EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OUTLINES R COMMON MISTAKES STUDENTS MAKE ON THEIR LOANS

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 
4 Common Student Loan Mistakes
Posted on November 12, 2013 by Nicole Callahan

It’s been hard to come to terms with, but I need to face the facts: I’m not in college anymore. In fact, this January marks two years since I started repaying my student loans. I know, not the most exciting thing in the world, but important. So while I don’t claim to be a student loan expert, I have learned a lot of lessons along the way, mostly through trial and error. In hopes that you won’t make the same mistakes I did, here are some things I wish I had known before I started repaying my student loans:
1.  I should have kept track of what I was borrowing.
Let’s be real. When you take out student loans to help pay for college, it’s easy to forget that that money will eventually have to be paid back … with interest. The money just doesn’t seem real when you’re in college, and I didn’t do a good job of keeping track of what I was borrowing and how it was building up. When it was time to start repaying my loans, I was quite overwhelmed. I had different types of loans and different interest rates. When I did eventually see my total loan balance, I was pretty shocked.

You can avoid this problem. Had I known there was a super easy way to keep track of how much you’ve borrowed in federal student loans, I would have been much better off. Just go to nslds.ed.gov, select “Financial Aid Review,” log in, and you can view all of your federal student loans in one place! How did I miss that?

2.  I should have made interest payments while I was still in school.
If you’re anything like me, you probably consumed your fair share of instant noodles while trying to survive on a college student’s budget. Trust me, I get it. But one thing I really regret when it comes to my student loans is not paying interest while I was in school or during my grace period. Like I said, I was far from rich, but when I was in college, I did have a work-study job and waited tables on the side. I probably could have spared a few dollars each month to pay down some student loan interest. Remember, student loans are borrowed money that you have to repay with interest and more importantly, that interest may capitalize, or be added to your total balance. My advice: Even though you don’t have to, do yourself a favor and consider paying at least some of your student loan interest while you’re in school. It will save you money in the long run.

3.  I should have kept my loan servicer in the loop

If you’ve recently graduated and haven’t heard from your loan servicer, make sure you check that your loan servicer has up-to-date contact info for you. When I graduated and moved into my first big-girl apartment, I forgot to change my address with my loan servicer. I found out that all of my student loan correspondence was going to my mom’s address. I hadn’t even thought to update my loan servicer with my new contact information. Don’t make the same mistake I did. Keep your servicer informed of address, e-mail, and phone changes.

4.  I should have figured out what my monthly loan payments were going to be BEFORE I went into repayment.
By the time my grace period was over, I had a decent idea of how much I had borrowed in total, but I had no idea what my monthly payments would be. I thought I was fine. I had started my new job and been paying rent and other bills for about six months. Then my grace period ended, and I got my first bill from my loan servicer. It was definitely an expense I hadn’t fully taken into account.

Don’t make the same mistake. Luckily for you, Federal Student Aid recently launched a repayment estimator that allows you to pull your federal student loan information in order to compare your monthly payments under different repayment plans side by side. That way, you know what to expect and can budget accordingly … unlike me.

I’ll be the first to admit that this whole process can seem a little overwhelming, especially when you’re new at it. But just remember, your loan servicer is there to help you. If you have questions or need advice, don’t hesitate to contact them.

Nicole Callahan is a new media analyst at the Department of Education’s office of Federal Student Aid.

DOD SAYS UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS COULD HELP SOME FURLOUGHED CIVILIANS

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

Unemployment Benefits May Help Some Furloughed DOD Civilians

By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 10, 2013 - On the 10th day of the partial government shutdown, DOD civilians excluded by law from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's Oct. 7 recall to work of thousands of fellow employees still await an end to the political standoff that sent them home and stopped their paychecks Oct. 1.

Hagel said Oct. 5 that the department tried to "exempt as many DOD civilian personnel as possible" from furloughs and will continue to try to bring all civilian employees back to work as soon as possible.

"Ultimately," he added, "the surest way to end these damaging and irresponsible furloughs and to enable us to fulfill our mission as a department is for Congress to pass a budget and restore funds for the entire federal government."

