This post originally appeared in the Center for Global Development’s blog, Views from the Center on January 28, 2008.

*This post was co-authored by Nancy Birdsall and Steve Radelet

The extraordinary challenges and opportunities of today require a new vision of American global leadership based on the strength of our core values, ideas and ingenuity. They call for an integrated foreign policy that promotes our values, enhances our security, helps create economic and political opportunities for people around the world, and restores America’s faltering image abroad. We cannot rely exclusively or even primarily on military might to meet these goals. Instead, we must make greater use of all the tools of statecraft through “smart power,” including diplomacy, trade, investment, intelligence, and a strong and effective foreign assistance strategy.

In today’s world, foreign assistance is a vital tool for strengthening U.S. foreign policy and restoring American global leadership. Foreign policy experts on both sides of the political aisle now recognize the importance of strong foreign assistance programs. But they also recognize that our foreign assistance programs are out of date and badly in need of overhaul to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

In 2004, as members of the CGD-sponsored Commission on Weak States and US National Security, we recognized the need for rebuilding the mission, mandate and organizational structure of our outdated foreign assistance apparatus to meet today’s foreign policy challenges, particularly our institutions and policies focusing on global development. We called for it then, welcome the more recent calls, and say again: It’s time for the United States to establish a new Cabinet-level Department of Global Development.

We hope that our next President will believe, as we do, that investing in global development is an investment in America’s future — strengthening its security, its economic opportunities, and its moral values. And that establishing a Department of Global Development to manage our foreign assistance — both bilateral and multilateral — and other development policy instruments would streamline the currently fragmented bureaucracy, reduce duplication, strengthen our ability to align major programs with our key objectives, and leverage U.S. dollars and influence to get results. It would establish development as the primary mission of US foreign assistance, elevating development to equal standing with diplomacy and defense as the three key pillars of U.S. foreign policy.

Because development is about more than development assistance, the new Department would have a mandate for policy coherence on the full range of US policies affecting poor countries, such as trade, environment, migration, and debt. It would facilitate the professionalization of a core of development expertise within the U.S. government on issues of public health, climate change, agriculture, institutional development, education, infrastructure, clean water, and other development issues. It would allow for the independence necessary to ensure that short-term political goals do not crowd out long-term development objectives.

Creating a new Department will be a heavy lift politically, and will take significant efforts on the part of both the new administration and Congress. But it would create a powerful new instrument for U.S. global leadership. We hope that momentum continues to build and that these ideas feature prominently in the 2008 presidential campaigns. It’s time for the U.S. to take a smarter and stronger approach to building a better, safer world.

If you’ve visited Kiva.org recently, you may have gotten this message “Thanks Kiva Lenders!…You’ve funded EVERY business on the site!!” It’s hard to remember a time (if ever?) that a charitable organization has said that to an enthusiastic donor.

Kiva.org is a way for a donor to make a small loan (microcredit) to an entrepreneur in a developing country. Kiva’s popularity sometimes makes it hard to keep up with the demand. But why? Kiva goes through a process of vetting their potential entrepreneurs from developing countries, and sometimes logistics (like getting a digital camera to the area that the loan applicant is in) is to blame.

It’s great to see that there are so many philanthropists out there interested in giving business people from developing countries a boost.

However, global development is a complicated issue—and microcredit is only one way to help those in poverty. The way we craft our policies has a huge impact—which is why it’s so important to tell our candidates that global development is important to us.

Watch this video to see Maria’s story and how microcredit may help her:

Read the article from NY Times Magazine here.

At an early morning session today at Davos, Bono and Al Gore spoke about a “Unified Earth Theory” that attempts to combine the agendas of both global poverty and climate change. Each year at the World Economic Forum, the biggest names in politics and business turn the chilly Swiss resort town of Davos into a week-long think tank.

According to a BBC journalist blogging directly from the conference, the Bono/Gore team was short on answers, but brought up some great questions that we do need to consider. And soon. The link between global poverty and climate change is critical—and it works both ways. Helping developing countries increase their wealth may also affect their consumption levels. But developing countries are also going to be the hardest hit when it comes to global warming. So how can we help developing countries in a way that doesn’t increase global consumption levels to a dangerous extent?

