[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
THE IMPACT OF U.S. WATER PROGRAMS ON GLOBAL HEALTH
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH,
GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
AUGUST 1, 2013
__________
Serial No. 113-98
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
82-312 PDF WASHINGTON : 2014
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio BRAD SHERMAN, California
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
TED POE, Texas GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MATT SALMON, Arizona THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina KAREN BASS, California
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
MO BROOKS, Alabama DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
TOM COTTON, Arkansas ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
PAUL COOK, California JUAN VARGAS, California
GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, Illinois
RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas JOSEPH P. KENNEDY III,
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania Massachusetts
STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas AMI BERA, California
RON DeSANTIS, Florida ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
TREY RADEL, Florida GRACE MENG, New York
DOUG COLLINS, Georgia LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
TED S. YOHO, Florida JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
LUKE MESSER, Indiana
Amy Porter, Chief of Staff Thomas Sheehy, Staff Director
Jason Steinbaum, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and
International Organizations
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania KAREN BASS, California
RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas AMI BERA, California
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
Aaron A. Salzberg, Ph.D., Special Coordinator for Water
Resources, U.S. Department of State............................ 4
The Honorable Christian Holmes, Global Water Coordinator, U.S.
Agency for International Development........................... 16
Mr. John Oldfield, chief executive officer, WASH Advocates....... 33
Mr. Malcolm Morris, chairman, Millennium Water Alliance.......... 44
Mr. Buey Ray Tut, executive director, Aqua Africa................ 52
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
Aaron A. Salzberg, Ph.D.: Prepared statement..................... 7
The Honorable Christian Holmes: Prepared statement............... 18
Mr. John Oldfield: Prepared statement............................ 35
Mr. Malcolm Morris: Prepared statement........................... 47
Mr. Buey Ray Tut: Prepared statement............................. 54
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 70
Hearing minutes.................................................. 71
THE IMPACT OF U.S. WATER PROGRAMS ON GLOBAL HEALTH
----------
THURSDAY, AUGUST 1, 2013
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health,
Global Human Rights, and International Organizations,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 o'clock
p.m., in room 2255 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon.
Christopher H. Smith (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Smith. The subcommittee will come to order. And I want
to wish everybody a good afternoon, and thank you for being
here, especially to our very distinguished witnesses.
Two years ago, our subcommittee held a hearing on U.S.
assistance programs to Africa and found that the unitary water
budgets line item had been zeroed out. Needless to say, some of
the members of our subcommittee, including myself, were at
first astonished that such an important segment of our foreign
policy was seemingly being abandoned, and we know that's not
the case. We were assured that the money for international
water programs did not disappear, but were merely redistributed
among several programs.
Today's hearing is intended to look at how effective that
strategy has been, how our Government's international water
programs can be implemented in the future, and how we can be of
additional assistance in the Congress in ensuring that that is
done.
Water is undeniably important to health, and the very
survival of human beings. Water comprises more than two-thirds
of the human body weight, and without water we would die in a
matter of days.
The human brain is 95 percent water, blood is 82 percent
water, and our lungs are 90 percent water; a mere 2 percent
drop in our body's water level can trigger signs of
dehydration, including fuzzy short-term memory, trouble with
basic math, and difficulty focusing on smaller print, such as
on a computer screen. Water is important to the mechanics of
the human body. The body cannot work without it, just as a car
can't work without gas and oil.
It is, therefore, troubling that so many people in the
world do not have ready access to clean water. According to the
2012 report released by the World Health Organization and the
United Nations Children's Fund, roughly 780 million people
around the world lack access to clean drinking water, and an
estimated 2.5 billion, roughly 40 percent of the population,
are without access to safe sanitation facilities. Tainted water
and sanitary practices are at the root of many health problems
in the developing world, and are hindering U.S. and
international global health efforts.
I know for a fact, and it's still one of the correctable
problems in the world, that one of the leading killers of
children remains to be diarrheal disease traced back to water-
borne disease. In my second term, back in the early 1980s, I
actually authored the reauthorization and expansion from $25
million to $50 million of what was known as the Child Survival
Fund, and one of the four pillars of that fund at the time was
oral rehydration salts to help those children who were dying a
needless death attributable the diarrheal disease.
In a June 27th hearing on neglected diseases, our
subcommittee heard testimony on the WHO list of 17 neglected
tropical diseases, three of which are primarily water-borne.
However, there are dozens of other diseases transmitted through
contaminated water, including botulism, cholera, dysentery,
hepatitis A, polio, and SARS.
WHO estimates that more than 14,000 people die daily from
water-borne illnesses which cause more than 1 billion cases of
intestinal worms, 1.4 million child diarrheal deaths, and
500,000 deaths from malaria. Moreover, water is at the root of
international conflict.
A growing number of conflicts are exacerbated by limited
access to water. Increasing demand and greater variability in
rainfall can inflame tension, such as the concern Egypt has
expressed, about the impact of the Nile's flow to Ethiopia's
proposed Grand Renaissance Dam.
Although water circulates, returning to availability
through various natural processes such as evaporation, clouds,
and rain, only about 2.5 percent of the planet's water is fresh
rather than salty, and less than half the amount is available
in rivers, lakes, or underground aquifers.
Pollution consumes some of the available water from
industrial or agricultural runoff. An estimated 40 percent of
U.S. rivers, and 40 percent of U.S. lakes are considered unfit
for fishing, swimming, or drinking. We are in a developed
country with significant resources.
Developing countries too often don't keep adequate track of
the extent of pollution, nor do they have the ability to
adequately do something about it. Other constraints on the
global supply of water include efforts to privatize water
systems in the developing world, and the encroachment of salt
water into fresh water systems.
The challenges to insuring that clean water is available to
people in developing countries are serious. That is why new
legislation is being developed: The Senator Paul Simon Water
for the World Act of 2013. Mr. Blumenauer has already joined us
from out there on the panel, and his bill will strengthen the
2000 act.
The new bill calls on USAID to continue to observe the
Water for the Poor Act of `05 in implementation of its water
and development strategy. The bill would elevate the positions
of our first two witnesses today, the U.S. Global Water
Coordinator and State Department Specialist Coordinator for
Water Resources to report directly to the Administrator of
USAID and Secretary of State respectively. Among other
provisions, the bill requires local consultation on water
management and usage, and encourages local contracting and
water sanitation and hygiene projects.
I am glad to be a co-sponsor of this legislation because
water is life and we must be as efficient as possible in our
efforts to provide clean water to those in need worldwide.
In addition to the leading administration officials on
International Water Programs we have three private panel
witnesses who I will introduce at the appropriate time. I'd
like to yield to Mr. Blumenauer if he has any comments.
Mr. Blumenauer. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I deeply
appreciate your having this hearing today to build a record, as
I appreciate your longstanding interest and leadership in this
area. You were original co-sponsor of the Water for the Poor
Act and original co-sponsor in the new act, and I really deeply
appreciate your continued advocacy and understanding. And you
laid out the case I think in a compelling way.
The vast majority of the world's water is salt water. Most
of the 2\1/2\ percent that's left is locked at least for the
time being until global warming does otherwise in Iceland, the
Arctic, and the Antarctic. And when you factor out the water
that's used for industry, for agriculture, basically it's \1/
10\th of a percent of all of this water that's available for
people to drink.
I cannot say enough about your choice of witnesses. It's
been my privilege to work with them in the formulation of this
legislation. With Mr. Holmes, Dr. Salzberg, you've got people
who are on point, who've helped us get to this point. I love
the release of the USAID Water and Development Strategy in May,
and the broad bipartisan support. The people that were there,
and the NGO community, the second panel with Malcolm Morris,
John Oldfield. The NGO community has been particularly focused
helping us understand and carrying this message out around the
world.
The last time I was sitting behind the dais with Malcolm on
the other side of the witness table before this very committee
was just a few months before Congress passed and President Bush
signed into law the Water for the Poor Act.
I hope today with your help and leadership, Mr. Chairman,
and the advocacy and insight of the people that are here we're
going to be able to repeat that success with the Water for the
World Act. And I must say how much I appreciate working with my
friend and colleague, Ted Poe, who has a real passion for this.
It is an opportunity for us to prove that politics stops
with water. We used to say it stopped at the water's edge, but
here we ought to be able to show that politics does stop with
water. Our colleagues, Nita Lowey and Kay Granger, in one of
the most difficult budget environments imaginable with strained
resources have been able to produce legislation that actually
keeps intact the gains that we have made.
I am very pleased with the progress we've made, deeply
appreciate your attention and focus on it, and with our friends
I think we can assume a role that's going to make a big
difference for women and children around the world.
I close by noting your advocacy for the protection of women
and children, your concern about human trafficking. And today
there will be 200 million hours that will be spent by women and
girls collecting water. And it's not just time that they won't
spend in school or working to support the family; they are at
risk of attack, physical, sexual assault. Our being able to
strengthen the opportunity to have that gift that most of us
take for granted is going to help protect the integrity of the
family, strengthen them, and allow us to live up to our ideals.
Thank you so very much.
Mr. Smith. Thank you to my distinguished colleague and lead
author of this legislation. I do want to thank him for his
passion to try to insure that everyone on this planet has
access to safe water, and I appreciate it, we all appreciate
it.
I'd like to yield to my good friend and colleague, Mr.
Marino.
Mr. Marino. I have no opening.
Mr. Smith. Thank you. I'd like to now introduce our
distinguished witnesses. Beginning first with Dr. Aaron
Salzberg, who serves as Special Coordinator for Water Resources
at the Department of State in the Bureau of Oceans,
Environment, and Science Affairs. He is responsible for
managing the development and implementation of U.S. policies on
drinking water and sanitation water resources management and
transboundary water issues.
Dr. Salzberg has been the lead representative or the lead
water advisor for the U.S. at several major international
events. He also leads the Department of State engagement on
transboundary water issues in many regions throughout the world
where water is or may become a source of tension or conflict.
We'll then hear from Mr. Christian Holmes who was
designated USAID's Global Water Coordinator in February 2011.
He is the senior representative within USAID responsible for
advising the Administrator on water matters and for
coordinating the implementation of key water program and policy
initiatives including USAID's Water Strategy.
Mr. Holmes has extensive public and private sector
experience in international economic development, humanitarian
assistance, and environmental protection sectors. He has also
worked in the field supporting USAID missions in Pakistan,
Yemen, Bangladesh, and Ghana on water and food security issues.
So, Dr. Salzberg, if you would begin.
STATEMENT OF AARON A. SALZBERG, PH.D., SPECIAL COORDINATOR FOR
WATER RESOURCES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Mr. Salzberg. Thank you, Chairman Smith and other members
of the committee for the opportunity to appear before you today
and discuss our work on water. Especially grateful for the
opportunity to testify alongside my close friend and colleague
from USAID, Chris Holmes. And, of course, thank you,
Congressman Blumenauer for your kind words and your
longstanding support and dedication to these issues.