According to a Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Service reference guide called "Pay and Leave during the Fiscal Year 2014 Shutdown Furlough," employees furloughed Oct. 1 and not recalled to work will receive regular pay and allowances for hours worked through Sept. 30. They'll also get a partial paycheck for the pay period including Oct. 1-5.

DOD civilians will stay in nonpay, nonduty status until recalled to duty. If they are in nonpay, nonduty status on the days before and after Columbus Day, they won't receive pay at that time for the holiday.

Congress must pass legislation to restore pay and allowances for all days spent in furlough status before any employee goes back into pay status.  If such legislation is passed, employees will be paid for the time they spent conducting shutdown activities on Oct. 1 but they won't get that pay until a 2014 appropriation is approved for the department. At that time they'll receive pay for the Columbus Day holiday.

Furlough affects leave accrual, according to the reference guide. In a separate furlough earlier this year triggered by the budget sequester, most employees were ordered to take six unpaid days, or 48 hours, off work. During the current round of furloughs brought on by the government shutdown, when employees reach a total of 10 furlough days this month, or 80 hours, on or around Oct. 4, they'll lose the sick leave and annual leave they would have earned during the pay period.

Once an employee reaches 80 hours of nonpay time during a calendar year, leave is no longer accrued. A new 80-hour threshold begins the following pay period.

For individuals or families who are struggling because they're not working and not getting paid, some help may be available through state unemployment compensation agencies.

According to a fact sheet on unemployment insurance for federal workers, the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees, or UCFE, program is administered by state unemployment insurance agencies. In general, eligibility is determined by the state where an employee is assigned to duty.

Furloughed DOD civilians may apply on or after the first day they're furloughed and put in nonpay status. Furloughed employees should be eligible as long as they meet all other state eligibility factors, according to the fact sheet.

To file claims, DOD civilians can contact the unemployment insurance agency in the state where they work. Such agencies usually have websites, online forms and telephone numbers to call for information or to submit applications by phone.

Employees may be asked to provide a form SF-8 to verify an agency mailing address or a form SF-50 to verify wages. If these documents are unavailable, the state may request proof of wages such as earnings and leave statements or last year's W-2. The state may also request an affidavit certifying that the employee is not working because of the furlough and to verify wages.

Amounts paid vary according to prior earnings. Most states pay a maximum of 26 weeks of regular benefits. Once the shutdown ends and employees have returned to work, regardless of whether they have received paychecks, they are no longer eligible for benefits.

Some states require applicants to serve a waiting week, the fact sheet says. This means that after a claim is approved, the first week for which individuals are entitled to benefits is an unpaid week.

Most states issue payments to eligible individuals within 14-21 days after the claim is approved.

On Oct. 5, the Federal Employee Retroactive Pay Fairness Act passed the House by a vote of 407-0. The Senate hasn't yet taken action on the bill but if they do and President Barack Obama signs it into law, furloughed federal employees will receive back pay for the time they've been out of work once the shutdown ends. Any lost leave would also will be restored.

According to the fact sheet, if Congress passes legislation that retroactively provides for the payment of salary, states generally require repayment of unemployment benefits paid out. States will advise affected claimants if benefits are overpaid, the fact sheet says, and provide repayment options.

SECRETARY OF HAGEL MEETS WITH TROOPS AT FORT BRAGG

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
Hagel Meets With Troops at Fort Bragg, Discusses Budget
By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, July 15, 2013 - In an uncertain and dangerous world, American service members are helping to build a better future for all mankind, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said today during a town hall meeting at Fort Bragg, N.C.

"We are truly defining a future for our country and helping others define their futures around the world," Hagel told troops, civilians and family members at the event.

Service members do more than just put on a uniform, and civilians do more than just show up to work, the secretary said. Everyone connected to the Defense Department is part of something bigger than themselves -- bigger than even the nation, Hagel added.

"I think occasionally we all can drift a bit and define ourselves, define our work, and define our missions in a more narrow channel," the defense secretary said. "But we are helping build a new world, a better world, a fairer world, a freer world, [and] we can't do it alone."

The world looks to the United States not because it's bigger, better or prosperous, Hagel said, but because of what the nation represents.

