The League of Conservation Voters led 9 environmental organizations in sending the below letter to the House of Representatives urging Members to oppose the following amendments to H.R. 4665, the 2024 State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, when they come up for votes. The League of Conservation Voters will strongly consider including votes related to these amendments in our 2023 National Environmental Scorecard.

September 28, 2023

U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Re: Amendment Vote Recommendations on H.R. 4665, the House State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Fiscal Year 2024 appropriations bill

Dear Member of Congress,

On behalf of our many members and supporters, the 9 undersigned groups make the following vote recommendations on amendments to H.R. 4665, the House State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS) Fiscal Year 2024 appropriations bill. While not all undersigned organizations work directly on each of these issues, we appreciate your consideration of these pro-environmental positions.

Thank you for your consideration,

League of Conservation Voters
Clean Water Action
Climate Crisis Policy
Endangered Species Coalition
IFAW – International Fund for Animal Welfare
Natural Resources Defense Council
PAI
Sierra Club
World Wildlife Fund

Vote NO

13. Crane (AZ). This amendment to reduce USAID Operating Expenses by half would severely undermine one of the world’s most important foreign assistance agencies. As part of the essential development and humanitarian assistance it provides globally, USAID plays a vital role in protecting globally important biodiversity and natural resources that are essential to livelihoods, food and water security, economic growth, and regional stability. It also plays a central role in addressing climate change globally by partnering with under-resourced countries in their efforts to reduce emissions and build resilience to climate impacts, including by protecting and restoring forests, mangroves, and other critical ecosystems, helping countries transition to renewable energy and increase energy access, and helping to protect food and water security through climate adaptation programs.

14. Biggs (AZ). This amendment would eliminate all funding for USAID Operating Expenses that support USAID’s global operations and workforce, including salaries and benefits, overseas mission activities, staff training, facilities, security, and information technology. Passage of this amendment would result in a complete defunding of the agency’s operations and end its current and future programs to address critical global environmental and conservation challenges as detailed in the description of 13. Crane.

15. Biggs (AZ). This amendment would eliminate all funding for USAID’s Capital Investment Fund which supports the construction costs of the agency’s overseas facilities, information technology improvements, and related capital investments. Adoption of this amendment would severely undercut the agency’s ability to assist countries on the most immediate frontline of the climate crisis.

17. Gaetz (FL). This amendment to reduce USAID funding would severely undermine one of the world’s most important foreign assistance agencies. As part of the essential development and humanitarian assistance it provides globally, USAID plays a vital role in protecting globally important biodiversity and natural resources that are essential to livelihoods, food and water security, economic growth, and regional stability. It also plays a central role in addressing climate change globally by partnering with under-resourced countries in their efforts to reduce emissions and build resilience to climate impacts, including by protecting and restoring forests, mangroves, and other critical ecosystems, helping countries transition to renewable energy and increase energy access, and helping to protect food and water security through climate adaptation programs.

27. Kelly (MS). This amendment would reduce US contributions to the Global Environment Facility (GEF), which is an international financial institution that provides funding to confront global challenges including biodiversity loss and wildlife trafficking, land degradation, toxic chemicals and plastic pollution, and climate change. The GEF also helps protect globally important forests and fish stocks, which are vital to developing communities livelihood and food security as well as global supply chains. US investments in the GEF yields a high rate of return: Every US dollar leverages $40 more from partner countries, NGOs and the private sector. In 2022, developed countries including the US made new 4-year pledges to the GEF. Cutting funding needed to meet the FY24 installment of that pledge threatens US credibility with our global partners and our ability to help under-resourced countries address biodiversity loss and other global environmental challenges.

28. Biggs (AZ). This amendment would reduce US contributions to the Global Environment Facility (GEF), which is an international financial institution that provides funding to confront global challenges including biodiversity loss and wildlife trafficking, land degradation, toxic chemicals and plastic pollution, and climate change. The GEF also helps protect globally important forests and fish stocks, which are vital to developing communities livelihood and food security as well as global supply chains. US investments in the GEF yields a high rate of return: every US dollar leverages $40 more from partner countries, NGOs, and the private sector. In 2022, developed countries including the US made new 4-year pledges to the GEF. Failure to provide funding to the GEF – which has been consistently funded under both Republican and Democratic Administrations – will call into question the ability of the US to meet its commitments to international partners and threaten US credibility at a time of increasing global competition. It will also curtail our ability to help under-resourced countries protect global forests and fisheries and prevent the loss of critical natural resources that are essential to stability, security, and economic development in strategically important regions of the world.

46. Gaetz (FL). This amendment would prohibit any funds in this bill from being used to implement the Paris Agreement, a landmark agreement between 196 countries and the guiding framework for international and domestic action on climate. Failure to do our part in its implementation would strike a blow to the goal of limiting warming to 1.5ºC and undermine US leadership on the world stage.

57. Spartz (IN). This amendment would prohibit funding to UN entities unless they are specifically provided funding in the underlying bill. Such entities include the International Civil Aviation Organization – which helps countries ensure common standards, practices, and policies for international civilian flight; the International Maritime Organization – which is responsible for the safety and security of international shipping and the prevention of marine and atmospheric pollution by ships; and the UN Office of Drugs and Crime, which is leading global efforts to make the world safer from drugs, crime, corruption and terrorism, including efforts to prevent transnational organized crime such as trafficking in narcotics, weapons, wildlife, and people. Preventing funds from flowing to these entities would negatively impact the US on a number of fronts, in terms of both our credibility with international partners and the ability of such UN agencies to fulfill their mandates and facilitate the kind of international coordination necessary to address these common challenges.

58. Hageman (WY). This amendment would defund the Office of Global Change, which is responsible for implementing and managing U.S. international policy on climate change, and representing the United States in negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and in many other international fora focused on climate change, including the International Civil Aviation Organization and the International Maritime Organization. Climate change is at the top of the international policy agenda for most countries, including many of our essential allies. The World Economic Forum has identified climate change-related risks as three of the top ten risks facing the global economy over the coming decade. The U.S. needs to show up in a robust and sophisticated way in the international policy discussions around these issues, including how to ensure a just transition to renewable energy, how to protect the world’s remaining tropical forests, and how to build the resilience of vulnerable countries and communities to growing climate impacts – all while ensuring U.S. interests are strongly reflected in those discussions. The Office of Global Change is central to this.

67. Burchett (TN). This amendment would prohibit funding for the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate. The US needs to show up strongly and at a high level in diplomatic discussions around climate change, which our allies have identified as a top diplomatic and foreign policy priority. The Special Envoy is the face of the US in these international discussions, which are complex and require dedicated capacity and attention. Without such dedicated leadership, the US risks ceding the ground to other countries and being unable to effectively advance its interests on the international stage. Given the importance that our international partners are placing on this issue and their calls for greater engagement by the US, defunding this office would weaken our standing with those key partners and undercut our ability to shape the outcomes of critical and ongoing international climate negotiations.

70. Roy (TX). This amendment would block spending to implement executive orders that help reduce pollution, adapt to climate change, and improve the clean energy independence of buildings, embassies, and State Department installations. The damaging effects of this amendment would include hobbling the State Department’s ability to prepare for and respond to the very real threats of the climate crisis at home and abroad.

The following amendments go against our organizations’ commitment to racial justice and equity – we urge opposition on any en bloc that includes these or similar amendments: 78 Roy.