If you will allow me, Mr. Chairman, I would also like to
submit my full remarks for the record.
Mr. Smith. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Salzberg. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, you and Congressman Blumenauer, I think
you've already made the case. Both at home and abroad water
security is becoming one of the great challenges of our time.
The lack of access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation,
poor water resources, increase in hydrologic variability from
climate change is a threat to people's health, to the
environment, to economic growth, to energy and food security,
and to the peace and security of people throughout the world.
To address these challenges, the United States is working
to increase access to safe drinking water and sanitation,
improve water resources management, and increase the
productivity of water resources. We're also working to mitigate
tensions associated with shared waters in many places
throughout the world.
We do this in five ways. First, we build capacity.
Countries and communities must take the lead in securing their
own water futures, and we must give them the tools to succeed.
This means building the knowledge and skills at all levels to
understand and respond to water and sanitation challenges.
Second, we engage diplomatically. The United States is
working to raise international awareness and encourage
countries to prioritize water and sanitation needs in national
development strategies, plans, and budgets. We're also working
in key regions and throughout the world diplomatically to
strengthen cooperation.
Third, invest in infrastructure. As one of the world's
largest bilateral donors in water and sanitation, the United
States invests in infrastructure in developing countries to
meet basic needs and to manage water resources.
Fourth, science and technology. While there is no silver
bullet, science and technology can make a huge impact. We're
working to incentivize innovation and the development of new
technologies that can achieve results at scale.
Fifth, partnerships. We can't solve this problem alone. We
work closely with a range of international partners and more
than 20 U.S. Government agencies and departments. Partnerships
like the recently launched U.S. Water Partnership can tap into
the much needed knowledge and experience, and resources from
the public, private, not-for-profit partners from across the
United States and bring these resources to bear on these
international challenges.
As the result of U.S. engagement on water and sanitation
we've seen real changes. Since 2006, more than 34 million
people worldwide have gained access to improved drinking water
supplies and more than 16 million people to improved sanitation
facilities.
In Fiscal Year 2012 nearly \3/4\ths of all U.S. support for
water went toward drinking water sanitation and improving
hygiene, and nearly 30 percent of that support went to
countries in sub-Saharan Africa. This trend has been further
reinforced by the recent launch of USAID's first ever water and
development strategy which makes reducing water-related disease
a strategic priority for the agency.
The United States has also played a key role in shaping the
way in which the international community approaches water and
sanitation challenges. We've been the driving force behind
expanding approaches to treating and safely storing water at
the household level, developing water quality guidelines, and
strengthening institutions like the African Ministers Council
on Water.
In recent years, the Department of State has become
increasingly engaged in promoting cooperation over shared water
resources. These are not easy problems to solve. Transboundary
water issues are often viewed through a national security lens.
They're embedded within a much broader set of economic, social,
and geopolitical issues. In some cases water, rivers, lakes,
ecosystems are closely tied to a sense of national identity,
and development of these resources is seen as a sovereign
right. Responding to these challenges requires patience,
flexibility, and closely coordinated diplomatic and development
efforts.
With this in mind, we launched the shared waters
partnership in 2010. This partnership serves as a multi-donor
platform to support political dialogue in regions where water
is or may become a source of tension or conflict. And we've
used this mechanism to support regional discussions on the
Nile, Niger, Okavango, many other regions throughout the world.
These are just a few examples of what the United States is
doing and how we believe that U.S. leadership on water is
making a measurable difference in lives throughout the world.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for this opportunity to
testify. We look forward to continuing our work with the
members of the subcommittee, USAID, other U.S. Government
agencies and other stakeholders here in the room to improve
water resources management, and to provide safe water and basic
sanitation to those currently without. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Salzberg follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Smith. Mr. Holmes, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CHRISTIAN HOLMES, GLOBAL WATER
COORDINATOR, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Holmes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Smith and members of the subcommittee, thank you
for the opportunity to testify today, and I ask that my full
written statement be submitted.
Mr. Smith. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Holmes. Thank you. And I will have a few core points
from my testimony and look forward to your questions.
I should say at the outset both you and Congressman
Blumenauer went right to the core of not only the magnitude of
the problem that we deal with, but some of the aspects of it
that have to be addressed. You referenced the importance of
dealing with diarrheal disease and it is, indeed, huge with
children, that we feel that we can do a lot to address and
mitigate through our water programs. And Congressman
Blumenauer, you addressed the importance of dealing with water,
and that in many ways is a critical element on the new USAID
Water Strategy. And your reference to how little water there is
on this planet goes to the core of our approaches targeted
around water efficiency to make sure that water is used
effectively for health and for food security.
I've had the privilege of working for a long time in the
government, started my career on this committee a long, long
time ago, and this problem of water tops anything I've ever
dealt with in my career. The magnitude is so enormous and the
cost to human life is so dear.
You cited, Mr. Chairman, some of the key statistics that
really surround the problem, and rather than repeat them which
you've already addressed, I think I'll move more directly to
save some time also for you into some other aspects of my
testimony.
I would like to note that in addition to my friend, Dr.
Salzberg, we have a lot of friends in this room. This is a
great water family that we're dealing with from the U.S.
Government agencies, the private sector, the NGO community, and
they've all helped get us to this point. And the point in many
ways is the successful implementation of the Water for the Poor
Act. I think you've made great progress.
To that end, from Fiscal Year 2006 to 2012 we've reached
close to 50 million people through our WASH programs. And I
think encouragingly, we're seeing increased funding moving to
our water programs to Africa. From 2006 to 2012 we committed
about $2.4 billion in our water programs, and about $848
million of that amount went to Africa in that top geographic
area. And when you consider all the other competing demands
geographically for water, this is a good sign in terms of the
direction that we're moving in.
Mr. Chairman, Congressman Blumenauer noted the new USAID
water development strategy and we really appreciate your kind
comments, Congressman Blumenauer. Thank you about that.
And to meet the challenges, the strategy and our principal
goal is to save lives and advance development, but first and
foremost, is to save lives. And our water programs are really
targeted on that. And we do it for our water sanitation and
hygiene programs, and we do it through the guidance to us by
the Congress through the Water for the Poor Act, also.
The Water for the Poor Act calls for specific metrics that
should be set, and so for the first time we set the metrics and
the strategy to reach over 5 years 10 million people with
improved access to water and 6 million people with improved
access to sanitation. The Water for the Poor Act said come up
with criteria for the countries that you select to prioritize
through your programming for your water supply, sanitation, and
hygiene efforts.
The world is a big place. We have water programs, WASH
programs in 62 countries, and we have developed that criteria
consulting carefully with Hill staff on both sides of the aisle
and the House and the Senate, and now we'll be applying that
criteria probably in Fiscal Year 2014.
And I note that in the Water for the World Act which,
obviously, is just coming out, but as it's been developed it
calls for many of the things that we've already started to move
out on listening carefully to our colleagues. For example, the
Water for the World Act calls for organizational shifts in aid
to elevate the water team into an office, and we've done that.
It calls for an elevated leadership position for water, which
is the Global Water Coordinator position, and we've done that.
It calls for metrics, and we've done that. It calls for really
advanced monitoring and evaluation, and we made a commitment in
the strategy for the first time to really start concentrating
far more heavily on what happens after the cycle, the 5-year
cycle of the program of funding closes, and we're going to do
that.
So, geographically I've given you kind of a thumbnail
mention about where we are moving forward in terms of Africa.
As we move ahead financially we concentrate, and you're
interested in the accounts, I'm prepared to discuss that when
you wish, really in four areas through our WASH funding and
funds which are provided to us through the directed
appropriations pursuant to the Water for the Poor Act, and
that's 100 percent devoted to WASH. And, at the same time, we
also fund our water programs through our Water Resources
Management Programs, our Water Productivity Programs like
support food production, and our International Disaster
Assistance Programs. And I think the good news is that while
the directed appropriation has been at the level of about $315
million, which we have met, we've also exceeded that for the
WASH funding by linking, you know, our WASH programs and other
ongoing programs in the agency. So, to that end, when we have
HIV/AIDS programs, well, it doesn't make a lot of sense to be
giving people medicine if they lose the medicines through
diarrhea. And that's where WASH makes such an important
contribution. If we have nutrition programs, it doesn't make a
lot of sense to have nutrition programs if you lose your
nutrients because of diarrhea, so we make that coupling.
So, this is a quick kind of tour de force overview, and I
look forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Holmes follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Smith. Thank you very much, Mr. Holmes.
Let me begin the questioning, and we'll have a second round
if others would like it.
But let me just begin first of all with, you know, the Safe
Drinking Water Act of 1974, as you know, the landmark law that
insures that Americans and anybody living in the U.S. has
access to safer water. It affects 160,000 public water systems
in the U.S. It sets national health standards for drinking
water. And I was in Congress in 1996 when we increased that
capability; that law was expanded to include Source Water
Protection, Operator Training, and today EPA has about 90
contaminants listed with maximum containment levels or MCLs,
including microorganisms, disinfectants, inorganic chemicals
including copper, cadmium, arsenic, lead, mercury, organic
chemicals including benzene, carbon tetrachloride, dioxin, and
radionuclides.
My question would be the United States more than Europe, I
believe more than any other nation on earth, has written the
book on how to--and we're still not there. It's always a work
in progress. More things ought to be on that list of 90 plus,
but we've written the book on how to make our water safer. And
I'm wondering how you interface with EPA, and how you take the
lessons learned and, hopefully, pass like a baton and mentor,
frankly, some of those who have emerging systems.
Mr. Holmes. So, I worked at EPA as the Deputy for
Enforcement there, and I dealt a lot with the Safe Drinking
Water Act, and the Clean Water Act which, of course, one can
talk about for a long, long time.
So, an important element of our work, particularly as it
relates to this category of Water Resources Management is to
really help build up the appropriate governance, and policy,
and regulatory structure in countries. But, at the same, you
know, we really recognize that utilities, just as they play
here in the United States, really play a really critical role
in economic development, and particularly in Africa. And we
have a major program underway throughout Africa to concentrate
on the strengthening of utilities, not just from the
perspective of strengthening, you know, the manpower and
staffing, but also improving the capacity to be able to pay for
themselves to the extent a utility can. And, also, strengthen
up their technical capacity to recover losses from water, and
those losses tend to come from two places. They tend to come
from either, you know, improper engineering, bad piping, some
sort of technical flaw, or they come from water being stolen
and then being sold off on the side.
So, it's a really important question you ask, and I think
as we go farther and farther ahead with our programs this kind
of work is going to become very important.