Bono noted that the G-8 isn’t doing all it can. They haven’t met their pledge to contribute $50 billion annually to help stamp out poverty. Bono continued, however, that they have been making progress—both France and Germany said that they would make a better effort. In addition to talking about a plan that would incorporate the negative effects of carbon into its price tag, Gore said that global compacts could solve both problems of poverty and climate change.

Read more about Bono and Gore’s session at CNN.com.

U.S. policies have a huge impact on global development, and more successful development is crucial to U.S. goals. But global development has often been missing in the U.S. political debate. On Monday, January 28, President Bush will deliver his final State of the Union address to Congress, the American people, and to a global audience seeking to understand America’s priorities in the world.

The Center for Global Development’s State of the Union Bingo will be helping people from Washington, D.C. to Dhaka track global issues in President Bush’s last State of the Union address as his thoughts turn to the legacy he hopes to leave behind. Will he mention malaria, trade, poverty, climate change? Several of the 2008 presidential candidates have discussed the need to restore America’s image in the world and ensure our own national security, and point to our global development policies as one way we can work to make a better, safer world. Will President Bush make similar overtures? Will there be more or less attention to global development than in his past remarks? To help you keep track we prepared these handy printable State of the Union Bingo cards (pdf, 116k).

Some global development issues have sometimes been prominent in President Bush’s State of the Union addresses–HIV/AIDS and trade, for example. But a quick analysis of past speeches suggests that none has been a recurrent theme. This year, we encourage you to use the New York Times’ State of the Union Word Tracker, that counts and graphs the number of times the president has uttered “poverty” (6), “Africa” (15), “economy” (88), or “global warming” (0) among the 34,000 words used in his State of the Union addresses.

Global Development Matters’ founding organization, the Center for Global Development, will be hosting a State of Union Bingo party in Washington, DC. In past years, friends of the Center have hosted their own Bingo parties as far away as Dhaka, Bangladesh; Lexington, KY; and Napa, CA. Organize your own State of the Union Bingo party, perk up your ears and get your ink dabber ready to mark off mentions of malaria, trade, poverty, and maybe even global warming in President Bush’s final State of the Union address.

Post your plans or a report on your festivities as a comment on this blog, or tell us about it here; include a photo and we will be happy to post it.

If State of the Union Bingo sparks a heated discussion about why global development matters for the U.S., check out CGD’s Rich World, Poor World: A Guide to Global Development to help inform your debate!

Tonight is Michigan’s turn to cast its votes—and the big issue is the economy. The Republicans have more at stake, since several democratic candidates aren’t on the ballot. According to NPR.org, Michigan may matter the most to Romney and McCain–you can find their stands on global development on our candidates page.

Tune in this evening for the results at CNN online.

How is a primary different than a caucus? You can find out more here.

Yale University will be hosting a conference of interest to the global development community in April—the Unite For Sight Fifth Annual International Health & Development Conference: Building Global Health For Today and Tomorrow. The keynote speakers will be: Susan Blumenthal, Jim Yong Kim, Jeffrey Sachs, and Sonia Ehrlich Sachs. Find out more about the conference speakers here.

There will be over 180 speakers on topics such as: “Addressing Vitamin and Mineral Deficiencies is a Key Building Block to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals”, “Global Health and the Internet Panel”, and”Youth Engagement in Development Stategies.”

Early bird registration ends January 30th. You can learn more at Unite For Site’s conference page.

This post appeared yesterday in the Center for Global Development’s blog, Views from the Center.

After drowning in Iowa analysis and New Hampshire speculation on Sunday, I was delighted that The Simpsons jumped on the election bandwagon with last night’s episode “E Pluribus Wiggum,” (watch the episode online), in which 8-year-old, paste-eating Ralph Wiggum is written in as Springfield’s presidential nominee. As the Simpson family watches “Decision ‘08″ (with accompanying Fox News-ESQUE bald-eagle-flying-into-voter-booth graphic) Lisa delights in how Springfield is the center of the political universe and likens herself to being a “pundit in a think tank.” In a surprising move, the usually donut-centric Homer picks up on his daughter’s reference in wondering “Think tank, eh?” as a thought bubble reveals the logo for “The Center for Global Progress,” Center for Global Development?complete with a globe-shaped logo that looks remarkably like CGD’s. The shot pulls back to reveal a small conference table with wonks discussing… wait for it…the World Bank’s lending policy to Micronesia!