"That's a heavy burden to carry," he said, one that can't be carried alone. Over the years, through many difficult lessons, the United States has learned =it must rely on partnerships and relationships to solve some of the world's biggest problems, Hagel said.

Tolerance, respect and dignity still anchor the human condition, the secretary said. "That's what we try to address every day and what we try to protect every day, and hopefully give people opportunities to live that kind of life."

This effort is not without its challenges, the defense secretary said.

The nation is unwinding from the longest war it has ever been in, but it still has responsibilities and commitments around the world, Hagel said. The question -- not for the first time in the nation's history -- is how to balance these competing needs with the department's more direct responsibilities for the nation's fiscal health, he said.

"This time is probably more dramatic for some of the reasons I've already mentioned, but also if these dramatic [defense spending] reductions continue on the course they're on through the current budget cap sequestration," Hagel said. "This is forcing us to take deeper, steeper, and more abrupt reductions than we've ever had to do."

Hagel said his role as defense secretary is to prepare the department for the future based on today's realities, and that includes the possibility that sequestration will continue. "I could not stand back as secretary of defense and try to lead this institution based on -- 'Well, I hope we'll get a change' [or] 'Well, I think maybe something will change,'" he said.

"You can't lead based on hope and thinking and maybes," the secretary continued. "You have a responsibility of leading ... with the reality of what's in front of you, and you do the best you can to repair your institution. In the end, that's the definition of each of our lives."

That reality forced the department to prioritize, Hagel said, adding that he had to make some difficult choices. And while budget isn't directing national security strategy, he said, it's an important part.

"You can have all the strategy you want," the defense secretary said, "but you better be able to assure the president of the United States, commander in-chief, and the people of this country and your families that, in fact, we can implement that strategy -- that, in fact, the president has the options when he calls [the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] or me, and we call [commanders] and say, 'Can we do it? Do we have the capacity to do it?'"

One vehicle for addressing budget limitations, the recently announced force structure changes, is predicated on preserving combat power and readiness, Hagel said. The military's only responsibility is the defense of the nation, he added, and everything else has to fit within that framework.

"That's not always an easy assemblage of pieces to have to come together to assure that one responsibility, especially during a time of ... significant reductions in our budget," the defense secretary said. Preserving current readiness is coming at a cost to future readiness, "but I have to preserve as much as I can preserve with the resources I have," he said. If sequestration continues into fiscal year 2014, an additional $52 billion in cuts will occur across the department, Hagel added.

As he sought additional ways to protect readiness, furloughs for the Defense Department's civilian employees were the last thing he wanted to do, Hagel said, but he told the Fort Bragg audience he had no other options. Congress was unwilling to authorize the reprogramming of funds that would have prevented the need to furlough about 650,000 defense civilian employees, he explained.

"I could not take down that readiness line any further than where we were," he said. "We've essentially cut [and] frozen everything we can in order to maintain those numbers."

This may be the most difficult time to be serving the nation, Hagel said, "but we have no choice but to get through it, and we will get through it."

Though some of the services were in better fiscal shape than others going into the sequestration period, Hagel said, he was determined for the department to stay unified. "It's the whole point of the joint command," he said. "I couldn't as secretary of defense get into a situation where I was going to allow each service to make their own decisions on this. ... I thought that everybody had to come into this together and go out together.


"If [for] no other reason," he continued, "I did that because I just think it's the fair way to do it, as fair as you can be in this business."

When people are treated unfairly, the secretary said, it does damage to the institution.

"This is bigger than the Defense Department. It's people. We as individuals -- as human beings -- each want to be treated fairly, with some dignity and some respect," Hagel said. "And if you think you're not treated fairly, there will be a residue of a problem there. And I thought it would be a mistake for me to make a decision [to] allow each of the services to figure out, 'Well, I've got more money in my budget, and maybe he squandered his budget, and so therefore, I should be in a higher position because of my budget.'"

Hagel said a great deal of credit belongs to the service chiefs for maintaining departmental unity and not allowing budget constraints to drive the services into "tribal warfare."