Mr. Smith. Especially as Africa industrializes and more of
these chemicals leach into aquifers.
Mr. Holmes. And it becomes more urban.
Mr. Smith. Right. Yes, Dr. Salzberg.
Mr. Salzberg. I'll be honest, I think the question we get
most often, I, the Secretary, whenever they're talking and
talking about water isn't about give us your money, it's tell
us how you solve this problem. More than anything else, I think
developing countries are craving the knowledge and expertise of
the United States from the governmental agencies, the non-
governmental sector, the private sector. I think they
understand that we have a very decentralized network of water
supply systems here in the United States, of waste water
treatment here in the United States. They want to know how we
make that work from a regulatory perspective, from a policy
perspective, from a technical perspective, from a financial
perspective, they want to see all that.
We have an interagency team which we chair. We meet once a
month. It includes representatives from all the U.S. agencies
that work on water, and departments that you probably didn't
think did much work on water. NASA, for example, is a very
active member of our group because some of the remote sensing
tools that they bring to bear on some of these challenges. And
that's really our brains. They're the folks who tell us what
makes sense for us to do as we approach some of these policy
issues internationally; very, very important.
We just launched the U.S. Water Partnership, which I
mentioned. You know, the idea behind that partnership is to
address the exact challenge you mentioned, which is can we
create a portal where we can bring the best and the brightest
of the United States, not just from the governmental sector,
but from the private sector and everywhere else to bear on this
challenge in a meaningful way for people from developing
countries. That's the idea behind that partnership. We hope it
succeeds and we can really take advantage of both the expertise
that you have in your districts, but the expertise that we have
here in the room.
Mr. Smith. If I could ask you, we will have the testimony
from the Millennium Water Alliance, faith-based, obviously. In
all things that USAID does, I think it plays a critical role.
Do you try to be inclusive of those faith-based initiatives?
And, also, if I could ask on unmet need, if you had more money,
what could you do? The amount of money that you do have, how
adequate is it? And then I'll go to Dr. Bera.
Mr. Holmes. So, we are--we work very closely with the
faith-based organizations. I began working in the Office of
Foreign Disaster Assistance with these organizations a long
time ago and we continue it. In fact, they were very active in
the launch of our water strategy this year, and they're really
just a strong ally. And one thing I've noticed what we have in
common with really all faith-based organizations is that from
my experience, their first goal is to save human life. And
that's the first--that's the lead-off in this water strategy,
so we're very much linked on that.
In terms of more money well, obviously, you know, anybody
from the administration is going to be very careful about
indirectly asking for more money at a cycle.
Mr. Smith. What's not being done? Should additional
resources have been available, or what are we not achieving?
Mr. Holmes. Well, I think that the magnitude of the problem
is so huge when you're dealing with the numbers that you were
talking about; 2 billion people without adequate sanitation on
the planet, and 800 million of them still in need of adequate
water.
I don't want to dodge your question in the sense of saying
we don't need more money. I mean, everyone, obviously, needs
additional resources, but I think the real question here is how
do you more effectively leverage what you've got. That's going
to be the art form, I think, going ahead. And that is why we're
placing a huge amount of emphasis on the kinds of partnerships
we develop so as to be able to draw more capital into these aid
projects because what's going on in foreign investment, or
what's going on in our aid programs, so how do we basically
link together?
We have several projects that we're encouraged, the
Congress has given us a guarantee authority for loans and we
leverage that up to help build water treatment facilities, for
example, in the Manila area, and we do it in such a fashion
that we bring in Japanese financing to complement it. At the
same time, we turn to big multinationals. Coca Cola, for
example, is the largest employer in Africa, so we have a
partnership with Coca Cola. It's a $30 million partnership.
It's in about 10 countries, and we seek to develop projects in
those countries which are sustainable so that one way or
another over a long period of time they'll stand on their own.
Mr. Smith. Thank you.
Mr. Salzberg. I think this conversation shouldn't be
limited to our money. I mean, the fact is we need to see
greater investment by the countries themselves, by communities
themselves. And we need to see full cost recovery of this
service provision in the country, along with the mobilization
of local capital. There is liquidity in some of these
countries; we need to get that money out and working for the
communities. So, looking at some of the tools and mechanisms we
can use to leverage some of that local capital, I think, is
going to be critically important.
Mr. Smith. Thank you. Dr. Bera.
Mr. Bera. Thank you, Chairman Smith.
And, again, let me compliment you on the series of hearings
that we've had in this committee that really just focus on the
basic necessities of human life, food security, water security.
You know, there's no greater need. And I look at this as a
physician who's worked in public health. I mean, again, if you
can't address clean water, if you can't address basic
nutrition, there's not much more you can address after that, so
it is just--you talked about an effective way of saving human
life. It is also the most important thing that we can do to
relieve human suffering.
You know, my home institution where I'm on faculty at the
University of California-Davis have the privilege--they have a
long history of taking our medical students through various
programs and going into Africa, going into Latin America. I've
had the privilege of going with some of my medical students
into Nicaragua and when we go into the neighborhoods with the
public health nurses there, you know, it starts with just basic
education, as well, because you could see the food preparation
facilities right here, and five feet away you see the
sanitation facilities. So, when we talk about food-borne
illnesses, when we talk about--it starts with that basic level
of education. And there's a lot that we can do there. You know,
certainly we have robust programs in the Peace Corps, we have
volunteer programs, we have the faith-based initiatives that
are out there, so pulling all this together so we're all
working and moving in the same direction.
Mr. Holmes, we have had the privilege of chatting with Dr.
Shah from USAID, and also the Millennium Corporation, and we've
emphasized the shift from just direct donation to capacity
building in these communities to helping these countries build
their own capacity. And that, obviously, starts with education,
but then it also starts with looking for local solutions where
you're empowering communities in countries with solutions that
are going to work there in those localities. We're just
conserving electricity.
But then you can come up with small-scale solutions that
work for a particular house or a particular town, but we also
then want to help develop scalable solutions. So, you know, my
first question to either one of you would be where you would go
in terms of funding some of this research and development, but
doing it in a mechanism that actually works in these developing
nations.
Mr. Holmes. So, I think that you go right to the core of
where we're trying to go. I can tell you've been talking to Dr.
Shah, so let me answer it in two ways. One, very specifically,
we develop the kinds of partnerships that are going to support
really new novel thinking, so we have a partnership with Gates
called WASH for Life. We seek solicitations for ideas that are
at a very early stage. We provide individuals with a small
amount of money so an organization called Sanergy received
$100,000 grant to develop in urban slums in Kenya ways in which
to take human feces and convert in into a marketable commodity,
sanitation marketing. And then we have a commitment that as
this matures over time we'll try to stay with them.
And more recently, we've also made probably the largest
commitment from this fund to support the chlorination of water
at the point of use, but in such a way that the chlorination
holds in effect for a while after it's gone into the Gerry Can
and come home.
On scale, working with communities is what it's about,
particularly when you're trying to end open defecation because
of the relationship of open defecation to many chronic
neglected tropical diseases which are so troubling now that
they're exceeding the capacity of antibiotics to treat them
completely, and hence the importance of these preventative
actions. So, in Ethiopia we've had a program heavily based upon
community participation that successfully eliminated open
defecation by 2.8 million people in the Ampara region. That's
the kind of scale we have to get.
Mr. Bera. Thanks. Dr. Salzberg.
Mr. Salzberg. Yes, I think we have to do a better job
talking to a lot of these companies about how we look at local
solutions, and getting those into practice, and working at
scale. And there's some great innovators along those lines that
exist.
I think one of the important things that we can do from a
U.S. Government side could be along technology verification.
We've seen this where CDC, the Centers for Disease Control, has
done a lot of work to look at, as Chris is mentioning, some of
these household approaches to disinfecting and safely storing
water, and proving the efficacy of these approaches in a
developing country context and whether or not these things can
work through a market-based approach to achieve results at
scale. I think those are important roles that the expertise of
the U.S. Government might be able to help with.
Mr. Bera. Great. Well, again, I applaud you, and I should
note it's great to see my friend, Congressman Blumenauer,
sitting in this committee. Thank you.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Meadows.
Mr. Meadows. Yes, thank you, both of you. What I would love
to hear from you is as you are--you mentioned the matrix that
you're looking at from a standpoint of project-specific, where
they are, what we do. How do you think we can improve on that
particular model, or is there anything from a legislative
standpoint that we can help, from a reporting standpoint, or
anything else that would give you additional tools to make
those assessments on where to place the assets. We have a
limited--as you mentioned, it's just a huge task, and so is
there anything legislatively that we can do? And then from a
matrix standpoint, how do you decide where we invest next?
Mr. Holmes. Well, you know, you kind of did it because when
you passed the Water for the Poor Act, you told us that you
really had to develop criteria, and you had to make them
public, and you had to engage the stakeholders in the process,
so that was extremely helpful. And, you know, you can't get
anywhere without a clear statement of objectives and plan. And,
quite candidly, until we developed the water development
strategy we didn't have that, and that impetus came from the
Water for the Poor Act.
I think where you can always be helpful is really in the
understanding of the complexity of this problem. It just does
not lend itself to easy fixes. And as we learn more about the
sustainability side of this issue; namely, it's one thing to
say you've provided water, and sanitation, and hygiene, the
acronym WASH, to people, and to say we've given these services
to 10,000 people, but it's another thing to try to figure out
what happened to those 10,000 people over a 15-year period. And
that seems to be the question that people really want answered
more and more. That takes time, and it takes resources to do
that internally.
Mr. Salzberg. You know, I think we've got the push down. I
think we need to see more pulling. And I think you can be very
helpful in that regard. Your colleagues internationally--as
parliamentarians you have a very unique perspective within your
own districts about how you deal with some of these challenges.
Sharing some of those experiences with your colleagues
internationally can do a lot in both raising awareness and the
importance of these issues for them, and creating the kind of
demand signals, and co-investments that we need to see to
insure the sustainability of the work that we do on the ground.
So, I think there's a large role that you can also play not
just on the side that you mentioned, but also on the side of
really helping create demand internationally.
Mr. Meadows. So, more on the international side of it where
we go out and stress not only the importance, but the dire
consequences if we don't do this. Is that what you're saying?
Mr. Salzberg. Well, I think so. And I think you all come
from districts that have personal experiences with this, so you
have very appropriate personal stories on how this--and I don't
just mean from a drinking water and sanitation perspective. You
know, it's the relationship between energy and water.
Mr. Meadows. Right.
Mr. Salzberg. Food and water, all the other complications
that you guys are dealing with.
Mr. Meadows. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Smith. Thank you very much.
[Off microphone comments.]
