H.R. 1886 provided assistance to Pakistan, and H.R. 2410 authorized worldwide foreign assistance for the 2010 and part of the 2011 fiscal years. This was a vote on the resolution or “rule” setting the terms for debating the two bills. , Rep. Hastings (D-FL), who was leading the effort on behalf of the rule, argued: “(I)t is critical that Congress put forth the necessary funding to help rebuild our diplomatic capabilities abroad and mitigate the damage that was done under the previous administration's leadership. H.R. 2410 . . . is the first foreign relations-related authorization bill to reflect essential democratic priorities since 1993. As such, it provides a new direction forward and vital resources to boost our diplomatic capacity, improve our relations around the world, protect our national security, and make use of America's smart power, rather than rely on the military only solutions of past Congresses and the previous administration
‘H.R. 2410 and H.R. 1866 . . . together, set forth a progressive foreign affairs agenda that emphasizes diplomatic, economic and social efforts at change, not just the use of military force.” Hastings also argued: “(F)or years the Department of State has been denied critical resources to fulfill its core diplomatic missions in furthering our global interests and protecting our national security. In neglecting diplomacy, we have missed opportunities to prevent and mitigate conflicts around the world.”
Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL), who was leading the Republican effort regarding the rule, first argued against it on procedural grounds. He noted that Members had requested that 85 amendments be made in order to the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, but that the Democratic majority had decided to make only 27 of them in order. He said: “I understand that the majority has a responsibility to move legislation and manage the time on the floor, but if we look at the amendments the majority made in order, they do not fully address the scope and range of issues of concern to House Members.”
Diaz-Balart also expressed concerns about the underlying legislation which the rule covered. Regarding the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, he noted that Secretary of State Clinton had “testified before the House Foreign Relations Committee that she had challenged the State Department to reform and innovate and save taxpayer dollars . . . Unfortunately, the majority has decided to ignore that challenge and instead today has brought forth legislation that authorizes increased spending by 35 percent without increased transparency, accountability, and efficiency.” He also expressed concern that the Foreign Relations Authorization Act would “increase U.S. taxpayer funding authorized for the United Nations by nearly one-third without requiring the United Nations to undertake necessary reforms to improve efficiency and stop blatant corruption.”
Diaz-Balart want on to argue: “While failing to place accountability standards in (H.R. 1886), the majority decided to include provisions in the Pakistan Assistance Act . . . that will micromanage U.S. policy toward Pakistan.”
The resolution passed by a vote of 238-183. Two hundred thirty-seven Democrats and one Republican voted “aye”. One hundred and seventy-two Republicans and eleven Democrats voted “nay”. As a result, the House was able to begin debate on H.R 1886 and H.R. 2410.