Senate Committee Holds Hearing on USAGM, IMF, and Ambassadorial Nominees

[0:00] Order. Thank you all for being here today. We welcome our guests who have joined us at this [0:06] public hearing. We're always glad to have guests. I want to remind everyone that this is a function [0:12] of the United States government, which cannot be interrupted. We've had that from time to time, [0:17] haven't had any lately, which is good. We know how to handle it if it happens, but I'd ask everyone [0:22] to not attempt to communicate with in any fashion during the hearing so we can get about our [0:30] business. We have three different nominees today. The way this will work is I'm going to make a [0:36] brief opening statement, then turn to the ranking member. We'll then have one introduction, I'm [0:42] told, and then we'll hear from our panel today. Thank you so much for being here, and thank you [0:48] to your families for being here. We'd ask you to keep your remarks to about five minutes. If you have [0:53] more, happy to include whatever you want in the record of the hearing. Thank you to our nominees [0:59] for being here today, and especially thank you to the families. When you serve, we all know [1:04] that the families share part of the burden and responsibility that that takes, and it is always [1:11] stress on them, just as it is on those who step forward to take part in our government. [1:17] Ms. Rogers, this call to serve is not new for you or for your family. Your potential dual role, [1:23] serving as Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and the CEO of USAGM, would create [1:31] a unity of operations and of messaging across the federal government. And as Secretary Rubio [1:36] continuously demonstrates, in this administration, the best reward for hard work is another job. [1:43] As you know, USAGM is the funding source of some of America's most important public diplomacy [1:48] tools. But it is also an agency with a troubled past, and in this administration, it is in a period [1:55] of transition. It will be your responsibility to right the ship and chart a much improved course [2:00] for the organization and U.S. public diplomacy in general. Ms. Jurada, the International Monetary Fund [2:08] is the international organization focused on promoting international economic stability. It's confirmed [2:16] as U.S. economic director to the board. You will be tasked with representing the U.S. position in the [2:22] day-to-day operations and business of the IMF, and ensuring American interests are protected. [2:29] I look forward to hearing how you plan to promote President Trump's vision for refocusing the IMF's [2:35] efforts, and in achieving its core mandate of global economic cooperation and stability. [2:41] And finally, Ms. Carroll, Trinidad and Tobago is a fellow democracy and a key U.S. economic, [2:49] diplomatic, and security partner in the Caribbean. Trinidad has benefited from and actively participated [2:55] in U.S. initiatives like the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership and the Caribbean Basin Security [3:01] Initiative. And most recently, Trinidad has played an active role in support of U.S. law enforcement [3:06] efforts in the region, including the arrest and extradition of Nicolas de Maduro in Venezuela. [3:13] We are very grateful for this work. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on ways we [3:17] can deepen our strategic relations with Trinidad if you are confirmed as ambassador. Thank you [3:23] again to our nominees. Again, thank you to your families. And now I'll turn it over to the [3:27] ranking member for her remarks. [3:29] Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome to each of our nominees today, to all of your families [3:35] and friends and supporters who are here with you. [3:39] Every day, U.S. adversaries try to shape the information environment in ways that hurt America's [3:45] interests. We see it with China's efforts to isolate Taiwan, with Iran's efforts to undermine [3:51] confidence in American military power, and in Russia's efforts to undermine support for [3:56] Ukraine to divide Americans and erode confidence in our democracy. Our adversaries treat information [4:04] as a domain of strategic competition. Iran, a country under crushing sanctions, still found [4:11] the resources to triple the budget for its state broadcaster. Russia spends roughly 1.5 billion [4:18] a year on state media and propaganda. And as we know, this is not a new challenge. One former [4:24] KGB propagandist who defected to the West estimated that 85 percent of the KGB's time, money, and manpower [4:33] was devoted to influence campaigns and ideological warfare. Now, the United States used to understand [4:40] this. During the Cold War, we built Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and Radio Liberty [4:46] to counter Soviet propaganda with fact-based reporting behind the Iron Curtain. We invested [4:52] in public diplomacy because we understood that influence does matter. We exposed foreign disinformation [5:00] because we recognized that information is a strategic asset. That commitment continued long after [5:07] the Cold War. Republicans and Democrats agreed that America had to compete in the information [5:13] space. Sadly, this administration has walked away from that tradition. It's gutted U.S. international [5:20] broadcasting, it's dismantled the State Department's capability for countering foreign propaganda, [5:26] and it has shifted our public diplomacy from confronting authoritarian regimes to criticizing [5:33] democratic allies. And today, we're seeing the consequences. A recent European Council [5:40] on Foreign Relations poll found only 11 percent of Europeans now describe the U.S. as an ally. [5:46] And we can see it here in the poster. Globally, more countries named the United States as the [5:54] biggest threat to the world, then named Russia. Earlier this month, the Pew Research Service [6:01] found that for the first time in its history, across most of the world, China is now viewed [6:08] more favorably than the United States. And again, we can see where those lines crossed in 2025. [6:18] At the very moment, we should be strengthening America's ability to compete for influence. [6:23] The administration has weakened it. Ms. Rogers, you've overseen our public diplomacy efforts [6:29] over this period. Now the president has nominated you to take over and resuscitate the U.S. agency [6:35] for global media after Carrie Lake's efforts to dismantle it. This raises serious concerns [6:42] about the statutory firewall that's supposed to protect the editorial independence of Radio Free [6:48] Europe, Voice of America, and other international broadcasters from political influence. And given [6:54] the record on public diplomacy over the last several months, there are real questions about [6:59] whether this nomination will make things better or worse. Ms. Jurada, you've been nominated [7:06] to serve as the United States Executive Director to the International Monetary Fund. The IMF has [7:12] played a critical role helping Ukraine keep its economy functioning as it defends itself against [7:18] Russian aggression. If confirmed, I hope you will continue to ensure the United States remains [7:24] a strong advocate for Ukraine at the IMF. And finally, Ms. Carroll, you've been nominated to be [7:30] the U.S. Ambassador to Trinidad and Tobago. As the chairman said, Trinidad and Tobago's proximity to [7:38] Venezuela places it on the front lines of regional instability. The country has faced increased [7:44] migration pressures, trafficking networks, and broader security challenges as a result. If confirmed, [7:51] I hope you will work to deepen our partnership and support regional stability. I look forward to hearing [7:56] from each of you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Senator Shaheen. Before we turn it over to the nominees, [8:05] Senator Cruz, I understand you have something for us. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's my privilege to [8:11] introduce President Trump's nominee to serve as the Chief Executive Officer of the United States Agency [8:17] for Global Media, Sarah Rogers. Ms. Rogers has spent her life as a committed advocate for freedom [8:24] of speech and ideas, and as a passionate believer in their power to enhance freedom. She earned her [8:32] bachelor's in international relations from Dartmouth College. She later earned her JD from Columbia Law School, [8:38] which she followed by carving out a distinguished legal career rooted in constitutional advocacy, [8:44] free speech, and public service. Ms. Rogers spent more than two decades on these causes. As a partner [8:52] at the New York litigation boutique Brewer, she represented the National Rifle Association in landmark [8:58] First Amendment litigation, securing a victory before the Supreme Court. Since October of 2025, Ms. Rogers has [9:07] served as Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, where she has advanced U.S. [9:14] interests in a global environment that has become complicated and challenging in ways that are [9:19] quite literally unprecedented in all of human history. We have entered a new era in which American [9:26] adversaries are using traditional and digital platforms to advance their interest at the expense [9:34] of the safety and prosperity of Americans. The geopolitical stakes have never been higher. Ms. Rogers has [9:42] overseen the Bureau's efforts in that space with unremitting commitment. Her leadership is just as [9:50] necessary at USAGM. USAGM's mission has never been more important. Authoritarian regimes are right now [10:01] in the United States. Ms. Rogers' professional and government experience makes her eminently [10:11] and perhaps uniquely qualified to lead the agency at this critical moment. I am grateful for Ms. Rogers' [10:18] willingness to continue serving our country in this role. And I thank her family for the sacrifices they [10:24] have made in support of her public service. Mr. Chairman, I am confident that