Mr. Blumenauer. I deeply appreciate your doing this. I just
wanted to follow-up on Congressman Meadows' point about the
resource. I mean, these folks are being very diplomatic, but
what we just heard here is despite the effort of the focus,
$2.5 billion that's been cobbled together from a variety of
different areas, we've just moved the needle a little bit. And
in some cases, like in the area of sanitation we're at risk of
falling behind because of rapid urbanization. But the key here,
and part of what we're trying to do with the new legislation is
there are lots of ways to leverage money that's already being
spent.
Poor people around the world are paying a huge cost for
poor water supply now that they buy privately, or they pay with
their time. If we can help with credit enhancement, a tiny
shift of some of our aid dollars, we have an opportunity to
help them get more out of their resources, save lives, and
build friends for us. And we look forward to working with your
committee, if possible, to just zero in on this with the
legislation that's going forward because it's coming to you.
Mr. Stockman. I can also say on a firsthand basis, I was in
Brazzaville drinking, what I thought, was bottled water, but I
found out the locals recap it and seal it. I found that out in
a very personal way.
Mr. Smith. The subcommittee will stand in recess, and again
I thank you for your patience.
[Recess.]
Mr. Smith. The subcommittee will resume this hearing, and I
can't apologize enough for that length of voting, so please
accept my apology.
Let me just ask a question with regards to the ratio of
wells to people. Obviously, it's a big issue here, how deep do
they go, how clean, as opposed to a public water system? And if
I'm not mistaken, the definition for a water system here is 15
or more people that are served. But what is the situation in
sub-Saharan Africa with regards to water wells versus--you
know, where are we putting our big emphasis to build out what
kind of capability, or both?
Mr. Holmes. In some ways some of those problems are
analogous--pardon me, Mr. Chairman. In some ways some of the
problems are analogous to what we're facing in different parts
of the United States; namely, rapid depletion of groundwater,
and the salinization of groundwater. So, those become two
extremely important considerations. And related to where you
locate the wells and related to the sustainability of the wells
are the programs we put in place on water catchment, so we find
that our water catchment efforts and our wells efforts are
closely interrelated. And I think in some ways one of the
iconic projects related to water catchments which relates to
water supply and wells is the Productive Safety Net Program in
Ethiopia. And this is a project that I think you're going to
hear more of in the future that dealt with anticipating major
climatic change in Ethiopia, identifying a population of 7
million people that would be adversely affected by significant
climate change, making a bet that it's going to occur, and then
working with the population to put in adequate water catchment
and adequate water supply, sanitation, and hygiene. So, the
issue of the location of the wells relates to the issue of
basically insuring that there's adequate water in the area in
which you're going to be drilling.
I guess the second part about the challenge of wells is to
be artful in where you're putting the wells in the communities
you're working with so you're not inadvertently causing any
conflict between agrarian and pastoralist related to the well
sites. And, again, in Africa we're building up an increasing
amount of expertise working with the NGO community on how to
appropriate site the wells.
I think the third thing related to wells relates very
closely to the issue of water and women, and we're finding that
supporting community organizations that take ownership and
responsibility for the drilling and the operating of the wells
becomes absolutely essential, and it becomes essential so as to
minimize the amount of time that women take, and the risks that
they incur in search of water from wells that may not be in
that good shape but are very distant and prevent tremendous
danger to them.
You know, in terms of a ratio of water wells to people,
that's a tough one. I'm not quite sure I have a good answer for
you on that, but I can look into it in more detail.
Mr. Smith. Okay, but what about in the public setting, I
mean, the public water works. Usually we define it 15 or more
people are served by it. Isn't that correct?
Mr. Holmes. Well, there are going to be more people than 15
that are going to be having access to wells whether it's urban
or rural. I can assure you on that.
Mr. Smith. Can I just ask you, John Oldfield, the CEO of
WASH Advocates who will be testifying, in his fourth
recommendation I just would love your feedback on it, and I'm
sure he'll elaborate on it. But it says, ``[p]rovide more
effective oversight as to where and how these funds are being
invested. We are concerned,'' he goes on, ``that many of these
funds are not going to countries and communities where the need
is the greatest for safe drinking water and sanitation.'' How
do you respond to that?
Mr. Holmes. So, when we developed the water strategy one of
the big efforts was to develop the criteria that would relate
to the countries that we would select for our water programs
and do it on a priority basis. And the criteria which we laid
out in the water strategy lays out two components. One
component is need, and that would be things like childhood
deaths due to diarrhea which, of course, relates to
inadequately treated water. And the second criteria was
opportunity; namely, the ability of a country to actually
manage public water systems effectively. And we weighted the
criteria so it was strongly weighted toward need. And we plan
to basically prioritize our countries around that criteria
which is heavily need-based, and then govern the allocation of
our funds starting in Fiscal Year 2014 as it relates to water
supply, sanitation, and hygiene to meet those criteria. And
that's a huge departure for us, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Salzberg. And I think if you look at the overall trend
since the passage of the Water for the Poor Act in 2005, I
mean, you're seeing significant changes in our investments, you
look at the DA accounts; and, Chris, you can answer this a
little bit better than I can, where I think when I joined in
2005, the first accounting 2005-2006 it was $16 million of DA
in Africa for drinking water supply and sanitation. And that
number is now well over--it's peaked at over 100 at some times,
so you are seeing trends I think in the right direction. I
think you're seeing the right prioritization of the Water for
the Poor strategy. And a major step forward with USAID's water
and development strategy.
And I think you're also seeing, when you look at the
Millennium Challenge Corporation and the significant
investments that they're now starting to make in many countries
in Africa, as well. This is a major contribution to some of
those challenges.
Mr. Smith. Thank you. I hope the other members get back,
but just--I guess I'm pretty much done. I want to thank you so
much for your patience. I thought the other members would
return.
Mr. Holmes. Thank you.
Mr. Smith. And, again, I apologize for that delay. I look
forward to working with you going forward.
Mr. Holmes. We do, too. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Smith. Thank you both gentlemen. Thank you.
We welcome our second panel to the witness table. Beginning
first with Mr. John Oldfield who leads the efforts of WASH
Advocates to increase awareness to the global WASH challenges
and solutions, and to increase the amount and effectiveness of
resources devoted to those solutions throughout the developing
world.
His previous experience with safe drinking water, and
sanitation, and hygiene comes from founding two implementing
non-profits in the sector, as well as his tenure as executive
vice president with Water Advocates, a group dedicated to
increasing financial and political support for worldwide access
to safe, affordable, and sustainable supplies of drinking water
and adequate sanitation.
We will then hear from Mr. Malcolm Morris, who serves as
chairman of the Millennium Water Alliance, a group of American
non-profit organizations that he founded in response to a call
from U.S. administration officials under his leadership.
The Millennium Water Alliance is leading an effort to bring
potable water and sanitation to 500 million people by 2015. He
is chairman emeritus of Living Water International, which in
1990 began drilling water wells in Kenya for hospitals,
schools, orphanages, churches, and communities, and is now
operating in more than 20 countries having completed projects
providing water to more than 10 million people on a daily
basis.
And then we'll hear from Mr. Buey Ray Tut who is executive
director of Aqua Africa. He was born in a small village in
South Sudan, and when he was 8-years old his family fled to
Ethiopia to escape the civil war in Sudan. His father was
jailed in Ethiopia for political involvement, and after his
father's release from prison his family was granted political
asylum in the U.S., and his family is settled in Nebraska.
He co-founded Aqua Africa at the age of 21, and has served
as a trustee for the South Sudan Community Association.
Mr. Oldfield, if you could begin.
STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN OLDFIELD, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, WASH
ADVOCATES
Mr. Oldfield. Thank you, Chairman Smith and distinguished
members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to provide
these remarks which are a summary of my written statement
submitted earlier.
Let me express, first of all, my gratitude to the
subcommittee for your support for safe drinking water, for
sanitation, for health, and related development challenges over
the years. I'd also like to quickly applaud the efforts and
commitment of my co-panelists here and, frankly, everybody in
the room on behalf of this issue, and also acknowledge and
thank the dozens of individuals who helped me crowd source this
testimony, Mr. Chairman.
Imagine this, and you don't need to work hard to imagine
this based on how this hearing has gone so far today. A woman
spends the first 3 hours of her day wandering through
treacherous terrain to find a 20-liter bucket of dirty, filthy
water to spend the next 3 hours of that day hauling that dirty
water back on her head, not knowing if that water is going to
make her children sick when she gets it back home. She may not
have even named her youngest children because so many people in
that community die before the age of five because of unsafe
water and inadequate sanitation.
Neither she, nor her children, have a bathroom, so they
suffer the indignity, the vulnerability, the physical
vulnerability that the subcommittee members have discussed
today through open defecation. Here in the U.S. we haven't
lived under these conditions for a long time, but this is a
challenge faced by hundreds of millions of people around the
world every day.
This is a grave challenge, but it is a solvable challenge.
And, most importantly, if I could leave you with one message,
it's a challenge that's being solved in Africa, in Asia, in
Latin America as we sit here at this hearing every day.
The solutions, to get to some of your earlier questions,
are often quite simple. These are wells, these are latrines,
these are hand washing stations equipped with bars of soap,
these are rainwater harvesting schemes. The most transformative
of these solutions are those which focus on strengthening and
building capacity of local communities to solve their own
challenges.
I'd like to just quickly highlight a couple of very recent
successes in the global water sector and blend in my humble
requests for the committee to consider. First of all, as you
know, USAID has recently launched their first ever 5-year water
and development strategy. We ask that your subcommittee
continue to provide effective oversight as to where, and as to
how these funds are being invested. A couple of specific
suggestions that you really preempted with your earlier
questioning: I urge USAID to continue to focus on the world's
poorest communities and countries. And, secondly, to leave
behind not simply wells, and latrines, and hardware, but real
capacity within the local communities to solve their own
problems with our front end catalytic support.
Secondly, we ask that you support the Water for the World
Act of 2013, H.R. 2901. As you know, this was introduced just
this morning with very strong bipartisan support. Thank you for
your sponsorship of that bill, Mr. Chairman.
The point I want to make here is that communities don't get
water, or they don't get sanitation, much less these health
benefits, and the education benefits, and the poverty
alleviation benefits unless these projects function properly
over the long run.
Congressman Marino said to me this morning that we are
taking care of our own when we do foreign assistance well. And
I asked him if it would be appropriate to relay that message
here, and he most certainly said yes. This bill, the Water for
the World Act, is a pivotal next step in the direction of doing
foreign assistance for water and health well.
Thirdly, your colleague, Congressman Stockman, recently saw
firsthand in his visit to the Democratic Republic of the Congo
how health challenges are restraining economic productivity in
that country. I would ask you, and I think everybody in this
room would echo this, to personally visit, in your case visit
again the developing countries and U.S.-funded water and
sanitation projects. Nothing trumps that first person
experience there, and then you can tell a better story than
anybody in this room can.
