatives and reviled by liberals for his budget wizardry, and some lawmakers worry that he’s being brought to State to find ways to cut the budget while still meeting legal requirements.

Democrats in particular grilled Ueland about a growing concern: that the Trump administration will simply not spend all of the money Congress appropriates agencies and departments, especially State. In theory, that could run afoul of statutes that require that the money appropriated be spent.

“If Congress passes the resources and it’s signed into law, will you carry out the congressional mandate and intent…?” asked Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin, the ranking Democrat on the committee.

Ueland assured Cardin and others on the panel that he would follow the law.

“If Congress has passed and the president has signed legislation calling for expenditure of resources in particular areas, absolutely,” he said.