Ms. Rogers will serve with [10:30] integrity, distinction, and an unwavering commitment to the interest of the United States as the CEO of [10:38] USAGM. And I urge my colleagues to support her nomination. Thank you, Senator Cruz. We appreciate [10:44] those remarks. We will now hear from our nominees. And again, I want to ask that you keep it to about [10:52] five minutes. And then you'll have another shot at it as we ask questions. So Ms. Garrett, let's start with you. [11:00] And you have the floor. Good morning, Chairman, Ranking Member, and distinguished members of the committee. [11:10] Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee for the [11:15] Ambassador to Trinidad and Tobago. I would like to take a moment, a point of privilege, to recognize my [11:21] family that traveled the distance to be with me here today. This nomination holds special, personal [11:28] meaning for me. I was born in Port of Spain, Trinidad. I immigrated to the United States at the age of [11:35] eight. And I've carried a deep connection to the Trinidad and Tobago throughout my life and career. [11:41] I've also committed to a life of service in the United States. As a Navy veteran who rose from [11:47] the enlisted and enlisted jet mechanic to retire as a Lieutenant Commander after 20 years of service, [11:54] I later served as Florida's 18th Lieutenant Governor. I've dedicated my career to strengthening America's [12:01] security and economic interests. As Lieutenant Governor, I led successful trade missions to Trinidad [12:07] and Tobago and other nations, garnering over 70 million dollars in new trade for Florida's businesses. [12:14] I will draw directly from those experiences in this role. If confirmed, I will focus my efforts on four [12:21] priorities central to strengthening the U.S. Trinidad and Tobago relationship and advancing American [12:28] interests and President Trump's vision for the Western Hemisphere. First, my most important priority [12:34] will be to ensure the safety and security of American citizens residing in Trinidad and Tobago, [12:40] including the thousands who travel there each year for business and tourism. Secondly, economic security [12:47] and prosperity are critical to both of our countries. I will promote the American exports, market opportunities, [12:55] and trade that generate commercial wins for U.S. businesses while helping Trinidad and Tobago build a [13:02] resilient, diversified economy, positioning the United States as a key partner for its economic growth and [13:09] competitiveness. I will advance our nation's economic strength by promoting fair trade, American [13:16] investment, and energy security that benefits U.S. workers and industry while building mutual beneficial [13:23] ties with this resource-rich Caribbean partner. Recognizing that economic and security interests are [13:29] deeply intertwined, I will work closely with the Trinidad officials to deepen our security partnership, [13:36] building off of our shared cooperation, including through the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative. [13:42] As a founding member of the America's Council Cartel Coalition and the Shields of the America, [13:47] Trinidad and Tobago is a regional leader on security and a strong partner in the fight against [13:53] transnational organized crime. If confirmed, I am committed to working with Trinidad and Tobago to stop [14:02] illicit narco trafficking that corrupts the lives and livelihood of both our citizens. Finally, [14:09] if confirmed, I pledge to champion American sovereignty and independence, ensuring that U.S. engagement with [14:16] Trinidad and Tobago serves our national interests first and reinforces our nation's right to control its own [14:24] borders, resources, and decision-making. I am committed to supporting enhanced border security and regional [14:32] migration corporations working with the Trinbegonian authorities to prevent illegal immigration and [14:39] ensure orderly, lawful movement of people throughout the Caribbean. Together, these priorities reflect [14:45] this administration's commitment to a safe, secure, and more prosperous Western Hemisphere. I look forward [14:52] to your questions, and if confirmed, to advancing these goals on behalf of the American people in Trinidad and [14:58] Tobago. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. Thank you, Ms. Carroll. We appreciate that. [15:05] Now, Ms. Jurada. Chairman Risch, Ranking Member Shaheen, and distinguished members of this committee, [15:12] thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee to be the United [15:18] States Executive Director at the International Monetary Fund. I want to thank President Trump and Secretary [15:25] Besson for their support. I am humbled by this nomination. Most of my career has been spent in public [15:31] service, and that is where my heart has always been. I look forward, if confirmed, to returning to public [15:37] service in this capacity. I would like to briefly acknowledge some of the people I am most grateful [15:44] to who have helped pave the way for me to appear before you today. My family and my friends. I want [15:51] to recognize my father, who is no longer with us, whose life was a prime example of the American dream. He was [15:58] born during the Great Depression. He started working at six years old. He enlisted in the United States [16:03] Navy, and he ultimately became a computer engineer. From my dad, I learned a great love of this country, [16:11] and the belief and knowledge that hard work and determination make anything possible. From my mother, [16:17] I learned that good judgment requires not only logic, but also heart. I also want to acknowledge my [16:25] stepdaughters, Caitlin and Jackie, who are here with me today. My brother, Joshua, his wife, Molly, and my [16:31] three nephews. Thank you all for your encouragement. Lastly and not least, I want to thank my husband, Jay, [16:38] whose love and support have made my service possible. Those lessons and the love of a large and supportive [16:46] group of family and friends have shaped both who I am and how I've approached my career. My professional [16:54] experience has centered on financial markets, economic policy, and public service. I've had the [17:00] privilege of serving at the Department of Treasury, the White House National Economic Council, the [17:05] Securities and Exchange Commission, and the House Financial Services Committee, and the Public Company [17:10] Accounting Oversight Board. While I was at Treasury, I was honored to represent the United States in [17:16] international standard-setting bodies, where I saw firsthand the importance of American engagement [17:21] and multilateral institutions in promoting pro-growth economic initiatives and market-oriented [17:27] regulatory frameworks. That experience taught me that American leadership in these forms is not [17:32] optional. When we step back, others fill the void, often in ways that do not reflect our values [17:40] or our interests. Throughout my career, one lesson has remained constant. American prosperity is [17:47] inseparable from economic growth, stability, transparency, and confidence in the financial system, [17:53] both here at home and in the international institutions that help sustain it. The IMF was [18:01] founded to, among other things, promote international monetary cooperation, facilitate the balanced [18:07] growth of traditional, excuse me, international trade, promote exchange rate stability, and provide [18:13] members with resources under appropriate safeguards to correct balance of payment problems without [18:18] resorting to measures destructive to national or international prosperity. If confirmed, it will be my [18:25] priority to help ensure the IMF is focused on this core mission. As Executive Director, I will work to ensure [18:33] the United States' voice is clear and effective at the IMF and advancing our economic and strategic [18:39] interests consistent with the President's America First policy. I believe the objective of facilitating [18:45] balanced growth of fair and reciprocal trade should be a focus of the Fund's work, and I will push for [18:51] policies that strengthen economic growth and stability both here and among our trading partners. [18:56] At the same time, I believe the IMF must maintain rigorous conditions and accountability in its lending [19:02] programs and remain focused on its core financial stability mission, rather than expanding into areas [19:08] beyond its mandate. I will work closely with the Treasury Department and the Administration to advance [19:14] American interests at the IMF, and I will engage with this committee throughout my service. [19:18] I am grateful for the opportunity to continue a career in public service that I care deeply about, [19:24] and I hope to earn your support. Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to your questions. [19:30] Thank you very much. Ms. Rogers? [19:32] Ms. Chairman Rush, Ranking Member Shaheen, and distinguished members of this committee. [19:38] One year ago, I appeared before you as President Trump's nominee for Undersecretary of State for Public [19:43] Diplomacy, the position I now hold. It is an honor to return today as nominee for Chief Executive Officer of the U.S. [19:51] Agency for Global Media, or USAGM. I would like to thank President Trump and Secretary Rubio for their [19:59] confidence, and my family and my husband Jeff, who is here with me today, for their love, patience, and support. [20:05] Before entering public service, I spent my career as an attorney fighting for the First Amendment. [20:11] I took that fight all the way to the Supreme Court and remained devoted to that cause while in office. [20:17] Like I said in my opening testimony last time, freedom of speech isn't just America's most famous [20:24] freedom. It's our number one strength. And USAGM helps champion free speech and freedom of the press [20:31] worldwide. In my current role as Undersecretary, I oversee a $1 billion budget and lead a workforce of [20:39] more than 5,000 employees to advance American foreign policy and counter propaganda from adversaries, [20:46] including China, Russia, and Iran, as well as Cuba and North Korea. Countering propaganda without countenancing [20:53] censorship has been my core mission. Sometimes that does mean sparking conversation with a tweet, but it means [21:01] multi-layered diplomatic engagement too. It means reaching people through music, sports, and entrepreneurship. [21:08] Above all, it means telling the truth, credibly. In a media environment where adversaries do want to [21:15] seed your timeline with slop. Truth-telling is what AGM is for. And if confirmed, that's the effort I'll lead. [21:24] Over the past year, I've traveled more than 70,000 miles and seen firsthand the power of free information [21:30] in closed societies. In Turkmenistan, I met students exploring an uncensored internet through our American [21:36] center. In Seoul, North Korean defectors told me that snippets of American radio were the first hints [21:43] they heard of another kind of life. These defectors risked torture and risked death. Fleeing toward a [21:51] freedom they'd only heard existed. Here. And they heard it from us. That's a great honor. And it's also [21:58] evidence that Voice of America and our grantees, RFERL, OCB, MBN, RFA, and OTF can be indispensable [22:07] instruments of American foreign policy. Free people tend to choose America, and the truth sets people [22:14] free. That's why delivering truthful information behind the Iron Curtain helped defeat Soviet communism. [22:21] And in today's information war, truth remains America's best tool. As multiple administrations have [22:28] agreed, USAGM must reform and modernize to meet today's media environment. If confirmed as CEO, [22:35] I will work to meet audiences where they are, which isn't always television broadcast or shortwave radio. [22:42] We won't abandon those mediums where we need them, but we will expand to short form video, diaspora group [22:47] chats, podcasts, and other timely forms of engagement. Over a year ago, President Trump signed an executive [22:54] order directing AGM to operate at its statutory minimum. Put plainly, that means the agency should [23:01] do what Congress codified. No more and no less. That means we must reach audiences in strategically [23:07] significant places, like Cuba and the Middle East, where censorship impedes our foreign policy. [23:12] If confirmed, my first priority will be to stabilize the agency, strengthen its leadership, [23:17] modernize its operations, and restore research capacity so we can actually measure reach and [23:22] viewership. Are we actually reaching people? And how can we do it better? And how can we make every [23:28] taxpayer dollar count? Those will be my obsessions. I pledge to engage consistently with Congress and [23:34] rebuild local language and transmission capabilities in areas where we need them too. Just last week, [23:40] I attended the second White House Correspondents Dinner of 2026 and listened to President Trump's remarks on [23:47] the Free Press. At the first dinner, I never got a chance to hear them. Like most dignitaries, [23:53] I dove for cover when the shooting started. One person sitting near me didn't, though. Susan Zarinsky of [24:00] CBS, who's about four feet tall, stood on a chair to film the room as the rest of us crouched for cover. [24:07] When I saw Susan Friday, I thought of the journalists across AGM and our grantees who report the news in [24:15] the line of fire daily, despite threats of detention, persecution, and violence. If confirmed, I will [24:23] work every day to be worthy of their courage and of the mission Congress entrusted to this agency. [24:29] That means keeping the cause of freedom alive where it is under greatest threats. Thank you, [24:35] and I look forward to your questions. Well, thank you very much to all three of you. And we'll now do [24:41] some questions, starting with myself and Senator Shaheen. And let's see. Let's start with you, [24:50] Ms. Carroll. We don't often get an appointee that has as great a connection to the country that they're [24:57] going to as you have. So it's good to see you and glad you're willing to do this. Tell us a little [25:04] bit about our relationship with Trinidad and Tobago. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Right now, [25:14] the United States is experiencing a good relationship with the country of Trinidad and Tobago in that [25:20] they've been very supportive of the Caribbean Basin security initiative such that they recognize that [25:27] they do have a porous border and we do need some resources or they need some resources in order to [25:34] curtail against illicit human trafficking as well as narco terrorists. Additionally, we have an issue [25:42] with regards to energy of their production reducing and the United States is committed to moving forward [25:50] with a license that has been accepted for a sector in the Caribbean area between Venezuela and Trinidad to [26:01] help the country explore for additional resources which will also help the United States in its efforts [26:08] to increase direct support for business opportunities. So we can see that at least Trinidad and Tobago is [26:18] committed to working with the United States to increase economic opportunities, increase oil and gas [26:24] gas exploration as well as utilize our assistance to help combat some of those illicit trafficking. [26:31] What's the stability of their government like? The government, as far as the stability, [26:39] I cannot speak to that if confirmed in getting down to the region and having more dialogue with Post as [26:46] well as the government to find out more about that but I do know that they have had several emergency orders [26:54] which doesn't bode well with regards to the criminal criminal activities that's been occurring for a [27:00] number of years and that is something that needs to be addressed and hopefully if confirmed with my [27:07] direction on the ground and sharing that information back to committee as well as the president and the state [27:14] that we can come up with some strategic goals to help in that endeavor. Thanks so much. [27:21] Ms. Jurada, as executive director at IMF, what kind of a staff do you have? How many people do you [27:27] do you oversee there? Would you oversee? Thank you Chairman. It's my understanding that it's around a dozen [27:34] career staff report up to the U.S. executive director but I can confirm and get back to you. No, [27:38] that's I was just looking at approximate that's that's all. And who will you report to? Do you report to the board or the [27:45] the chairman of the board or who who's your immediate supervisor? I report to Senator [27:50] I report to Secretary Besant, sir, the Treasury Department. I see, okay, good. And does Secretary [27:56] Besant, is he actively engaged with the board as far as setting policy and that sort of thing? [28:02] So the governance structure of the IMF is that you have the board of governors and Secretary Besant is the [28:08] governor on the governing board and meets a couple times a year and they have the overarching setting of the [28:13] agenda. As U.S. executive director to the IMF I'd be sitting on behalf of the United States on the [28:19] executive board which meets very regularly multiple times a week to entertain and vote on underlying [28:26] decisions that range from day-to-day operations to major policy decisions. I appreciate that. Ms. Rogers, [28:36] interesting to hear your story about talking with people who have fled or escaped another country. I [28:41] think all of us that sit on this committee have from time to time met with the same people and it's [28:48] it's always a wake-up call to realize how we take for granted what we have here in America. [28:57] It just amazes me. We wake up every morning, don't even think about it. And then if I travel, [29:02] I come back here and I'll turn on against my better judgment TV and watch the talking heads and [29:09] talking about how bad America is and all the troubles we have here and etc. It just amazes me how [29:16] how people are in awe when they come to the United States as to what we have here. Let me ask this. [29:23] There's almost 200 countries or more or less depending on how you count them on the planet and obviously [29:30] you're going to have to be active in some and obviously we can't be in all. So how do you make a [29:35] decision as to where you're going to where you're going to focus your efforts. Thank you very much [29:40] Chairman Richten. I totally agree and my travels have underscored the same gratitude. So look, [29:46] the statutory mission of AGM set forth an International Broadcasting Act subsection 6202 [29:51] includes reaching audiences in information environments where a free media ecosystem is not [29:56] possible. So we're focusing on censored societies and we also have to think about advancing the broad [30:02] objectives of US foreign policy. That's subsection 6202A and I think precedent and statute kind of give [30:10] us a bit of a guide. We have to be operating in the Middle East. We have to be operating in Asia. We have [30:14] to be operating in Cuba and then there's Radio Free Europe and obviously Radio Free Europe is really one [30:21] of the crown jewels of Cold War soft power. I still have interactions with Europeans who grew up behind the [30:26] Berlin Wall and they get tears in their eyes when they talk about hearing rock and roll music on Radio Free Europe [30:31] and that was like a shaft of light from a free society. I think Radio Free Europe now should stay [30:36] focused on the Russian periphery, Iran and Afghanistan where it is and then you know there were some [30:43] languages that languages and regions that were deprecated under Kerry Lake that I think we're probably [30:47] correct to shift away from. I don't think we need to be broadcasting in places like Hungary and Greece [30:52] now that the Cold War is over. It's not that those media environments are perfect, it's just those aren't the [30:57] kinds of places where the taxpayer dollar is most efficiently deployed to get information to people [31:03] who literally can't get it otherwise. I do think Africa is something we shouldn't totally abdicate. [31:08] The security situation in the Hessahel and the advances made by Russia and China there show that so [31:15] I would as I have in my role as R with my Limitless Africa podcast and Young African Leaders program [31:20] explore some careful tactical resuscitation of resources there. But otherwise I think you know [31:28] Cuba huge focus obviously we can't have communism in our hemisphere. Asia huge focus, Iran, Afghanistan, [31:35] Middle East huge focus and it's basically countering adversarial propaganda with the truth and we've got [31:40] to do that everywhere. Thank you. I'm always amazed when I speak to part of the diaspora from Iran [31:49] on the reach that we have and the penetration that we have into Iran even with their efforts to keep [31:56] that down. So keep that up. Senator Shaheen. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Ms. Rogers, in May the State [32:03] Department sent Congress a report concluding that the IRGC uses social media bots to spread anti-Semitic [32:10] propaganda and manipulate online discourse. The President goes on to say that Iranian propaganda is a [32:17] national security threat and your own department says that the IRGC is conducting influence operations [32:24] against Americans. So help me understand why the administration waived sanctions earlier this [32:30] month on Iran's state broadcaster, IRIB, the regime's principal propaganda outlet. I have a copy of the [32:38] waiver here signed by Secretary Rubio. Mr. Chairman if we could introduce this into the record I'd appreciate it. [32:45] It'll be introduced. So help me explain why given the propaganda challenges we have with Iran why we [32:53] would provide that kind of a waiver. Thank you very much Ranking Member Shaheen. You know we have been [33:00] very very active on the Iranian propaganda issue and I'll I can get to some of our activities in a moment [33:05] but I will address your question. So public diplomacy wasn't involved in that particular waiver. I can tell [33:10] you though that Secretary Rubio has been extremely aggressive in enacting sanctions on Iranian entities [33:16] listing Iranian foreign terrorist organizations and kicking frankly the family members of Iranian [33:22] authoritarian murderers out of the United States. Would you agree with me though that that doesn't make [33:26] sense that we should provide a waiver? I mean this is an example of the propaganda that they're putting [33:32] out a billion views of this video and why do we want to encourage our adversary who's bombing Americans [33:42] and our allies in the Middle East by letting them continue their propaganda efforts? I don't think [33:48] there's a single person in this administration who wants to encourage Iran to bomb Americans or have [33:53] a nuclear weapon. We've been very aggressive against Iran but I want to address your question. So [33:57] um look these sanctions determinations are legalistic and fact specific. I'm not asking about the [34:02] sanctions determinations. I agree with those. What I'm asking about is this waiver. Do you know [34:08] why we provided this waiver? So that the determination of that sanctions waiver would be legalistic and [34:13] fact specific and I'm not the person to speak on it. Okay perhaps if you get confirmed you could get an [34:19] answer for the committee and respond to us because it's hard for me to understand why we would do that. I'll certainly [34:24] be responsive to the committee. Thank you. I also am concerned as I said in my opening remarks about [34:32] one individual serving as both the head of the USAGM and public diplomacy of the State Department. I think [34:40] USAGM is by statute an independent agency. Its mission is to provide objective as you have confirmed [34:47] objective accurate news free from editorial interference. So I'd like to hear from you how you plan on [34:55] maintaining that independence and whether you would commit to allowing USAGM broadcasters and grantees [35:02] to operate free from any interference by you, the State Department, or other political appointees. [35:07] Thank you Senator. So I commit to follow the law. That's my North Star. I'd come from the courtroom and [35:12] I wouldn't want to do anything else and I've done that as R. And would you agree that that is the law? [35:17] So with the law? The law, sorry I don't mean to interrupt you Senator. Well no, that as I understand [35:24] the International Broadcasting Act says that USAGM shall continue to exist within the executive branch [35:30] as an entity described in 5 U.S.C. 104, the statute on independent agencies, and that there are multiple [35:39] references to its independence and the independence of the grantees. And it also says clearly that the [35:46] Secretary of State and the CEO shall respect the professional independence and integrity of USAGM. [35:52] Yes, so I absolutely commit to respect the professionalism and independence of broadcasting. [35:57] That's what the statute says. I don't think the statute says though that there should be no [36:00] quote unquote interference or interaction because the statute requires that AGM consult with the [36:05] Secretary of State on foreign policy guidance. I'm usually the delegate for that consultation and [36:10] the law requires that I ensure, that's the verb the statute uses, ensure that broadcasting is consistent [36:16] with our broad foreign policy objectives. What that means for practical purposes, Senator, and [36:19] when I meet with the heads of the grantees, this is what they ask me for, is that they don't want me [36:24] to, and I don't have the time to, copy edit individual stories so that they look like propaganda from RT. [36:30] I don't want to do that. But I do want, and the grantees want me to provide, strategic management [36:36] level guidance on things like standards and practices, on things like foreign policy priorities, [36:41] and I think, I think they're crying out for this, and if confirmed, I'd be willing to do that. But I [36:47] don't, I don't want to trample on the independence of professionalism of broadcasting, because candidly, [36:52] accomplishing our foreign policy objectives means that these organs of broadcasting have to be [36:57] credible. And Xinhua is not credible. I want VOA to be credible. As I understand the statute, it says that [37:05] the CEO shall respect the professional independence and integrity of USAGM, its broadcasting services, [37:13] and the grantees of the agency. That doesn't say to me that they're looking for the CEO to provide them [37:22] the kind of direction that you're talking about. So you'd also have to read section 6202. You're [37:27] reading, I think, 6201. We'll pursue, my time is up, but I will pursue questioning when the second round [37:35] comes back. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Sheehy. Senator Cruz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations [37:41] to each of the nominees. Ms. Rogers, authoritarian regimes are investing enormous resources into [37:48] coordinated campaigns to undermine the United States. Chinese, Russian, Iranian, and other hostile [37:55] foreign governments are amplifying these campaigns. They do so through a vast networks of anonymous [38:02] social media accounts, automated bot farms, state-controlled media, and covert influence [38:08] operations. These efforts are backed by effectively unlimited state resources. Their objective is to [38:15] constrain America's ability to confront hostile regimes, including especially Iran, the world's [38:21] leading state sponsor of terrorism. To achieve that objective, foreign-backed influence campaigns work [38:28] aggressively to kneecap America's technology and defense sectors. They manufacture the illusion of [38:34] widespread domestic opposition to policies that boost U.S. national security, designed to erode the [38:41] political will to counter our adversaries. We have also seen foreign bot networks amplify anti-Israel and [38:49] anti-Semitic narratives as a broader campaign to wear down American support for our Israeli allies. [38:56] Walk us through how these foreign influence operations actually work in practice. [39:01] Thank you for that question, Senator. You know, you're absolutely right when you allude to effectively [39:06] unlimited resources. China alone spends about $40 billion on propaganda and influence operations. [39:12] Just repeat that statement because that is a staggering statement. [39:16] China spends about $40 billion on propaganda and influence operations. I have $1 billion and most of [39:22] that goes to salaries and keeping the lights on. But America keeps winning the information war in [39:28] the sense that people who can choose would choose to come to America over China pretty much any day. [39:32] And why is that? You know, part of it is that American freedom sells itself and I could wax on about [39:37] that for five minutes and I won't waste your five minutes, Senator. So we have coordinated bot hives. [39:42] That's certainly part of it. We also have foreign influence united front spending through networks like [39:48] the Singham Network and Code Pink, of great concern to this administration. And we even have foreign [39:53] influence in our universities. So through a partnership between my office and the education [39:58] secretary, we've started digging up data that universities were obligated to disclose for years [40:03] but weren't disclosing. We found hundreds of millions in dollars flowing into places like Harvard [40:09] from sanctioned Chinese nuclear labs and the like that the American people just didn't know about. [40:13] And so these influence operations, they're broad, they run deep, and we are countering them on a [40:19] lot of different levels through counter speech and exposure. What doesn't