Despite the department's efforts, the fiscal future remains uncertain, the defense secretary said. Following a departmentwide Strategic Choices and Management Review, Hagel said, the department has mapped out three options: the president's proposed budget for fiscal year 2014, full sequestration and some compromise in between.

"But I think it's fair to say if we're going to be living with an additional $52 billion cut, there [is] going to continue to be bad news with every aspect of our budget," the defense secretary said.

Though he doesn't yet know what Congress will do about the fiscal year 2014 budget request, Hagel said, he has a responsibility to work closely with the president, Congress and the people of the United States. "That's the way our Constitution is built, and we work best when we're working together," he added.

"We're going to work through this," the defense secretary said. "In the end, we are defining a new force structure, a new institution, not unlike after Vietnam, not unlike after every conflict, not unlike every sequence of the historic cycle of world affairs."

DOD RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND BUDGET UNCERTAINTY

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Research, Engineering Team Adjusts to Fiscal Uncertainty
By Amaani Lyle
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 19, 2013 - Defense Department scientists and researchers will adjust to fiscal uncertainty by scrapping duplicative research and increasing prototyping, a senior Pentagon official told Congress yesterday.

Alan R. Shaffer, acting assistant secretary of defense for research and engineering, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that DOD plans to consolidate programs and develop new capabilities by keeping design teams on tap during equipment purchase lulls.

"[Scientists and researchers] will be doing prototyping in things like very advanced electronic warfare systems and ... cyber capabilities," Shaffer said. "It's where we have to address new and emerging capabilities."

About $45 million allocated for the applied technology program in the Pentagon's fiscal year 2014 budget request is not a new set of money, Shaffer said. Rather, he told the senators, it derives from a consolidation of programs such as cyber, communications, electronic warfare and materiel.

"I took five or six of my old programs and collapsed them into a single program element to be able to fund good ideas competitively across the department in the cross-cutting areas that everybody has [science and technology] programs in," he explained.

Shaffer said Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Frank Kendall has asked him and his team to reassess late-development prototyping and demonstration.
When considering advanced technology, the real "secret sauce" is design team engineers who will create the new trades and possibilities, he added.

"So we will do some prototyping to make sure that we keep the national intellectual capital viable for when we need the next set of systems," Shaffer said. "It's a new way of thinking about how we're going to get more 'bang for the buck' by funding ... internally, competitively proposed projects in those certain cross-cutting areas."

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS BEFORE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Opening Remarks by Secretary Kerry Before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
April 17, 2013

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very, very much, Madam Chairwoman and Madam Ranking Member, my good friend Nita Lowey, Chairman Rogers, and members of the committee. It’s great to appear before you. This is a privilege for me. I like the intimate setting, and I look forward to having good dialogue with everybody. We do indeed, Chairman Rogers, have very important choices in front of us and we have to, obviously, put them in their appropriate context and I will try to do that this afternoon.

I want to thank you all for your mention of the Boston Marathon. Representative Wolf – Frank and I were talking beforehand about running the Boston Marathon. I did it a long time ago. And it’s a great event. Clearly, to have Patriots’ Day, among all days, turned into bloody mayhem is beyond the pale and everybody is still reeling from it.

A few minutes ago before I came in here the ticker was talking about the potential of an arrest. I will say to you that no – the latest data I have is no arrest has been made but they have, quote, "solid leads." And that’s sort of where we are now. But as President Obama said, nobody’s going to rest until we get to the bottom of this.

Turning to the challenges of the budget, the challenges of foreign policy, you’ve all listed the enormous array of challenges that we face. But we are the United States of America, and we are still the indispensable nation and people all over the world look to us for leadership. And I have seen that reinforced in me in the – what are we now – two months plus that I have been privileged to serve President Obama and the country.

It’s amazing to me how even more so than I learned as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, it is critical the choices that you make and that we make together. So I’m really happy to be here to talk about this budget. I think we can more than justify it.

As Senator Lindsey Graham has said very eloquently, America’s investment in foreign policy is "national security insurance." And I absolutely believe that. If you can make the right small investments up front, you can avoid costly conflicts. We’ve spent about a trillion dollars in Afghanistan, and I think about the same in Iraq.