Finally, we urge you to work with your appropriations
colleagues to support increased funding and, again, oversight
for development assistance specifically by supporting the $405
million Fiscal Year 2014 Senate appropriations request for the
Water for the Poor Act of 2005.
Now, above and beyond what Capitol Hill is doing, my
organization, WASH Advocates, is carefully tracking what
Americans are doing in all 50 states for this issue, and
probably all 435 congressional districts, as well. Rotary
Clubs, churches, corporate and private foundations, ingenious
social entrepreneurs, school kids, primary school kids,
universities, and myriad non-profits are all active oftentimes
in partnership with the U.S. Government. And I'd like to
quickly note Congressman Meadows' interest in public-private
partnerships, a number of which have been brought up so far
today and I am happy to provide more details on those.
If successful, I believe that your and the subcommittee's
actions will save and improve millions of additional lives by
increasing the effectiveness of U.S. foreign assistance for
water, health, and related development sectors, and at the end
of the day help these countries move toward aid independence. I
believe that your efforts will catalyze more support from
American citizens across this country for their complementary
efforts.
In conclusion, I would just reinforce things you already
recognize; this global water crisis isn't just a crisis. This
isn't just wonky development talk here, this is a real genuine
leadership opportunity for this country that can help save and
improve millions of lives around the world, and at the same
time unite Americans as we're seeing here today with this
aggressively bipartisan hearing for which I commend you.
These are uncertain times on Capitol Hill and far beyond,
but the fact of the matter is none of us spent the first 6
hours of our day hauling dirty water around on our heads. And
none of us in this room are worried that our kids are going to
die from easily preventable water-borne diarrheal disease today
as we sit here.
I'd suggest that water-related death and disease have
historically been unavoidable, and with my colleagues at WASH
Advocates and throughout this room, I very much hope to
continue to work with you to make them unacceptable. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Oldfield follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Smith. Mr. Oldfield, thank you very much for your
testimony and your concrete recommendations. This does help the
subcommittee, and members will return and will read your
recommendations as well as of our other two distinguished
witnesses, so it really goes a long way. Thank you, and for
obviously what you're doing out in the field.
Mr. Morris.
STATEMENT OF MR. MALCOLM MORRIS, CHAIRMAN, MILLENNIUM WATER
ALLIANCE
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, Malcolm Morris, and I chair the
Millennium Water Alliance.
I want to thank you and your colleagues, your staff
colleagues for organizing this hearing today.
From the testimony I've heard from the members of this
committee, I think everybody is already in agreement in
recognizing the greatness of this need, and yet the constraints
that need to be overcome.
The Millennium Water Alliance represents 13 leading U.S.-
based charities working to achieve safe water, sanitation,
health and hygiene called WASH for people in developing
countries. Safe drinking water and sanitation are both life and
death issues. They are also fundamental issues for women,
public health, education, and economic and social development.
Addressing WASH is the most effective step the U.S. can
take to enhance its reputation among people in the developing
world, and to work in partnership with our allies to accelerate
the economic, as well as political development that is
foundational to true security in our world. Is it working? Yes.
First, I want to point out our goal is not to complete the
job of full water and sanitation coverage in any one country,
but to build the local capacity within that country so that
these nations finish the task for themselves. And more and more
of those nations are moving in that direction.
Among the many activities we conduct in partnership with
the USAID, our Millennium Water programs where we train local
organizations you will hear from next which are through WASH
programming. Through our framework, local and national
participants meet regularly to share best practices, lessons
learned, and are held accountable by their peers to country
standards, transparency, as well as technical effectiveness.
How do we do all that? First, we meet with governments to
determine standards for water quality, standards for water
quantity, country-specific technologies are established so that
supply parts can be created. You have to have a supply chain.
And then when you establish the types of implementations that
are done, indigenous people can be trained in maintenance of
water points. The last thing that we want to do is to create
infrastructure dependent upon calling 1-800-USAID for repairs.
Millennium Water programs use independent monitoring and
evaluation by specialists to make sure that our progress is
successful, up to standard, and is achieving desired goals. To
do that, baseline studies regarding health and education are
conducted and measurable milestones established to be able to
determine improvements to life in a community. These findings
are shared among the participating organizations, as well as
government officials which are invited to all of those
meetings.
USAID has an important role in priming the pump. Perhaps
USAID's best practice has been in funding an RFA which is
called a Request for Assistance in countries where the U.S.
desires to put its best foot forward. Through successful
deployment of initiatives funded with $11 million by USAID
since 2009, MWA has been able to attract an additional $16
million on top of that $11 million of funding to facilitate
even additional programming. Matching contributions have been
generated from other donor countries, foundations,
corporations, and even the countries in which the work is being
undertaken. That's important.
Science and technology are included in our training. Many
lives are saved through oral rehydration techniques. I believe
the chairman even mentioned that as we began this hearing.
Through MWA and others, USAID has helped build momentum with
pilot programs that can be replicated within the country. We
enable community-funded maintenance programs which must be
designed as permanent interventions. Community leaders must be
included in planning and training to meet the water,
sanitation, health, and hygiene needs for the future population
growth of their communities wherever we have done water. Those
communities have attracted a growth in population, people
moving there who haven't water where they're from.
USAID should continue the use of RFAs to get underway
quickly. It allows the implementer such as the MWA to utilize
their expertise responding to local factors in the areas that
are being served. Water committees are formed which leads to
more local empowerment. It's not really the provision of water
and the community is not called Washington, not called the
Federal Government, so to speak. Same way at your own home.
These local committees are formed which leads to more local
empowerment, and especially among the women. And these
committees create a learning experience where people elect
their leaders and learn grassroots democracy. This is also
fabulous in what USAID has led.
USAID support of the Millennium Water concept and
implementing WASH programs within developing countries has
achieved something, though, beyond the original plan. In
partnership with American NGOs, USAID has become recognized for
its leadership in WASH. I remember the day when I walked into
USAID and they could not find water in their programming in
their computer systems, anywhere. I'm sure there was some, they
just couldn't find it.
Today, totally changed. We have a great team there. The
policy has been put out, and now here's what we're seeing.
Other countries, corporations, multilateral organizations are
calling on the MWA because they've seen what the MWA USAID-
funded projects have done elsewhere, and they say hey, would
you come and apply your expertise in our country to assist us
in water programming.
These are places where USAID is not even being called on
for a dollar's worth of assistance right now in this area. So,
because of what USAID has done to prime that pump, we're seeing
this reputation build and we hope to see that USAID may even
consider the possibility of capacity building grants to even
further these opportunities, and low-cost opportunities.
Included in my report, Mr. Chairman, is a study of an
example of a great new water program in Kenya. It demonstrates
the power of partnership between America's charities and USAID
that leads to even larger partnerships with others around the
globe. With funding from USAID, funding from a major Dutch
organization, the Dutch Government, as well as matching funds
from Millennium Water Alliance members, a perfect example of a
forward-looking collaboration has been built to build against
community resilience to drought.
So, the Millennium Water Alliance and its members, want to
point out, fully support the Paul Simon Water for the World
Act, House Bill 2901 introduced today by Congressman Earl
Blumenauer, Ted Poe, and Chairman Chris Smith, and I believe
already 10 cosigners, if that's correct.
This bill does not require additional budget but improves
the way USAID partners for achieving maximum efficiency. It
puts into the statute. We don't want to go back to the time
when we couldn't find water. We want it in the statute where
everybody stays focused on it, and we appreciate the committee
recognizing the importance of that.
We are eager to assist the committee, the subcommittee in
any way we can to advance the great work on behalf of the
American people, and I'll be happy to take your questions. I
have a writeup for you in my submission about the KALDDR
Project in Kenya which really discusses how all the things that
I just told you about are actually being deployed just within
one program now.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Morris follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Smith. Mr. Morris, I look forward to reading that, and
you will convey it to us. And without objection, all of your
testimonies and any attachments will be made a part of the
record. And when you said you don't want USAID to be the
repairman, I thought what we want these programs to be is like
the Maytag repairman.
Mr. Morris. Yes.
Mr. Smith. Never gets called.
Mr. Morris. Yes, sir.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Tut.
STATEMENT OF MR. BUEY RAY TUT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AQUA AFRICA
Mr. Tut. Well, I would like to thank you, Chairman Smith,
for this opportunity. Also, Congresswoman Bass who is
unfortunately not here, and also the member of the panel here.
I feel fortunate enough to come share a little bit of my story.
I think to explain what I do and how I do it, it's important to
know where I'm from, and why I came about this line of work.
I am, like you mentioned in my autobiography, I am from
South Sudan. I was born there, and I was--my family was granted
asylum in the United States. Actually, my father had a choice
to pick between Canada and the United States. He said that
Canada sounds freezing cold, and moved us to Minnesota. But
we've lived in Nebraska for right now what amounts to about 15
years. And when I was in college, a friend of mine, also a
native South Sudanese, we wanted to go back to South Sudan and
we wanted to support our new country coming about. And when we
talked about going back to South Sudan and really trying to
help, we said what do we want to do there? We really have to
have a philosophy, why are we going back?
And we said what we come down to is, we wanted development
over aid. We're looking to move back to South Sudan in 10-15
years. We love the United States, but we're moving to go back,
so how do we create a nation that's not sustaining? We no
longer go by we're a developing nation. What we are, South
Sudan, is an aspiring nation, and we think East Africa
countries are aspiring nations.
So, what we've designed is a three-step process. First, we
drill water wells for about 500 people, and with Aqua Africa
what we do is we drill one water well for about 500 people. And
just like Mr. Morris explained, our second portion is called
Micro Democracy. And for Micro Democracy, what we do is of the
500 people we drill for, we have the 500 people, we set out
boxes, help them elect six members of committee to run the
water well. And our objective in that is the people understand
on a micro level rather than on a macro level why democracy is
important, where it's going. And our objective is in 2015 or
whenever we have following elections is they understand and go
vote. They understand the applications of voting and why
democracy is important.
And our last portion, what we teach again using water as an
example, water is the starting point, we teach resource
management. Resource management we teach the people that when
we drill a water well that pipe doesn't go to the Indian Ocean.
That water will run out at some point, so you have to create
policies in place in order to manage it effectively.
Now, what inspired us to do this and why I'm telling you
all this is because we are from South Sudan. I was born in East
Africa. Jacob Khol was born in East Africa, Buey Ray was in
East Africa. What's unique about this point in history, we feel
in East Africa is no longer are we just willing to help East
Africa, willing to help where we were born, is we're able to.