work is playing [40:23] whack-a-mole censoring American tweets. You brought up the Singham Network and Code Pink and there have [40:29] been recent reports about the major investment they're making in driving anti-AI sentiment in the United [40:36] States with the objective of discouraging America from investing in AI to help the Chinese Communist Party [40:44] beat America in the AI race. Elaborate a bit more on the Singham Network and Code Pink and what exactly [40:51] they're doing. Yeah, so this is a billionaire based in China who's sympathetic to communism and socialism. [40:57] And I'm not going to focus too much on that individual. It's really a whole united front network. [41:02] So the day after our wildly successful operation against Maduro in Venezuela, we had protests pop up, [41:09] you know, seemingly overnight in like 75 different cities waving the same signs. The information I've [41:15] received is that that was funded by the Singham Network. Singham Network, very congenial with China. [41:20] There's actually incredibly a New York Times expose, even the New York Times has noticed this, [41:25] from 2023 on it. And it's a big problem. And I wanted, Senator, the anti-AI thing, you're absolutely [41:30] right. This sloppy list, deletitism, data center hysteria. It's not, you can't blame it completely [41:36] on foreign bots, but it is being amplified by foreign bots for sure. And it's being amplified on [41:40] both the left and the right. Our adversaries find our open free market of ideas particularly vulnerable [41:48] to manipulation. Now, Chinese and Iranian influence operations appear particularly sophisticated and [41:55] persistent. What distinguishes their influence ops from those of other other adversaries and how [42:01] should the United States prioritize our response? So both Chinese and Iranian influence operations [42:08] skew especially noticeably towards this kind of leftist anti-colonial ideology. By the way, [42:13] so does Cuba. Our recent Cuba report, very strong on this. Russia, I would say- My colleagues on this [42:19] committee would agree we have too many Cubans. One. We only have one left. This is so that- [42:30] Well, maybe with OCB's help, we make Cuba a nicer place for Cubans to return to. [42:35] Amen. From your mouth to God's ears. I'm sorry, you weren't giving your answer. [42:38] Oh, no. I just, I think, you know, there's more of a consistent leftist and anti-colonial ideology in [42:43] some of this stuff. Russia dabbles in that, but Russia is also a bit entropic and entrepreneurial. And [42:49] we saw, you know, when they tried to muster up, there was no evidence that Russia caused President [42:53] Trump to win the election. That was nonsensical. But they found like $100,000 worth of Instagram [42:58] posts. And there were pro-Black Lives Matter posts, and there were fake white nationalist posts, [43:03] both from Russia. Russia's a little more chaotic. And a lot of, a lot of Russian misinformation right [43:08] now focuses on recruiting soldiers for its war as well, which China and Iran aren't focused on. [43:13] China and Iran doing a lot more anti-Semitism also. Thank you. [43:16] Well, let's see. Senator Rosen was next. [43:22] Thank you. Thank you, Chair Risch, Ranking Member Shaheen for holding this hearing. And [43:27] thank you for the witnesses for being here today, your willingness to serve. [43:31] I want to build a little bit on Senator Shaheen's line of questioning about editorial independence. [43:37] USAGM has audiences in more than 100 countries providing reliable, trusted reporting by journalists, [43:43] not political officials. But under Carrie Lake's leadership of the agency, [43:48] these standards were not maintained. For example, Ms. Lake shut down Radio Free Europe, [43:53] Radio Liberty's Hungarian news service, because she claimed its programming had undermined President [43:59] Trump's foreign policy by opposing the duly elected Prime Minister of Hungary. And that's a quote. [44:05] So I'm going to double down on what Senator Shaheen asked. Ms. Rogers, if confirmed, will you commit [44:11] specifically to not interfering in reporting that is critical of politicians, governments, [44:17] or political parties that President Trump has expressed support for? I commit to respect the [44:22] professionalism and independence of international broadcasting, Senator. Well, it shouldn't really [44:27] be a difficult question. I just want to say this. If the USAGM is seen as a tool of the U.S. government [44:34] to punish President's opponents, any President's opponents, and to silence the criticism of his [44:39] friends, it will lose the very credibility that I think so many of us believe make it an incredible tool [44:48] in our arsenal. So I'm going to move on to Lebanon. Ms. Jurada, following Lebanon's 2019 economic collapse, [44:56] the IMF has made it clear that unlocking financial assistance program for Beirut depends on comprehensive [45:02] economic reforms, including a credible banking restructuring strategy. At the same time, Lebanese [45:08] depositors have had their savings effectively frozen for years, and any path to making them whole [45:13] will likely require some combination of losses absorbed by the banking sector, the government, [45:19] or the depositors themselves. The U.S. has long advocated for these reforms, not just for the good of [45:24] the Lebanese people, but also to rebuild the international's community confidence in Lebanon's economy [45:30] and banking system. So Ms. Jurada, given the reforms that IMF is asking for, and the goal of fully [45:37] repaying depositors that may pull in different directions, how would you approach balancing these [45:43] two imperatives? In your view, is there a realistic scenario in which Lebanon can satisfy the IMF's [45:49] conditions, while also delivering an outcome that the people of Lebanon will see as fair? [45:56] Ms. Well, thank you, Senator, for that question. So to state a little bit of the obvious, which is [46:02] I'm obviously not currently in the role, so I haven't been privy to some of the underlying [46:05] deliberations, but generally what I can say is what I, if confirmed, that I can commit that [46:11] in evaluating what is an ongoing program, getting up to speed on what the current status is, [46:16] and then making sure that one of the core functions of the IMF, which is capacity development and [46:22] technical assistance, is deployed in order to help build up that economy. Because once you do get [46:27] the lending program ruled out and you have the finances going there, you want to make sure that [46:31] you have a respected rule of law and the infrastructure associated with it, so that then it can develop. [46:36] And I will, you know, commit to staying coordinated with the Treasury Department and ongoing commitment [46:42] with this committee on that issue. Thank you. I want to move on to you, [46:48] Ms. Johnson Carroll, and talk about countering violent extremism. Because Trinidad and Tobago has the [46:54] highest per capita rate of ISIS recruitment in the Western Hemisphere. The country has struggled with [47:01] repatriating its nationals and has dealt with lingering security risks. At the same time, [47:06] the Trump administration has gutted funding, gutted funding for countering violent extremist efforts, [47:12] or CVE, the very program designed to address radicalization in places like Trinidad and Tobago. [47:19] So Ms. Johnson Carroll, do you believe that cutting CVE programs helps us advance the U.S. national security [47:26] interests? And if confirmed, would you advocate for programs to prevent radicalization in Trinidad [47:32] and Tobago? Senator, thank you so much for the question. It is an important issue with regards to [47:39] transnational illicit opportunities for criminal elements in the country. And since I am not in post, [47:50] I cannot say what amount of monies has been- I'm not asking for an amount of money, but would you [47:55] advocate that those programs to prevent radicalization should be funded? I'm not asking for an amount. [48:02] Thank you. With the INL, as my understanding, and the CBSI has been items that have been placed, [48:10] particularly with combating those particular issues that the committee have supported, the CBSI and INL as [48:17] well. And I look forward to at least seeing what sort of resources have been put in- But would you agree [48:22] this radicalization is a problem and it needs funding to be addressed so you can do your job? [48:27] The radicalization is a problem, ma'am. And I look forward to working with the committee [48:31] and the State Department and President Trump in combating this issue. Thank you. [48:35] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Rogers, you stated that your intention is to follow the law. [48:48] The appropriations law is one of the most relevant laws that applies to your agency. Congress allocated [48:57] $199 million to VOA in this fiscal year. That's less than the previous year, but it was a bipartisan [49:04] rejection of the president's request to essentially just fund the wind down of the agency. But we're now [49:13] well into this fiscal year. In July of 2026, so in this month, it's expected that VOA will operate for [49:23] about 208 hours. That is compared to 2,400 hours in 2004. There are 1,042 VOA employees that are currently [49:35] on administrative leave. You are in violation, the VOA, the operation of VOA is in violation of the [49:44] Appropriations Act right now because VOA is funded at a level and they are not coming close to the level [49:52] of operation and reach that Congress is funding them for. So is it your intention to bring back to work [49:59] the 1,042 employees that are currently on administrative leave and return VOA to its funded level of [50:07] operation? Thank you, Senator. So my numbers are slightly different than that, but it is my intent [50:12] to follow appropriations law. And I'll just note that I have a track record of doing that in public [50:16] diplomacy. So budget