Hmmm…Could it be? Did The Simpsons just spoof CGD? You be the judge! That was certainly the chatter this morning around our coffee maker. Without wanting to appear presumptuous, we would love to think that our reputation reaches well beyond the beltway. But hey, even if CGD was not the model (although the thought bubble conference room looks an awful lot like our conference room here at the Center!) its surely a good sign for global development policy that public awareness has reached the point where The Simpsons is spoofing our community’s work. And–cue to thought bubble–just imagine a world where exposure leads to awareness, which in turn leads to action. As Homer might say: “Think tank, eh?”

This post originally appeared in the Center for Global Development’s blog, Views from the Center.

*This is a joint post with Sheila Herrling

The announcement Wednesday that House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos (D-CA) will not seek reelection in 2008 following a diagnosis of esophageal cancer is another loss for what is becoming a slim group of congressional champions for development and responsible U.S. global engagement. In a press release from his office, Lantos said:

It is only in the United States that a penniless survivor of the Holocaust and a fighter in the anti-Nazi underground could have received an education, raised a family, and had the privilege of serving the last three decades of his life as a Member of Congress. I will never be able to express fully my profoundly felt gratitude to this great country.

Throughout my adult life I have sought to be a voice for human rights, civil liberties and social justice, both at home and around the world. My wife, Annette, and I look forward to continuing this vital work with purpose and verve every day for the remainder of my term.

Our community is grateful for the tireless work and attention Chairman Lantos and his dedicated staff have brought to global development during his nearly 28 years of service in the House. A patriot, internationalist and multilateralist, Lantos cared deeply about America’s credibility and stature in the world. He has been a leader in raising awareness and promoting an active U.S. response to global warming, and is the author of the international portions of the Energy Independence and Security Act. He has pushed for accountable U.S. foreign assistance that reduces poverty and provides opportunities for the world’s poor. At times, he has been an outspoken critic of the administration’s foreign assistance reform efforts for not adequately informing Congress (see We Are Not A Potted Plant: Congress Responds to U.S. Foreign Aid Reform). Lantos also worked across the partisan divide with the late Congressman Henry Hyde (R-IL), then chairman of the House International Relations Committee, to craft the Millennium Challenge Account legislation, with support from his staff members Paul Oostburg Sanz and later Robin Roizman. He continues to play a key role in authorizing (and reauthorizing) legislation for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) with support from staff member Pearl-Alice Marsh. And he is well known for his work on human rights for all.

Congressman Lantos, much like Congressman Kolbe who stepped down in 2006 (see Kolbe’s Decision to Leave Congress a Loss for Development) seemed to understand that America’s prosperity and security have become inextricably linked to the prosperity and security of other nations and their people. And that America had a special responsibility to be a moral and economic leader in ensuring that our policies help us while also helping responsible states around the world.

Our warmest thoughts and thanks go out to Chairman Lantos, his family, and staff. And as we look towards the next elections, here’s hoping that a new generation of congressmen and women will fill the void left by Lantos, Kolbe and others to become the new congressional champions for global development.

As you’ve probably heard, Obama and Huckabee were the winners of last night’s Iowa Caucus.

In Obama’s victory speech, he gave a nod to climate change and poverty as some of the topics he would address as president. In December, Obama committed to strengthen our security through a global development strategy.

Watch his speech:

Huckabee also mentioned some global development issues when he appeared on the “Early Show” the morning of the caucus. He said people “in the Republican establishment think I’m a little too liberal for them because I actually care about hunger, poverty, disease and the environment.”

Watch the segment:

The race for nomination is far from over—make sure to check out the rest of the candidates’ stands on global development issues on our candidate page and on One.org’s On the Record page.

The process of selecting the U.S. presidential nominees will begin tonight. If you want to follow the Iowa Caucus results, the Iowa Republican and Democratic parties are posting the results online in real time.

Where do the candidates stand on global development issues? Learn more here on our blog.

What is a caucus? Why is it important? This article in the LA Times can help.

Curious to find out what the results could mean for each candidate? Take a look at this handy guide by Chuck Todd, the Political Director of NBC News.