I've been here in the United States for 15 years. I've
gotten a tremendous education in the United States, and the
people have been--there's been a tremendous amount of capacity
building. Now I'm ready to go back to South Sudan. And I think
what we're missing right now in a lot of this discussion is why
don't we have an East African or anywhere we're helping
aspiring nations from the beginning process to the end process,
from the design phase, implementation phase, and execution
phase? And when we're looking at it, what we wanted to
accomplish at this point with foreign aid, and everything else
going on is we want Africans that are from there that have
experienced it.
I was fortunate enough--I was unfortunate not to have a
sister, so I have to drag water back and forth with my mom. But
we what we are trying to accomplish is we're trying to get
Africans, I mean, wanting to go back and help--are able to go
back and help our--and have the capacity to help. And the
things that's changing is that's us. I mean, when we look right
now, I have curly hair, dark skin, as my mom would attest
attractive feature but, I mean, what we're saying at this point
is we're ready to go help. And passing--I mean, concentrating
on water policies looking forward, I think it's not just
important, it's critical to have us on the table, to have us
see where we're going to--what we're going to be doing, because
that inspires ownership. And that inspires us to take it on
fully.
And, again, I'd like to thank the subcommittee for inviting
me to be able to share my story, and I'll open it up to any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Tut follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Tut. I appreciate that very much.
I wonder if you or any of our panelists are aware of the
capacity that might exist in this country that is being shared
with regards to universities, training people in water
management, or at least courses that can be learned online. Is
that readily available to someone in Kenya or South Sudan who
might have access to a computer, or could get to a college here
or somewhere else; is that something--are we trying to build up
that intellectual capability that then can be applied to
implement these strategies?
Mr. Morris. I might address that. The Living Water
International which we founded has put chapters basically on
college campuses, and the students--through student demands,
Student Engineers Without Borders, et cetera, have worked their
way into engineering programs. And the students are actually
being trained to go out, go to other countries.
I had the opportunity to work with Oklahoma in establishing
the OU Water Center, which now awards the first ever United
States World Water prize. And it's headed by Dr. David
Sabatini. Every 2 years there is a meeting there. People are
brought in from different countries, we raise funds, if you
will, for those to come to the conferences and learn from what
the universities are doing. They're doing major work in some of
the issues that we face with contaminated water that we find,
so it's fabulous.
Gary behind me here with water.org is with University of
North Carolina. They have a fabulous program in water, so a
number of universities. Southern Methodist University has
picked up on it, Emory University has picked up on it.
Mr. Smith. How long of a study does it really entail in
order for someone to become at least proficient in putting
together a clean water----
Mr. Morris. Well, when you say--these are people getting--
if you look at some of the young USAID is hiring, they're
getting engineering degrees in hydrology, et cetera, so these
are full 4-year degrees.
Mr. Tut. Well, in our--my degree is in actually in
political science, graduating from the University of Nebraska.
When we began Aqua Africa, in Aqua Africa in our 3 years of
operation now, we've served 4,500 people. We've drilled nine
wells in South Sudan, and the--I mean, I didn't get that
through getting my engineering degree. A lot of, I think, the
information we need is readily accessible. I think the most
important thing is identifying in which area that we're going
to be working in, first of all, and then identifying those
needs. And then once the need is there, the resources to
facilitate that, I think, are readily available as long as
we're able to access it. And I think it's there.
Mr. Oldfield. Mr. Chairman, if I might add my two cents to
that. You've asked a question that our intelligence community
is concerned about, as well. Last year, 2012, there was a
national intelligence estimate on global water security which,
as you know, suggested that global water challenges are likely
to pose security threats to this country over the next decade.
The one key finding that's interesting and aligned with
your question is that the intelligence community found that
Americans are expected to lead on this issue. We know how to
solve these problems, and Americans in both their public and
private capacity are expected to lead.
I'm going to do a little more homework on your question and
figure out exactly what this country is doing in its private
capacity. I am more familiar with what a couple of multilateral
organizations are doing on that.
What I'd like to highlight is what USAID, in particular, is
already doing to share not just best practices that they're
finding in their programming with many of the organizations in
this room, but come together and share emerging practices, or
dare I say worst practices not just in water, and sanitation,
and health programming, but in programming across the
development portfolio. Our Government is making strides in that
direction, and eventually I would hope, and it may already be
happening, that information is going to get out into developing
countries, in Africa, Asia, and Latin America fully cognizant
that online education is tricky, and that no one solution is
the same for one community to the next, as you've heard here
today.
Mr. Smith. How realistic is it that there will be a real
growth in the area of large water treatment systems, as well as
those dealing with sanitation? The cities, are they more likely
to be the places where that's going to emerge sooner rather
than later? And I asked this earlier of our earlier panel, and
I would ask it of you, as well. You know of the lessons learned
from the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and all
of the contaminants that we now look for. In my opinion,
there's still a whole lot more we need to be looking at, but
there at least 90 contaminants. How specific do they get in
looking for those kinds of toxins and other contaminants that
are contained? Do they have that capability in some places, but
not in others? Does South Africa have it? It's not as likely to
be, obviously, in South Sudan as it emerges from all the
problems of war?
Mr. Morris. Most everywhere I have been, the government
does have government testing labs, and they--part of the
oversight of the government is doing water quality testing.
Some communities who get well to do enough buy their own
equipment for testing. Clearly, we probably have more
contaminants in this country than people experience in the
developing world because we've put in manufacturing runoff, et
cetera. And all of the pills that get flushed down toilets in
America, et cetera, so it's a bigger problem here but it's
something that from here we need to recognize what--that it
will happen there.
There are some remote sensing and testing technologies now
that can actually be inserted in pipelines to test the water.
Kind of like the pigs that they run through the pipelines to
make sure there's no--the oil pipelines with no leaks, so there
are remote sensing that can be done, and cities are using that
because it's a terrorism issue, as well.
Mr. Smith. You know, I find when I travel throughout Africa
and I find this in many parts of Europe; I was just in
Istanbul. I was admonished not to drink the water, to drink
bottled water. I remember being in Leningrad in the early `80s
and it hasn't changed now that it's St. Petersburg; you're
admonished again, or asked not to drink the water, to be very
careful.
I'm wondering, are they looking for enough of the
contaminants? I mean, is there a register that when you're
talking to them you can refer to and say you need to be looking
for this, or looking for that? And in answering that, a few
weeks ago we had a hearing on the ever present and seemingly
worsening problem of tropical diseases, particularly those that
are neglected. And there was particular emphasis played on
deworming, and the fact that we're doing some very good things
on deworming, but it is such a huge universe of hurt and that
we're not doing enough. About 1 billion people, the estimates
are, have worms, and one of the takeaways from the hearing was
that it makes women more susceptible to HIV/AIDS. It leads to
anemic children and low birth weight children. That trip to
Istanbul was with a doctor who served in Ghana and he said that
he had an experience where a woman brought her son in because
his urine was clear, and she thought he was sick because all
the other kids' urine was red or pinkish from the worms. And
I'm just wondering, you know, if we really fully understand
that clean water that doesn't have worms and other kind of
parasites inhabiting, it will lead to a lot of benefits on
those issues, as well. I mean, water-borne worms are a problem.
Mr. Morris. I've walked into a community using hand dug
wells, and dropped a bucket down, lifted the bucket up, put my
hand in the bucket and counted the worms in my hand. And this
was the water that the people were using. And water that is
hand dug, basically you're only digging down to the very first
underground river, and that is often what we call latrine
water, or refer to as latrine water. That's where the
contaminants will go and disperse, so generally we will drill
through and case through that type of thing. When we're putting
in water, we're putting in sealed wells, sealed systems.
Mr. Smith. How deep do you have to go?
Mr. Morris. More than 20 feet, just more than 20 feet
because the earth acts as a natural filter. In the drilling
process you contaminate the aquifer. Then you've got to cleanse
the aquifer, and when you're cleansing it you often import a
sulfur that sometimes the odor becomes offensive until that
clean process takes place.
But I think you're talking about maybe more in the urban
areas, and where cities are growing, as we were just talking
about earlier. And in the cities the main problem that we're
seeing is that there is overuse of the water. If you're the
mayor of Addis Ababa you've got 10,000 people moving into your
city a day. There is no place for them to live, there's open
defecation, they're going in the rivers, they're polluting
everything around. And you don't have enough water to deliver.
So, what happens is the old city water pipes that were built
for a city of a certain size, there's not enough water to push
through them, so if the pipes are not pressurized, then you get
contaminants seeping back in the pipes, and then you get some
bad water in the cities which is probably the kind that
Congressman Stockman partook of.
Mr. Stockman. Will the gentleman yield briefly? He's not
telling you also that during that hearing we had specialists
actually come up from Houston, and a lot of the tropical
diseases--and you'd be interested in this, Malcolm--were seen
in Houston. And I was shocked to hear there's a reintroduction
of tropical diseases in Houston. During the hearing he was
covering a broad spectrum of different things occurring in our
own city.
In fairness, Mr. Chairman, I've known the gentleman now for
over, I guess, 30 years, 25 years. I knew his father, who was
very active, and testimony to Malcolm, he could be doing
anything he wants in the world. And I am thankful that you
chose to save lives, and to work in this area. You're doing a
good job. Thank you. You could be doing--you could be on a
yacht; instead, you're giving your time to this cause, and I
really appreciate it. As I said, we were delivering medicines
to Africa, and the need is so great, and the people are so
grateful when you do that, so I really--I just want to
acknowledge his efforts and what you've done, and really
appreciate it. I'm excited that we're going to do this. As
always, your work is phenomenal, I appreciate it.
Mr. Smith. Thank you. Any questions?
Mr. Stockman. Well, one of the questions I had is more of
an interest in Africa. And you were saying 20 feet, but is that
true? What part have you been in Africa, where do you drill
most of your wells? And I understand some people use the merry
go round method to get water, you know, where they use that.
What methods do you use?
Mr. Morris. Well, the merry go round is really just a pump.
That's once you've drilled your well. But wells in Kenya,
you're a mile high city sitting on top of granite. We're
putting in 1,100 foot wells. You know, in other places, India,
you'd be putting in 120 foot wells. In Nicaragua, you'll go
through a 20 foot, 50 foot, 80 foot, 120 foot aquifer. You'll
find rivers at all those different levels.
Mr. Stockman. But are you using the same technology they
would if you were drilling for oil? Is that why--I mean,
Houston has such a natural abundance of----
Mr. Morris. Yes, it's the same process, different size rigs
depending on how deep you're going.
Mr. Stockman. Do you have companies that step up and say,
``Hey, we know you're involved in this. We want to help you,''
and offer their assistance at all?
Mr. Morris. Yes. Well, I know now that we have oil industry
that want to do something in return to the countries, to
benefit the countries where they're doing oil drilling. And one
of the greatest benefits they find being requested in those
countries now is water.