process, as you know, is iterative interagency. And there have been moments in [50:23] that iterative interagency process where things like the Fulbright Scholarship have been defunded in budget [50:28] proposals. I obviously stand with each of the president's budget requests. He was elected, [50:32] I wasn't, I serve him. But, you know, when it's ultimately Congress's decision how much money gets [50:36] deployed, I've deployed that money and I will follow appropriations law in this function. [50:40] But does that mean you're bringing back, you may have different numbers, but obviously there are [50:46] hundreds and hundreds of employees who are on leave. Are you bringing back those employees? [50:51] I'm definitely going to bring back more of them. I'm not committing to return the agency to like [50:56] the same exact identical footprint it had under President Biden. I think we do need to reform [51:00] and modernize, but we should see people coming back to work. But you're required to spend that [51:05] money in accordance with directive from Congress. Yes, I will. I will deploy the appropriated resources. [51:11] Let me ask you about this question of how you mentioned Hungary as a place you didn't necessarily [51:17] think the United States needs to be. But it's an interesting example because [51:20] the State Department noticed Congress of its intention to terminate Radio Free Europe [51:29] and Radio Liberty's Hungarian language programming. And, you know, they sort of pulled back the curtain [51:36] as to their reason. In the statement to Congress, they said that they are terminating the programming [51:43] because the programming undermined President Trump's foreign policy by opposing the duly elected [51:52] prime minister of Hungary. Essentially, criticism of an elected leader was by definition in opposition [52:01] to U.S. foreign policy. That's extraordinary. We have never determined our foreign policy as being in [52:08] service of one particular elected leader and punished our grantees for being critical of that leader. [52:17] That sounds like the opposite of free speech, right? That sounds like if you are a grantee and you run [52:24] programming that is critical of a friend of the president, you will have your contract terminated. [52:31] So is that the policy now of the OA or of broadly funded information networks that if they run programming [52:42] that is critical of someone that President Trump is friends with or supports, that they'll have their funding pulled? [52:48] So, Senator, when I said I didn't see Hungary as a place we needed to be broadcasting, I just mean that [52:53] Hungary is the kind of environment, it's not like North Korea or Cuba, right? Like if taxpayers are paying [52:58] to help people in the most deprived, most censored societies get information, Hungary is not one of those. [53:02] I also think broadcasting in an allied country is an interesting proposition. Like, I wouldn't want to [53:10] start broadcasting in Britain or Germany either, even if sometimes we're at odds with their elected leaders. [53:14] But I guess I'm asking a broader question, separate and aside from whether it's an allied country. [53:22] Is it our policy now that if a grantee is being critical of an ally of the president, [53:29] because that's exactly what we said here. We said that we were pulling the funding because [53:33] our foreign policy was to support Orban. Is that the way we're going to do grants now? Is that if a grantee is [53:41] critical of an ally of the president, they risk losing their funding? [53:45] So, we have to respect the independence and professionalism of our broadcasters, [53:49] that's right there in the statute. And frankly, Senator, I'm not going to have [53:53] time to do tit for tat fly specking of every piece of content to see if there's any criticism of anyone [53:58] the president likes. I have, you know, more important foreign policy priorities to address, [54:02] so I wouldn't see that as a lodestar of our grant making. I do think, as the statute says, [54:07] broadcasting has to be consistent with our broad foreign policy objectives, [54:11] so undermining the elected government of an allied country is not something I would expect to do. [54:17] I think that would be pretty extraordinary. What does that mean, undermining? Again, [54:21] that does sound like you're saying that a grantee who's critical of an allied government would lose [54:26] funding. That's the opposite of free speech. Well, I mean, this speech isn't free. It's being [54:31] paid for by the taxpayer to support American foreign policy. But, Senator, we're not currently [54:36] broadcasting any allied countries or broadcasting in places like Iran, right? So I think it's almost [54:42] a moot point. But look, you're asking, am I going to pull funding from a grantee? If any of its [54:46] reporters criticize anybody the president likes, I don't think that's what the statute envisions, [54:50] and I don't think that's what my priorities are going to be. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [54:53] Thank you, Senator Murphy. And we will now turn to Senator Hagerty. [54:59] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Rogers, I'd like to continue with you, if I might. [55:03] I've been very pleased to actually see common sense prevail for once in the administration of [55:11] government functions. As I think about what was going on at USAGM before this administration came [55:19] to office, it had basically run amok. You've got journalists tied to the Kremlin. You've got [55:24] employees there calling up Republican members of Congress and threatening them and winding up in [55:28] jail as a result of that. I think you have a unique opportunity to actually align this organization [55:35] with the other role that you perform, which is our Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy. [55:39] I've been in the field. I've been an ambassador. I've actually seen what our communications can do [55:43] and should do and where they fail. This sounds to me as a business person for my whole career, [55:49] as an opportunity for alignment that's rarely achieved in the United States government. So I'd like [55:52] you to just articulate how you're going to see that this alignment works and how you're going to [55:56] advance the interest of the United States taxpayers as a result. [55:59] Thank you so much, Senator. So one of the commands on the statute that I think [56:04] may have been neglected and that I really want to revive is we have to do research to make sure [56:08] that we're reaching audiences in the kinds of censored environments where Congress commands us to. [56:13] And that means reinvigorating our audience measurement capabilities and coming up with [56:17] new ways of doing that. I think there's some synergies through OTF tools that can be really useful in [56:22] that regard. And in terms of alignment, you know, we hear a lot of concern from minority [56:26] about this firewall and that we and I, I don't want to be micromanaging the editorial [56:33] copywriting or bylines of any of these outlets, but these grantees are asking for strategic guidance [56:39] on broad foreign policy objectives, which is what I'm supposed to provide. And I look forward to [56:44] providing it. And I think, you know, these are mostly patriots who serve these entities. These are [56:48] reporters who risk their lives to get truthful information to their countrymen in places like Iran. [56:53] Iran. And they know they're working indirectly for the United States. And I think these grantees [56:59] want our guidance and we're happy to give it. And I think we can do that without the kind of [57:04] editorial micromanagement the minority is afraid of. [57:06] Well, in your role as Under Secretary of State, I think you have a unique opportunity to provide [57:10] that guidance in an informed fashion and really avoid the situation where we wind up being far astray [57:16] from what American foreign policy is. So I commend you for that. I look forward to supporting you in [57:20] that role. Mr. Rana, I'd like to turn to you now on the IMF. The United States is the IMF's largest [57:28] shareholder. You and I have talked about the central role that the United States can and should play [57:34] there. And the U.S. Executive Director, I think, has a responsibility to ensure that IMF policy actually [57:40] advocates for both global financial stability and also for our own American economic interest. [57:46] And so I'd just like for you to articulate for us the standards that you'll use to determine whether [57:50] the United States should support IMF assistance to countries that have repeatedly failed to implement [57:55] reforms. Well, thank you, Senator Hagerty, for that question. And thank you again for your time [58:01] with meeting with you. So I couldn't agree more with you that on – as being, if confirmed, [58:06] the U.S. Executive Director to the IMF, the first core tenant is that I would be representing American [58:11] interests. And so when evaluating whether a specific country project is pending before the board, [58:17] I'd want to evaluate it on some of the core tenants that I identified in my opening statement, which is [58:23] what is the underlying transparency associated with the existing debt to that country? So in particular, [58:31] if there's a concern that that country has outstanding debt to China and making sure we [58:35] have the transparency to that, what is the fiscal responsibility? Because I recognize that I am a [58:41] steward of the taxpaying dollars. And then what is the conditionality associated with that underlying [58:45] loan program? Making sure it's coupled with the appropriate, you know, technical assistance and [58:51] structural reform that the country would then be held accountable as the payment would be rolling out. [58:55] Well, I certainly don't think American taxpayers want to see their money deployed without conditions. [59:00] I think the whole purpose of engaging in this regard is to achieve reform and to achieve improvement. [59:07] And I'd love to hear your perspective that I could go back home and tell my constituents in Tennessee [59:12] of why is – why would Tennessee taxpayers benefit from the role that the IMF is going to play under your [59:17] leadership? Well, thank you, Senator. I think it's important that we have a strong U.S.