United States Institute of Peace - Budget - Budget Debate

Budget Debate

An op-ed in The Wall Street Journal February 16, 2011, by Republican congressman Jason Chaffetz of Utah and former Democrat congressman Anthony Weiner of New York, attacked funding for USIP as part of the broader debate about federal spending. “The USIP is a case study in how government waste thrives,” they wrote. “The idea began during the Cold War as a modest proposal with $4 million in seed money. But the organization received government funding year after year essentially because it had been funded the year before—and because it had important allies.”

Former U.S. Central Command Commander Anthony Zinni wrote an op-ed, published in The New York Times March 7, 2011, in support of USIP. “Congress would be hard-pressed to find an agency that does more with less. The institute’s entire budget would not pay for the Afghan war for three hours, is less than the cost of a fighter plane, and wouldn’t sustain even 40 American troops in Afghanistan for a year. Within the budget, peace-building is financed as part of national security programs, and is recognized as an important adjunct to conventional defense spending and diplomacy. The institute’s share of the proposed international affairs budget, $43 million, is minuscule: less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the State Department’s budget, and one-hundredth of 1 percent of the Pentagon’s.”

On February 17, 2011, the House of Representatives for the 112th U.S. Congress voted to eliminate all funding for the U.S. Institute of Peace in FY 2011 continuing resolution. Funding for the Institute was eventually restored by both the House and Senate on April 14, 2011 through the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011.