I will tell you that under the Foreign Corrupt Practices
Act, you're not supposed to pay somebody off, so to speak, to
get a drill contract, and it seems like if they are asking you
for something, somebody wants to give money to their brother-
in-law, so they've come to Living Water and said can we give
you the funds and you go do the projects?
We've been called on by the United States Government to go
in and do projects where they needed to--had committed to do
certain water programming, just said please program it for us.
Mr. Stockman. In what country have you drilled the most
wells for water, would you guess?
Mr. Morris. Well, that would be--at Living Water we've
drilled about 14,000 now. And at the Millennium Water Alliance,
the 13 member organizations are now serving over 100 million
people a day.
Mr. Stockman. Wow, that's phenomenal. And I'm not being
disrespectful, so--and are you deeply involved, no pun
intended, with the people?
MR. Oldfield. Thank you, Mr. Stockman. First of all, I'd
like to second what you just said about Mr. Morris here, a big
fan, and he could be doing anything he wants to, so well done,
Mr. Morris.
We are a non-profit advocacy initiative, and we are, to
answer you technology questions, we are for whatever the most
appropriate solution is in any given part of the world, whether
it's Africa, Asia, or Latin America. We look for technical
appropriateness, technical sustainability, we look for
environmental sustainability, we look for financial
sustainability, we look for socio-cultural sustainability to
make sure that a project in South Sudan is appropriate for the
South Sudanese, and that it will be maintained technically in
local hands with decentralized ownership, that the individuals
who benefit from that will be able to support in financial
terms its operations and maintenance, and to make sure that,
quite simply, if you're using chlorine to disinfect water, to
make sure that people still use the water even though it tastes
like chlorine, or to make sure that when you're purifying river
water that the local individuals in Guatemala or Vietnam aren't
concerned about socio-cultural things like angering the river
god. All of these are true stories.
We are for pit latrines that are used for their intended
purposes, to properly dispose of human waste rather than to be
used to store cow dung, or bicycles, or in some cases to live
in during the rainy season because that might be the only
physical structure in a village that holds up. So, we're in an
interesting spot as a neutral advocacy organization to be for
only those solutions which are technically, financially, and
socially appropriate in that environment.
Mr. Stockman. You mentioned South Sudan. I was there in
Juba, and I actually went on foot, which they told me was
highly unusual. And one of the things they were showing me when
I was there is that North Sudan, or whatever, had taken and
poisoned their wells, and also poured concrete down them. And
not just one well, a lot of wells. Are you from Juba?
Mr. Tut. I'm not from Juba, but I am from South Sudan.
Mr. Stockman. Okay.
Mr. Tut. State North Sudan, or----
Mr. Stockman. You have a beautiful country, beautiful
people. I appreciate the hospitality you showed us.
Mr. Tut. Well, great. When were you there?
Mr. Stockman. A year ago January.
Mr. Tut. Okay.
Mr. Stockman. And another thing I saw which is tangental,
if the chairman will grant me a little bit of leeway here, is
that at some time I think they need to see how you play
volleyball, because it's a combination of soccer and
volleyball. The most amazing thing, but getting back to the
wells, it was very upsetting to see the number of wells that
could be used. I don't know, is there a way to rehabilitate a
well that's been sabotaged like that?
Mr. Tut. Well, if I could take this one. Honestly, when
you're looking at a well that's been sabotaged in that manner,
it's very difficult to--because, I mean, it's much more cost-
effective to build another one. Right now, when you're looking
at South Sudan and the needs, and not just South Sudan but East
Africa, in these drillings projects so you have, I mean,
advocacy groups, and then you have groups that are getting
others together.
What we need to do is build a capacity of organizations
that are from there, working there, and honestly understand it.
We drill about 50 meters into the ground. That's where we think
is the safest. I mean, you have salt content that goes high
whenever you're drilling, and the water is--I mean, has really
high salt content. People don't want it. And that goes into the
testing thing that--the testing methods Chairman Smith brought
up earlier. What kind of testing do we employ?
We employ--we work with the local government to see what
the standards are. And what the unique thing is, we remember
what it was like when we were kids. I remember when I was eight
drinking the water, what I liked and didn't like. And I know
what would prevent me from drinking it versus not. So, when we
work in this areas, we understand the people. I mean, they know
us, they see us, and that's what makes us effective in the
manner. And that's why it's very important for Mr. Oldfield and
Mr. Morris, I mean, in the areas they work in, building our
capacity to be able to do what we are doing in those areas.
Mr. Stockman. I was shocked at how many wells. I mean, they
were showing me all the wells that were, you know----
Mr. Tut. That's astonishing.
Mr. Stockman. Yes. It was really amazing.
Mr. Tut. Very astonishing.
Mr. Stockman. We also gave out 200 pounds of candy. We
created a new industry, dentistry.
Mr. Morris. Well, this--on one of the questions I was
thinking about, as John was speaking, about the social issues
and different things you face. Fluoride is fixed by using some
ground up bones, but if you go to one country you don't want to
use ground up pig bones, and you go to another country you
don't want to use ground up cow bones. So, I mean, it's just--
it gets very, very detailed to be a part, as Mr. Tut was just
saying, of what is the local posture. You know, we don't put
the same technology in every country. One country likes French
equipment, one country likes another. It's okay, as long as the
whole country is getting toward a standard and then people can
learn to maintain and do for themselves.
Mr. Stockman. With that, Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Smith. Just a couple of final questions, and then
anything you want to add as we close.
First of all, I do want to note that Christian Holmes, the
Global Water Coordinator, has stayed. I've chaired maybe 450
hearings as a Member of Congress, including as Veterans Affairs
chairman. Usually, the administration people leave and never
listen to the panels that follow, so thank you for doing that,
for caring so much to hear what people, the NGOs and others
have to say. That speaks so well of you. Thank you.
We just had a roll out of an idea with a number of NGOs
last week on the whole issue of electrification, and the need
for electrification in Africa. And I'm wondering how you
mentioned in your statement, Mr. Oldfield, to push the
administration, one of your five points, harder on linking
water and sanitation with other important development
objectives whose success depends on safe water. Well, if you
just drop who depends on, there are other developments. I mean,
things work synergistically when you've got a larger strategy.
How will electrification help? It seems to me, and you also
made a point in your statement, I thought it was great, about
visiting, and encouraging Members of Congress and all of us to
go see a water project. I've done that many times, but one time
I was actually at a refugee camp in Darfur when the water just
came on line while we were there. I don't know if they timed
it. I don't think they did. And it was amazing how people were
euphoric. A lot of water was wasted in the process because it
was being thrown around and dumped, because people were just so
happy to be able to turn that spigot. I was giddy, too, so your
point is very well taken there.
But about this working side by side with other development
goals, if you might want to expand upon that.
Mr. Oldfield. Sure. And our co-panelists will have lots to
say on this, as well. Let me just suggest one thing. It's an
interesting question you asked about electrification. The sound
bite is this. Development is about a whole lot more than water,
but it's never about less than water. I'm not here to say that
anything is more important than anything else, but turn out the
lights in here and see how it goes, or let's try to live for
the next few days without safe drinking water. It really gets
back to the primacy of water and basic public health to human
existence.
Specifically to answer your question about electrification,
that's part of the solution. Innovation, science and
technology, research and development, you bet that's part of
the solution. You know, I've seen some UV systems that use less
and less electricity, they narrowed the spectrum down to more
cost-effectively purify safe drinking water by irradiating it.
There are a lot of great solutions.
My concern about technical solutions in the water sector is
simply that we don't want to go overboard on that.
Desalination, of course, is part of the answer. But you know
what, instead of focusing on really high tech desalination
equipment and multi-billion dollar installments, I'd suggest
that most parts of the world need to take more advantage of the
biggest desalinator out there, which is the sun. Let's
desalinate water by evaporating it and let's capture that water
via rainwater harvesting. We've all agreed here today that
there's no silver bullet for this. I would suggest to you that
simple rainwater harvesting techniques and a simple improved
pit latrine may come as close to a silver bullet as anything
we'd have.
If I could answer your NTDs question, as well: Solving
health challenges is about much more than water, but never
about less, once again. NTDs are complicated. They're neglected
for a reason. Water clearly came out from Dr. Hotez and the
others' earlier testimony. Every single one of those people,
including the doctor and the nurse on your subcommittee here
understand that water is medicine, that toilets are medicine,
that hand washing with soap is medicine.
We're not here to say, and I'm particularly not here to say
that NTDs are not important, and should continue to be
neglected. Absolutely the opposite, do everything you're doing
to support that. Also include diarrheal disease as a neglected
tropical disease, which it certainly is, and it's easier to
pronounce than many of the others. And all of these are
solvable by safe drinking water and sanitation.
Mr. Smith. Thank you.
Mr. Tut. Well, my grandmother from--she lives in the
northern part of Ethiopia in the mountains, my mother is
Ethiopian, she called for the first time last year to see if
I've been eating enough. The remarkable thing about it is we
never had phone towers. She didn't have a way to access
electricity until an NGO came and gave them a charging system
through solar charging.
But to get back to your question, if this is something we
could compile, so for Aqua Africa this year we're building a
water tank. And this water tank is going to have the capacity
of 50,000 liters, six distribution points with two going one
clinic, one school, four areas of distribution. And in that
we're including a solar system to where people could charge,
and actually charge people money to be able to charge others.
Compiling these developmental efforts advances it from just
aid to development. I mean, that's very important. To stay 3
more hours and to be able to study changes the people's lives.
I wasn't able to read when I was a little kid. Now, if I had
the opportunity, would I? I mean, I would have given it a shot,
you know, so it's--to say that we could compile these things
all together, I think is an amazing way of delivering aid and
making it development.
Mr. Morris. Let me just say a couple of quick things. In
Guatemala we put in a--we try to meet the community's needs.
You don't want to go in and do something to a community, you do
it with a community. And in interviewing the community they may
want the least costing intervention. They don't have
electricity, et cetera, so that might be something like a hand
pump. But when we're in Guatemala, we always want to deal with
the local government and make them a part of it because they're
going to inherit this, ultimately. So, the mayor came and so we
had the mayor speak each day. The second day he came, speak
again, I said hey, we drove under an electric line. I said how
far is that from here? And he said well, it's only about a
quarter of a mile as the crow flies, and I said well, what
would it take to get electricity to this community? I said
these people are already asking, the bore hole is here, going
to put a hand pump on it, but we could pull this hand pump
right off the top and you can drop an electric pump down there,
people can have distribution right to their homes.
Well, other people kind of overheard that so the mayor said
well, we could do that pretty quickly. He said matter of fact,
within 6 months we'll have electricity, and these people went
home and got shovels, they're digging to the well, going to put
their pipes in already. And by the next day he came and he was
bringing people to put in a health clinic in this community
because he said this community's got water now, and he says
we're in the process of bringing electricity. We were only 3
days there, you know. So, it was amazing to see.