-led IMF that's [59:25] credible as a lender of last resort because in the absence of that, these countries that are in [59:30] financial distress are going to look for lending elsewhere. And so by enforcing the fact that they [59:36] are encouraging them to come to the IMF, then we can have the safeguards associated with it. You can have [59:42] the conditionality so that we can implement and facilitate structural reform by having the capacity [59:46] development and the conditions and that you evaluate when those programs are subject to review and [59:51] whether they're going to get another tranche of capital. And I also think it's really important, one other [59:55] tenet as it relates to the IMF program, is the country-specific surveillance as to whether that [1:00:00] country raises any kind of financial stability risk. I think it's a critical role. I look forward to your [1:00:06] leadership there because I think it's absolutely vital that we participate in a way that drives toward [1:00:11] reforms that will actually benefit the entire global financial system. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:00:15] Thank you, Senator Hagerty. Senator Van Hollen. [1:00:17] Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Rogers, I am worried that the United States [1:00:23] is ceding more and more of the information space to our adversaries and that the dismantling of much [1:00:30] of VOA has contributed to that. I'm looking at an article here, a Wall Street Journal article here, [1:00:36] from July of last year, just months after the President's executive order, headlined, [1:00:42] China gets more airtime around the world as Voice of America signs off. Subheading, Chinese state [1:00:49] media has expanded its reach from Indonesia to Nigeria after Trump's March order to dismantle [1:00:55] U.S. government-funded outlets. And I'd ask unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman, this will be entered into the [1:01:00] record. It will be entered. Does that concern you? And do you disagree with this statement and the [1:01:09] reporting that China has been trying to fill the information space that the United States is leaving [1:01:18] in many of these areas? I, China is rapacious and it is expanding all its propaganda efforts. And I, [1:01:27] as because I'm recused and I am not in the operations of the agency, I don't have micro data on what China's [1:01:33] doing in each transmission facility in each place. But I agree that Chinese adversarial propaganda is [1:01:38] a problem and combating it has been a cornerstone of my public diplomacy strategy and will be a [1:01:42] cornerstone for me if confirmed. Yeah. And you agree, and I think I heard some of your earlier testimony, [1:01:47] that Africa is a critical region of the world? Certainly, we have critical equities there. Yeah. [1:01:53] So this story reports how the Nigerian communications minister is troubled by the fact that China is [1:02:01] essentially filling the space that VOA is leaving. Can you commit that the VOA Africa service, Africa [1:02:09] services, language services, will be reinstated? So no good CEO would cite unseen, you know, obligate [1:02:16] tens of millions on spending on specific transmission capabilities. I will, I intend to take a closer, [1:02:24] fresh look at Africa because I do think there are information skirmishes there that we should be in. [1:02:29] I think Sahel is one of them. Yeah, I would argue the same is true of much of East Asia. I know that [1:02:39] you bet language is restored in Korea and Mandarin, but as this Wall Street Journal article points out, [1:02:50] Indonesia, for example, has been sort of left. That's a big and critical and important country, [1:02:55] and it seems to me that the United States should have its voice airing there and providing factual [1:03:04] information. That same, I would think, is true for Latin America. I mean, I know the Cuban Broadcasting [1:03:11] Services is up and running and there are lots of resources dedicated to Cuba, but Latin America is a very [1:03:16] big country. The New Yorker has a story today entitled How Donald Trump Silenced the Voice of America, [1:03:24] and they talk about the situation you referenced earlier. In the aftermath of the taking out of [1:03:32] Maduro, there was no VOA there, and China and other voices have been filling the void. So I understand you're [1:03:43] not going to make a commitment here, but I would argue that you agree that Latin America is an important [1:03:49] part of the world. Absolutely. So those are two, I mean, we just talked about three really important [1:03:54] parts of the world, right? Africa, East Asia, Latin America, and I really think it's important that, [1:04:00] you know, we have America's voice back in those regions. I heard a little bit of your exchange with [1:04:08] Senator Murphy about bringing folks back. My understanding is right now about 400 VOA employees [1:04:15] and 25 U.S. AGM employees are still on paid administrative leave since March of last year. [1:04:24] My understanding is that has cost American taxpayers about $140 million. Wouldn't you agree that it would [1:04:34] be better if those $140 million were spent to make sure those people could be doing their jobs in [1:04:41] different parts of the world rather than sitting at home? Senator, the last thing I want to do as CEO [1:04:45] is pay people not to work. So can you commit to bringing them back? I commit to taking a close, [1:04:52] fresh look at staffing needs, and if we, and I suspect we'll want and need more staff in some places, [1:04:57] and I will dip into that pool and bring people back. Could you commit to giving preference to [1:05:02] those who've been displaced, have experienced and displaced in terms of bringing people back? [1:05:06] I'll talk to my employment lawyers about preferences, but we obviously hired those people [1:05:09] for a reason, and I would look at rehiring them. And how about the director of VOA? Shouldn't we bring [1:05:16] the director back? I really don't want to make specific personnel decisions before confirmation. [1:05:23] Just last question, who's running VOA these days? So Mike Regas is acting CEO. [1:05:28] But you have a director, right? I think it's Mike Abramowitz? We have good executives in there. We [1:05:36] have Chris Wallace in there. But in terms of day-to-day, who's sitting at what dashboard doing what, [1:05:42] I don't have microvisibility. Well, I hope you'll reinstate the professional team. I'm all for reform, [1:05:51] but there's some very talented people, and I hope they'll be brought back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:05:57] Thank you, Senator Van Allen. Senator Keene. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Rogers, I know you're [1:06:03] familiar with the VOA charter, and it is a simple document that requires VOA to be accurate, objective, [1:06:11] comprehensive, and representative of America as a whole, not any one party or in one region or one [1:06:18] segment. Will you commit to enforcing the charter? Absolutely, Senator. I'm going to follow the law in [1:06:24] every respect. Thank you. Thank you for that. I want to echo my colleague's comments, just how [1:06:31] bizarre it is that we're paying so much money to VOA employees, but forbidding them from working. [1:06:37] There's a lot of expertise in that group of employees, and as you point out, the last thing [1:06:42] you would want to do as a CEO is pay people not to work, and I think we should try to get folks [1:06:48] back to work. And in particular, on Latin America, you commented favorably to my colleague's question [1:06:54] about whether we should have services there. One area I really agree with the Trump administration, [1:06:59] and I'm not hesitant when saying I don't agree, but in the national security strategy, and more [1:07:04] generally, they've really elevated the Americas to near the top, maybe at the top. And I have some [1:07:10] differences of opinion about exactly what, but I actually really like that prioritization of [1:07:15] the Americas. And that's why it seems very odd to me that we have essentially reduced Spanish language [1:07:22] services throughout the Americas, with the exception of Cuba. I was a missionary in Honduras, [1:07:26] and was feeling very, very lonely in a world where my English served no purpose. And I love to be able [1:07:33] to listen to listen to Voice of America. Programming in Spanish helped me learn a little bit to be [1:07:39] better with my students. Jazz music on Christmas, you know, I can still remember listening to VOA [1:07:45] Christmas music high in the mountains of Honduras, just like others were. So I do think Spanish language [1:07:51] programming by VOA in the area that the Trump administration says should be top priority, should [1:07:57] be a priority for the agency. And I gather you don't disagree with that. Yes, Senator, I don't want to [1:08:01] make operational commitments sight unseen, a good CEO wouldn't, but I strongly expect you'll see more [1:08:06] from us in West Ham. Thank you. Here's something that troubles me. Earlier this year, you did a social media [1:08:16] post where you said, and I quote, Germany infamously retains very few Jews, yet imported barbarian rapist [1:08:31] hordes. Perrin, as an American, I'm allowed to call them that, under Merkel. I'd like to introduce that [1:08:38] social media post for the record. Yeah, yeah, just slide that right in. I'll produce the tweet. As an [1:08:49] American, you are allowed to say that, I mean, obviously, but this was not on your personal account. You [1:08:56] posted it on your account as Under Secretary of State Sarah B. Rogers. You're nominated for a [1:09:02] position that's very much about communication. Communication should be really truthful, and [1:09:09] communicators should be careful to use broad brush, narrow brushes, not broad brushes. Talking about [1:09:15] the importation of barbarian racist hordes struck me as, and wait, she's being nominated to be a key [1:09:22] leader of our communication enterprise. Tell me how I can square those two things. Well, [1:09:28] so, Senator, the barbarian rapist horde language isn't my original language. That's language that [1:09:32] a German woman used to describe a horrific gang rape attack, and that language was then censored in [1:09:38] Germany. Now, the tweet you're quoting is part of a much longer exchange in which the censorship is [1:09:43] addressed, and I'm actually rebuking there pretty forcefully a self-identified Nazi who responds to my [1:09:48] tweet. Yeah, I saw that, so, and I'll introduce the entire experience so that it's fair in context, [1:09:53] but you did not, like, put a quote around Germany imported, quote, barbarian rapist hordes according [1:09:59] to this or that person. I mean, you used it in your own voice on an account that was an official [1:10:07] government account, and, you know, I just, I can't, I can't quite wrap my head around using that language [1:10:14] from an official account from the Department of State, given the nomination to be the head of this [1:10:19] really important communication enterprise. So, what I would say, Senator, is viewed in context, [1:10:24] the quote origin is more obvious, and if you disembody it, it probably does need to have quote [1:10:29] marks around it. If you view the whole thread, it's clear that it's a quote, but ironically, you know, [1:10:34] I'm a very strident anti-censorship person, and you might not agree with me on every single stance, [1:10:39] every single point of emphasis, every single tonal choice I make, but you should want a strident [1:10:44] anti-censorship person in this role, because the whole point of AGM is to deliver objective, [1:10:49] truthful, balanced broadcasting in countries where censors want to stamp that out. [1:10:54] I don't disagree with you on government censorship, but I do believe that there is judgment that a [1:11:02] leader needs to utilize in deciding how to express very, very important sentiments, and I think it's [1:11:08] fair to judge someone on their judgment without censoring what they might state as an [1:11:13] American or national of any other country. I yield back, Mr. Chair. [1:11:23] I do. I have another round that I would like to follow up on, because I would like to follow up, [1:11:27] Ms. Rogers, on the questioning that Senator Cain has opened, because as we have looked at [1:11:42] your debates online, it seems like you've spent an inordinate amount of time engaging in provocative [1:11:49] debates, rather than strengthening alliances that would be important to the U.S. public diplomacy aspect. [1:12:01] And I don't understand how that makes us stronger. I mean, I cited, and we have the poster again, [1:12:08] in my opening comments, I cited that a recent poll has found that only 11 percent of Europeans now [1:12:14] describe the United States as an ally, that China is more popular around the world than the United States [1:12:20] States. I find that really troubling, because I think our values and our commitment to free speech, [1:12:28] to human rights, to individual freedoms, it totally differentiates us from China. And yet, [1:12:36] that's not how the world is now seeing the United States. And that's troubling. And as somebody who's [1:12:41] supposed to have been the head of public diplomacy at the State Department, I don't understand what your [1:12:46] strategy is, and it's clearly not working. So how do we reverse that? And how will you, as the head of USAGM, [1:12:56] reinforce the factual nature of the differences between the United States and our adversaries, like Iran, [1:13:06] like China, like Russia? Because that is not coming through now as part of your role at the State Department. [1:13:14] Thank you, Senator. So I think my Twitter account has focused prominently on some of these kind of punchy [1:13:23] populist debates in Western Europe. I've also tweeted a lot of content about Japan and some about India. [1:13:28] The reason my Twitter account has focused on Western Europe, Japan, and India is that Western Europe, [1:13:33] Japan, and India are the countries where Twitter is most popular. But Twitter is a tiny, tiny segment of [1:13:39] public diplomacy. I don't spend a lot of time on it. And I wasn't necessarily referring just to your [1:13:44] Twitter account. I'm referring to other meetings that you've had with right-wing [1:13:52] representatives in countries that are supposed to be our allies. I'm referring to conversations [1:13:58] that you've had. And fundamentally, I'm asking you how that promotes American foreign policy, [1:14:07] and how the rest of the world views us. Because I don't think it's been working. Clearly, it's not. [1:14:14] I mean, the polling shows it's not working. Well, if my meetings were the main driver of the [1:14:19] public perception of America and China, I think that would put a lot more power in my pocket. [1:14:24] I didn't say they were the main driver. I'm trying to understand what the strategy is to contribute [1:14:32] to improving the image of the United States around the world, and how you see USAGM [1:14:39] as being able to help do that. So look, my strategy when I take meetings as a diplomat, [1:14:44] as I meet with people that the State Department and our national security strategy favors that I meet [1:14:49] with, and that's a wide variety of people. I've met with right-wing parties, middle-of-the-road parties. [1:14:54] I've met with some leftist politicians. I've met with NGOs. I do all of that. And now on to AGM, [1:14:57] because that's the matter of the day, I mean, I really think, you know, I'm not going to be making [1:15:03] the day-to-day editorial choices, especially at the grantees. So if you slightly disagree with me [1:15:09] on tone or emphasis or how we carry out the Europe prong of our national security strategy, [1:15:13] I'm not the one deciding what the headline on RFURL is going to be. I'm supposed to provide, [1:15:18] you know, general strategic management guidance. I'm supposed to make sure that these entities can run [1:15:23] efficiently, that they have access to transmission capabilities, that they have access to back office [1:15:26] services, that they have access to journalistic standards and practices guidance. And those are [1:15:31] the kinds of things I want to do. And as to how that advances our foreign policy, I think, Senator, [1:15:35] I think you and I actually agree on this, that just the fact that the United States is holding out [1:15:40] this funding, a resource of reliable, a source of reliable- Oh, I totally agree with that. [1:15:46] Yeah. And I am concerned that under this administration, that there will be [1:15:51] a reversal of what has been the history at USAGM with all of those entities of providing that factual [1:16:00] information and not having the political ideology interfere with what's factually presented over [1:16:10] the air. I do have another question for Ms. Jurada on the IMF. It continues as, again, as I said in my [1:16:20] opening statement, continues to provide support to Ukraine. And last week, it approved another [1:16:25] disbursement of funds, signaling continued confidence in the Ukrainian government's economic [1:16:31] policies. So can you talk a little bit about how you think the fund could continue to support the [1:16:36] Ukrainian economy in the midst of this Russian war? Well, thank you, Senator, for that question. So [1:16:44] obviously, I am currently not yet confirmed, so I'm not privy to some of the underlying analysis or [1:16:49] deliberations in the decision. But what I can commit to you is in evaluating the ongoing future [1:16:55] decisions as it pertains to disbursement of additional capital to Ukraine, is doing it consistent [1:17:01] with how I've sort of my core function or like framework is, you know, is it in the American best [1:17:06] interest coordinating with Treasury and the administration department, ongoing engagement with [1:17:11] this committee, and definitely recognizing the need that the Ukraine economy, it needs the capacity [1:17:17] development, and ongoing, you know, capital commitment, not just from the United States, [1:17:21] but from other allies. Thank you. I appreciate that and encourage you to take that approach. [1:17:28] The IMF has also launched what it calls an intensive program of engagement, in quotes, [1:17:34] with Syrian counterparts to assess their economy to provide advice. And the fund visited Damascus in [1:17:42] February. If confirmed, will you continue to advocate for an IMF lending program in Syria? [1:17:48] What I can commit to you, Senator, is if confirmed, is wrapping my head around what that current proposal [1:17:54] is and understanding what the current status is. And then again, with that same framework that I just [1:17:59] heard of articulated as it relates to Ukraine and recognizing how, you know, to bring Syrian into [1:18:04] additional lending and capital development and infrastructure aid or technical assistance, [1:18:10] rather, for that specific country. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:18:14] Thank you. Thank you, Senator Sheehan. That will conclude our hearing. And I want to thank [1:18:18] you all for providing us with the benefit of your testimony and responses today and your families [1:18:22] for participating. Before closing, I'd like to add all letters of support and otherwise that the [1:18:28] committee has received to the record. I will also note for the information of members, the record will [1:18:33] remain open until close of business till tomorrow, Friday, July 31st, including for members to submit [1:18:39] questions for the record. With the thanks to the committee, this hearing is now adjourned.