Washington state is in the soft power business. Dozens of local organizations involved in global affairs have a stake in defining the U.S. role in the world, and they're calling for an overhaul of some basic principles.

They're hoping to influence policy in the other Washington to focus on more equitable, efficient and sustainable development as the Obama Administration sets its budget and priorities.

One area that needs changing most is foreign aid, participants at a Global Washington forum on Monday agreed.

WALLY SANTANA/ASSOCIATED PRESS

The U.S. foreign aid program needs a thorough overhaul to be more effective, many NGOs say.

The current Foreign Assistance Act, all of 417 pages, contains programs to attack the Soviet threat and address disasters in Nicaragua and Pakistan that ended in the 1970s, said Jenni Rothenberg, field director of the U.S. Global Leadership Campaign. With 140 priorities and 400 directives, it's complex and cluttered without any clear road map.

The campaign, whose leadership includes local charities such as PATH, Mercy Corps and World Vision, along with Boeing and Microsoft, is advocating for a strong international affairs budget. The administration's current international affairs budget proposal for fiscal 2009 is $39.8 billion, about 1.3 percent of the total budget request, according to the campaign.

As the U.S. has been involved in two wars, the military role in development has grown significantly, said U.S. Rep. Adam Smith (D-Tacoma).

The Defense Department "moved into what was traditionally the State Department's lane," Smith said. Now it's in over its head in some places and needs to work cooperatively with more civilian experts in a broader mission. But as for getting the military out of the business of development entirely, "it's not going to happen and it's not desirable," Smith said.

Foreign investment and trade will play a key role, but the U.S. needs a new approach to that as well, he said.

"We have learned an enormous amount about how to not make it work," Smith said. "Foreign investment comes in, keeps separate from local populations, sucks money out, pays shareholders somewhere else, pays no taxes and flees."

JOHN MOORE/GETTY IMAGES

As the U.S. military has expanded its role to include more international development, it has stretched beyond its capability and needs more civilian involvement, local leaders say.

Bill Clapp, a Seattle businessman and philanthropist who launched the Global Washington network, suggested that the mission of the U.S. trade representative should be redefined.

Rather than simply negotiating the best deal for U.S. companies, "there has to be a change in priorities, or an additional priority on the trade arm, that says economic development is also one of the outcomes we are looking for," Clapp said.

Speakers debated the role of corporate involvement in economic development.

Foreign aid, originally used to bring foreign countries in line with Washington and promote U.S. economic interests, has fostered a sense of mistrust of U.S. programs, some said.

Margaret Willson, international director of Bahia Street, a Seattle non-profit that aids impoverished girls in Brazil, said her organization refused money from the U.S. Agency for International Development. "All the construction materials had to be brought from the States, supervisors had to be from the States. No money was going into the community. They did not own it, they did not supervise it." In addition, USAID "wanted dossiers on every person involved in the organization," she said.

Simeon Karanja Waidhima, a businessman from Kenya, pointed out that while many criticize U.S. foreign investment, almost none has actually gone to Africa. He also argued that foreign aid has done some good.

"I'm a product of foreign aid," he said. The aid that came in the 1960s and 70s was visible on the ground in the form of teachers and machinery, he said. But in recent years "what we received is not visible," he said. "It's packaged in democratization, but this has no effect on the local population."

Aaron Katz, senior lecturer at the University of Washington School of Public Health, said business interests can be a positive force for development if the focus is on creating economic opportunities for families.

"If there is an intersection between the interests of some corporations and expanding opportunities for those families, I say great," he said. "It's not the companies' interest or U.S. interest that should be paramount. It's the economic well being and opportunity to expand one's freedom that should be paramount."

Since foreign debt consumes up to 70 percent of the budgets of some countries, it has to be addressed to make resources available for health, education and other services, Katz said. An audience member from Ethiopia, however, was quick to chime in that governments often don't use those resources appropriately, and the savings from debt relief does not go to the poor.

Katz and Willson put forth what they called "A Modest Proposal" for U.S. foreign aid, based on the following principles: Do no harm, support public institutions and transparent decision making, invest locally, serve local agendas and priorities, and foster equitable relations.