And in Malawi, Living Water trained water for Malawi. We
went to an area west of the Longway about 60 minutes out, and
began doing water programs there. I think we're serving a
couple of million people there now. And the persons that we
began that with were specialty and women, and child infant
mortality, and we built a hospital there now. And we just
signed a partnership with Baylor Med in Mr. Stockman's hometown
here, so it's now the Baylor Med Child Legacy Intervention.
They have built in Malawi out in the boondocks a total hospital
infrastructure, operating rooms, all this. It is the only
medical facility in the country that we know of that has non-
fail electricity. It's got solar, it's got wind, it's got
battery storage, and it's got generator backup, and no
hospital--it's now becoming the center for the new residency
program for all of Malawi right out in the middle of nowhere.
So, electricity is extremely important, very important when
you're in the middle of surgery to have electricity. And I
don't know that there's a lot of synergy with water, and with
what we do, but we clearly make use of it when it becomes
available.
Mr. Smith. I just have one final question; Mr. Stockman may
have some additional. How well do you think, and please be
absolutely candid, do you think we, the U.S. Congress,
prioritizes clean water and proper sanitation? What about other
European countries, the European Union, for example, and other
donor nations, the philanthropic community? I mean, there are
other things that are seemingly less mundane, but perhaps not
as important, where the philanthropic efforts of the Gates
Foundation and others would rather put their dollars. I mean,
are we all doing enough? It would seem like we're not, but I
asked this question earlier about the unmet need, you know, how
big is that gap?
And, finally, a lot of the leaders start at the local level
like mayors, and it happens here, too, many of us go from being
mayor, councilman, assemblyman, to actually being in Congress,
and then indictment, no. But a lot of people at the lower
level----
Mr. Morris. Not this group.
Mr. Smith [continuing]. End up being Presidents, end up
being international parliamentarians, and I'm wondering if the
lessons learned about the importance of clean water carry over
so that they bring that vision to the nation?
Mr. Morris. I have to say that if you look at anybody in
the world, we've got an immigration debate going on now,
everybody in the world wants to come to America. I mean, I
don't know anybody who is offered an opportunity to come to
America says no, no, we don't want to go there. People want to
come here, and when I began working, as I said, a more national
level, and going to--I spoke at the World Water Forum in
Mexico, I've been around in global meetings, but I was
surprised at the lack of leadership by America. That's why I
went to USAID and said, ``What are we doing?'' The change that
I have seen, I mean, we might all sit here and say oh, we're
not doing enough. But today when you ask the world who's
leading, it's not Japan anymore, it's the United States. USAID,
the stature of the water team, the great reputation, like I
said, it's enhanced. They helped the MWA get started, and now
even in places where they're not having to fund it, the MWA is
being funded by other organizations. And Mr. Gates is very
actively involved, and he's really focused on sanitation. Mr.
Hilton, very actively involved. He's really focusing more on
the water, so they kind of work hand and glove.
One thing we forgot to mention today, and that is soap. Mr.
Gates funded a major study in Kenya, a 5-year study. I think it
was $9 million, and at the end of that $9 million--we talk
about people coming to the cities, the cities building and so
forth, and water does attract people. Well, when you bring more
and more people together, you increase the changes of water-
borne contaminants and people gathering together in that place.
And that's what happened, they provided soap for like the first
3 years of the study, and then didn't provide money for soap.
People quit using soap. Well, they'd come together, they
learned to not open defecate. Everybody is coming to the same
place, and actually disease went up, so you have to have soap.
So, that $9 million study; soap, very important. And you've got
to keep it on your hands for 20 seconds.
Mr. Smith. You mentioned Mr. Hilton. He was asked on a TV
show once what his best advice would be. He said put the shower
curtain inside the tub. That's Barrett Hilton. Conrad Hilton
said it.
MR. Oldfield. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a quick story.
A couple of years ago I was in Rwanda up country visiting a
site, a project of a group called Water For People based here
in the United States in Denver. It's called Le Pays des Milles
Collines, the Land of a Thousand Hills, and I was on top of one
of these hills with 12 engineers looking down into the ravine
figuring out where to site a pumping station. And I'm not an
engineer, but you've got 12 engineers up there, you might
imagine there were 12 different ideas about where to site this
pumping station. That's not the point. The point is that each
of these 12 engineers was Rwandan, and each of these 12
engineers was having this vigorous technical debate way over my
head in Kinyarwanda, the local language. The front end
catalytic support provided by the United States, a private non-
profit in this instance, was the secret to that success. We're
not out there just drilling wells and poking holes in the
ground, and digging latrines. We're out there strengthening
these organizations' capacity.
To answer your question, are we doing enough? Well, the
Water for the World Act that you've sponsored and introduced
this morning with Mr. Blumenauer, and USAID's new water
strategy get it. You get it by asking your question about
quality versus quantity. Quality always lags quantity. It's
pretty easy, 20 liters per person per day of water, but you get
into the quality concerns, particularly in urban environments,
particularly when you're dealing with cholera, that's the right
question to ask. And the Water for the World Act, and the Water
for the Poor Act, and the water strategy are steps in that
direction.
The second quick point I'd mention is you asked something
about rule of law, about democracy and governance, and water as
a means to that end. I want to highlight the work of a group
called the AVINA Foundation which is a private philanthropic
initiative active throughout the Western Hemisphere in this
instance, by strengthening community water boards, community
water user associations, building their capacity to manage and
solve their own water and waste water challenges.
The work of the AVINA Foundation and its many partners is
interesting, not simply because they're helping solve water and
sanitation challenges in a decentralized fashion, it's
interesting because that work is strengthening the social
contract in those countries. That work is strengthening the
role of women in these water community associations to take
charge of their own destiny.
I look at every village water committee as a primary school
for democracy, and that's something that is also envisioned by
the water strategy and Water for the World Act. This isn't just
water and sanitation, but it's water and sanitation as an entry
point into the health objectives you're looking forward, into
the primary education objectives, into the NTDs solution, and
so on.
Mr. Smith. Yes, just I do have one final suggestion/
question. And it would be a takeaway for Mr. Holmes, as well.
I've been here long enough to know that many a good idea
doesn't get passed. I had 30 plus significant bills, including
five Veterans bills, die in the Senate. They have very arcane
rules, people put holds on things. The International Megan's
Law died 3 years ago, which would have been a noticing
provision for convicted pedophiles before they travel abroad.
And one of those that I got passed was to establish an
obstetric fistula repair program and prevention program, passed
in the House, failed in the Senate. I put it into a larger
bill. Well, I went to USAID and asked Dr. Kent Hill if he could
just take the blueprint and do it administratively. He did. We
have now effectuated well over 20,000 obstetric fistula repairs
which--and the money has grown very significantly. And I'm just
wondering, you know, if for some reason--and we'll push hard to
get this bill passed--if it doesn't pass, it could still serve,
I would think, as a blueprint. There may be a few authorities
that need to be conveyed to USAID, but I think we ought to be
thinking, take it, obviously work it, you know, and improve
upon it any way you think fit, but it could become the
blueprint right now. It doesn't have to wait for enactment,
because I've seen it happen many times. The obstetric fistula
is just one example of many, others have had their bills that
went nowhere, but they were a good idea, and all of a sudden
the administration said hey, ``We can do that.'' We can do it.
And I'm just wondering if that's something that you guys have
looked at, because I think we should be working to try to get
it done even if the bill runs into a snag somewhere over in the
Senate. Notice I said not in the House.
Mr. Morris. It seems like USAID is already working in that
direction. And you made a beautiful comment about Chris Holmes,
and he's still here. I haven't looked yet back, is he still
here? And he's not here because you're here. Chris Holmes will
answer his phone and he wants to know how we can get to where
we want to go. And if it's 6 o'clock at night, or 8 o'clock at
night, I mean, he will answer his phone. He calls you back.
This is very, very important to him. We have never had such a
great working relationship with USAID. And I would say that the
greatest thing that the House might do now is just agree to
consent with the Senate bill of $405 million instead of $315
million.
Mr. Oldfield. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me just
quickly respond to that. Yes, the Water for the World Act is no
marker legislation. We expect this bill to sail through your
subcommittee, and the Foreign Affairs Committee, naturally, and
send it over to the Senate and see what happens. But a lot of
what's in that bill--not a lot, I shouldn't say, but some of
what's in that bill codifies the progress that the
administration is already making on this.
Chris Holmes is a great example. The Global Water
Coordinator is not in the statute, but it's a good idea, and
the administration made it happen, the same with your work with
obstetric fistula there.
The Water for the World Act, with that said, is very
additive, and my personal hope on behalf of the many people
who've helped me with this testimony, is that it will increase
the pro poor focus of the administration's efforts to fully
implement the Water for the Poor Act. And I would personally
ask, as an advocate for pro poor water and sanitation needs,
why not 100 percent of the funds appropriated under the Water
for the Poor Act to the bottom 40 most water and sanitation
poor countries in the world? I'm sort of picking numbers out of
the air, but is that unreasonable? I don't think it is, or
frankly I wouldn't be good at my job.
But secondly, perhaps more transformatively, the
effectiveness of this work, the capacity building that we've
all talked about here today, the increased monitoring, and
evaluation, and resolution, and learning, particularly after
the technical end of the project is over, that's what's
envisioned in the Water for the World Act. That ribbon cutting
ceremony that we all love so much is not the last stage of the
project. That ribbon cutting ceremony is the first important
event in that project. The next most important event is what
happens when something breaks 2 years down the line? Echoing
what Mr. Morris said here, the answer is not to call USAID,
much less the subcommittee chairman. The answer will be found
locally, technically, and financially. So, I do think it's
additive, and I certainly push hard for your support on that.
Mr. Tut. Well, looking at the Water for the World Act, and
I'm looking at my panelists here sitting next to me here, for
Aqua Africa, we're a small organization right now. We have
three staff members, two in the United States, one in South
Sudan trying to advance. So, what we need going forward is
capacity building, but who do we go to in order to get the
support capacity building? And we're looking at now USAID in
terms of experience, in terms of how much they've accomplished,
and looking at my fellow panelists here. That's where we seek
the support. And going off of what you said, I mean, and what
Mr. Morris was saying earlier, we don't want 1-800-HOTLINE
calling to USAID trying to solve their problems. We're going to
be solving the problems.
In order to do that, we need to be--we need to have the
expertise. We need to have the capacity building, and this is
what is going to allow us to do.
Mr. Stockman. We've got like 5 minutes to go, but I'll just
say this real quick. I appreciate all your work, appreciate
your work; and Malcolm, we'll make sure the bill passes in the
Senate.
Mr. Smith. The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 5:32 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing RecordNotice deg.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