It seems to me that in the last months, we have had underscored to all of us a lot of developments that underscore the stakes for us having a strong presence in every part of the world. And I’m really appreciative, Chairwoman Granger, for your cooperation and participation in some efforts to try to advance our diplomacy and Congresswoman Lowey. It’s been critical and it will be critical as we go forward. We’re going to have to work really closely together in this.

You saw what happened in our rapprochement between Israel and Turkey. That’s diplomacy, and it came about because we were able to be there, be present, be involved with both nations in ways that serve both of our interests, all of our interests. And that’s the art of diplomacy, is being able to bring interests together at the right moment in time.

The committee I know, and I know we will discuss it today, has had some robust discussion about Syria. I look forward to that discussion today, because it’s a critical issue for us. We’ve contributed nearly $385 million for humanitarian relief to put essential resources to the Syrian people, as basic as sending flour to bakeries in Aleppo, which makes a difference, to providing food and sanitation in the Atmeh refugee camp. And I look forward to discussing it as we go on today.

We’ve also – I think we may be looking at this budget, Chairman Roger, slightly differently, but we can discuss that in the course of the day. Because our 2014 budget request, we believe, represents a 6 percent reduction from the 2012 funding levels. Now why do I say 2012? Because we had a CR for 2013, so we never had the full budget comparative process. And we think we’ve implemented reforms and some reductions that delivers the maximum bang for the taxpayers’ dollar.

Now, let me give you few examples of that. With just over $3.5 million, the State Department’s Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations made key investments leading up to the recent elections in Kenya. And I want to congratulate our Assistant Secretary of State for Africa Johnnie Carson, who’s just left the Department, just retired. And he did a superb job of day-to-day diplomacy. I personally was on the telephone with Kenyatta, with Odinga, talking to them, trying to walk through the process. We came out of that without the kind of violence that could rip apart a country and provide further requirement for the United States and for the rest of the world to be engaged. So we reduced a repeat of the violence that we saw during the last election.

Our anti-terrorism assistance funding has helped save the lives of hundreds of people quantitatively in places like Pakistan, India, Lebanon, by training local law enforcement to detect and neutralize explosive devices. And all of you are privileged to the intelligence that shares with you the – some of the things that our fellow Americans never see, because they don’t happen, because working with other people we prevent them from happening. Whether it’s the Saudis or the Israelis or others, we’re able intervene ahead of time.

We believe the 2014 budget maintains our commitment to peace, security, and stability, where all three of those things can be a very scarce commodity. And I’ve already traveled, as you mentioned, three times as Secretary to the Middle East and North Africa, which is struggling to respond not to a religiously motivated revolution, but to a fruit vendor who wanted respect and dignity and the ability to be able to sell his goods, responded to young people who gathered in Tahrir Square. Not the Muslim Brotherhood; they didn’t bring this. Young people in a generational revolution believing they want to share in what the rest of the world has brought us this. They brought us an election and some other people won the election. So we have to sort of deal with this emerging aspiration, if you will, that is global.

To that end, this budget requests $580 million for the Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund so we can help give reformers the tools and resources they need to make the right decisions on behalf of their folks. And this fund will allow us to say to people: "If you’re willing to take on these deep-rooted challenges, if you’re willing to believe in democracy, if you’re willing to go to the polls, you’re willing to invest in the process, we are going to stand with you and we’re going to help you."

And with all due respect to the members of the committee, this is de minimis – de minimis. I mean, think of what George Marshall did at the end of World War II, when we had the courage – against the will, I might add, of many Americans – to invest in a defeated Germany and a defeated Japan, today two of our greatest allies, two of the strongest economies in the world. And it’s an example of what can happen in this transformative process. We put aside in this budget 8.6 billion for our security, counterterrorism and law-enforcement assistance. I ask you to compare that 8.6 billion to the 1 trillion that we’ve spent fighting, as I said earlier, in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is penny-wise and it’s pound-wise as well.

The simple fact is – and this is – I’m more convinced of this than ever after 28 years on the Foreign Relations Committee – we cannot be strong at home if we are not strong in the world. We also can’t be strong in the world if we’re not strong at home. So that has something to do with the choices we make here in Washington about our own budget and our own deficient and so forth.

But I believe we need to do more to get out there and stoke the economic engines with the trade and business opportunities that are available in other countries. I said in my confirmation hearing almost all diplomacy today is economic diplomacy. I believe that. I see that in the TTIP; I see it in the TPP. I see it in this race for resources, and China is currently investing more than the United States in Africa. We need to think long term and this budget, I believe, is critical to our tapping the growing markets of Asia, which are essential to America’s economic recovery.

When it comes to shoring up our economic health and protecting national security, I believe our development work is one of our strongest assets. Let me very, very clear: Development is not charity. It’s an investment. It’s an investment in a strong America and a free world. Eleven of the top 15 trading partners of the United States today were once beneficiaries of U.S. foreign assistance. You can just look at Korea, where I was a couple days ago. Fifteen years ago, 20 years ago, we were giving aid to Korea. Today Korea is giving aid to many other parts of the world.

So I’ll just tell you quickly a couple of the reforms we’re making in the budget that I think are the most visible. In the food aid program, we’re giving ourselves the flexibility to choose the most appropriate and efficient type of food assistance that we will give. And by doing so, we’re actually able to reach an estimated 2 to 4 million more people every year with the exact same discretionary funding. At the same time, we’re going to save approximately $500 million in mandatory funding over the next decade, which we will use to reduce the deficit.

American growers and producers – and I know there are members of the committee who are concerned about it – first of all, I’ll say to you it’s not meant to be a subsidy program. We’ve got plenty of that. But it is supposed to be an effective way of providing aid to people. And yet we will still see a majority of the food and producers still will be U.S. Over half the funding that we’re requesting will be used and purchased by – and provided by shipping, U.S. shipping and purchase from American farmers. But by giving us the ability to modernize, including the flexibility to procure food aid in the countries that are closest to the crisis, not only can we feed more people, but we can actually get to malnourished people 11 to 14 weeks earlier. And in the case of malnourishment, that can be the difference between life and death. So the bottom line is that we think this change allows us to do more to help people to lift themselves out of hunger, and we think that’s a good deal for the American taxpayer.

The final area I’ll mention is what the budget does for our most important resource from my perspective as Secretary, and that’s the men and women of the State Department and USAID. We’ve requested $4.4 billion to fortify our worldwide security protection and to improve our overseas infrastructure; 2.3 billion of this is set aside for constructing secure diplomatic facilities. And it’s part of our commitment to implement in full the recommendations of the Independent Accountability Review Board so that we can mitigate the potential of any future tragedy like the one we suffered last year in Benghazi.

So I’d just say to everybody, I’m not going to come here and promise you we’re not going to see another terrible incident. There’s no way anybody can promise you that. We can’t have 100 percent security. We can do the best we can, and we can probably address some of that today. But we learned – just two weeks ago I was in Afghanistan, and one of my control officers, Anne Smedinghoff, who was just laid to rest today, was just a superb, brilliant, bright, committed Foreign Service Officer. She took part in a major women’s event that we did there. And she wanted to make a difference in the world, and she was. She was delivering books in Urdu to kids among the millions of kids going to school because of what we’ve been able to do to change. And this was the type of thing that’s been happening. There have been a thousand of those events, and it was just wrong moment, wrong time. But Anne and Ambassador Chris Stevens represent the same kind of quality of individual that come to work in this endeavor, which is taking America’s values and our interests and trying to share them with other people in the world, and trying to open up opportunities for them and make the world a safer and better place.

My most important job is obviously to protect these folks, and I admire them. But we can’t do it, none of them believe we can do it, by retreating from the world. We are the country that carries with us everywhere we go a sense of optimism, a sense of the possible. We are, I think, unique in all of history in what we have done to help other people share opportunity and equality and freedom.

And so I will personally stand, and we will stand, in opposition to anybody who wants to replace hope with hate and peace with war and security with violence. That’s what we believe, and those are the values of the State Department and USAID, and that’s what brings this budget to you here today. So I look forward to a good dialogue. Thank you.