[House Document 106-145]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



106th Congress, 1st Session - - - - - - - - - - - House Document 106-145


 
     VETO MESSAGE FOR H.R. 2606, FOREIGN OPERATIONS APPROPRIATIONS

                               __________

                                MESSAGE

                                  FROM

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

NOTIFICATION OF THE VETO OF H.R. 2606, THE ``FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT 
       FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2000''




   October 18, 1999.--Message and accompanying bill referred to the 
         Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed

                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
79-012                     WASHINGTON : 1999


To the House of Representatives:
    I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 2606, the 
``Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 
Appropriations Act, 2000.''
    The central lesson we have learned in this century is that 
we cannot protect American interests at home without active 
engagement abroad. Common sense tells us, and hard experience 
has confirmed, that we must lead in the world, working with 
other nations to defuse crises, repel dangers, promote more 
open economic and political systems, and strengthen the rule of 
law. These have been the guiding principles of American foreign 
policy for generations. They have served the American people 
well, and greatly helped to advance the cause of peace and 
freedom around the world.
    This bill rejects all of those principles. It puts at risk 
America's 50-year tradition of leadership for a safer, more 
prosperous and democratic world. It is an abandonment of hope 
in our Nation's capacity to shape that kind of world. It 
implies that we are too small and insecure to meet our share of 
international responsibilities, too shortsighted to see that 
doing so is in our national interest. It is another sign of a 
new isolationism that would have America bury its head in the 
sand at the height of our power and prosperity.
    In the short term, H.R. 2606 fails to address critical 
national security needs. It suggests we can afford to underfund 
our efforts to keep deadly weapons from falling into dangerous 
hands and walk away without peril from our essential work 
toward peace in places of conflict. Just as seriously, it fails 
to address America's long-term interests. It reduces assistance 
to nations struggling to build democratic societies and open 
markets and backs away from our commitment to help people 
trapped in poverty to stand on their feet. This, too, threatens 
our security because future threats will come from regions and 
nations where instability and misery prevail and future 
opportunities will come from nations on the road to freedom and 
growth.
    By denying America a decent investment in diplomacy, this 
bill suggests we should meet threats to our security with our 
military might alone. That is a dangerous proposition. For if 
we underfund our diplomacy, we will end up overusing our 
military. Problems we might have been able to resolve 
peacefully will turn into crises we can only resolve at a cost 
of life and treasure. Shortchanging our arsenal of peace is as 
risky as shortchanging our arsenal of war.
    The overall funding provided by H.R. 2606 is inadequate. It 
is about half the amount available in real terms to President 
Reagan in 1985, and it is 14 percent below the level that I 
requested. I proposed to fund this higher level within the 
budget limits and without spending any of the Social Security 
surplus. The specific shortfalls in the current bill are 
numerous and unacceptable.
    For example, it is shocking that the Congress has failed to 
fulfill our obligations to Israel and its neighbors as they 
take risks and make difficult decisions to advance the Middle 
East peace process. My Administration, like all its 
predecessors, has fought hard to promote peace in the Middle 
East. This bill would provide neither the $800 million 
requested this year as a supplemental appropriation nor the 
$500 million requested in FY 2000 funding to support the Wye 
River Agreement. Just when Prime Minister Barak has helped give 
the peace process a jump start, this sends the worst possible 
message to Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinians about America's 
commitment to the peace process. We should instead seize this 
opportunity to support them.
    Additional resources are required to respond to the costs 
of building peace in Kosovo and the rest of the Balkans, and I 
intend to work with the Congress to provide needed assistance. 
Other life-saving peace efforts, such as those in Sierra Leone 
and East Timor, are imperiled by the bill's inadequate funding 
of the voluntary peacekeeping account.
    My Administration has sought to protect Americans from the 
threat posed by the potential danger of weapons proliferation 
from Russia and the countries of the former Soviet Union. But 
the Congress has failed to finance the Expanded Threat 
Reduction Initiative (ETRI), which is designed to prevent 
weapons of mass destruction and weapons technologies from 
falling into the wrong hands and weapons scientists from 
offering their talents to countries, or even terrorists, 
seeking these weapons. The bill also curtails ETRI programs 
that help Russia and other New Independent States strengthen 
export controls to avoid illicit trafficking in sensitive 
materials through their borders and airports. The ETRI will 
also help facilitate withdrawal of Russian forces and equipment 
from countries such as Georgia and Moldova; it will create 
peaceful research opportunities for thousands of former soviet 
weapons scientists. We also cannot afford to underfund programs 
that support democracy and small scale enterprises in Russia 
and other New Independent States because these are the very 
kinds of initiatives needed to complete their transformation 
away from communism and authoritarianism.
    A generation from now, no one is going to say we did too 
much to help the nations of the former Soviet Union safeguard 
their nuclear technology and expertise. If the funding cuts in 
this bill were to become law, future generations would 
certainly say we did too little and that we imperiled our 
future in the process.
    My Administration has also sought to promote economic 
progress and political change in developing countries, because 
America benefits when these countries become our partners in 
security and trade. At the Cologne Summit, we led a historic 
effort to enable the world's poorest and most heavily indebted 
countries to finance health, education, and opportunity 
programs. The Congress fails to fund the U.S. contribution. The 
bill also severely underfunds Multilateral Development 
Banks,providing the lowest level of financing since 1987, with cuts of 
37 percent from our request. This will virtually double U.S. arrears to 
these banks and seriously undermine our capacity to promote economic 
reform and growth in Latin America, Asia, and especially Africa. These 
markets are critical to American jobs and opportunities.
    Across the board, my Administration requested the funding 
necessary to assure American leadership on matters vital to the 
interests and values of our citizens. In area after area, from 
fighting terrorism and international crime to promoting nuclear 
stability on the Korean peninsula, from helping refugees and 
disaster victims to meeting its own goal of a 10,000-member 
Peace Corps, the Congress has failed to fund adequately these 
requests.
    Several policy matters addressed in the bill are also 
problematic. One provision would hamper the Export-Import 
Bank's ability to be responsive to American exporters by 
requiring that the Congress be notified of dozens of additional 
kinds of transactions before the Bank can offer financing. 
Another provision would allow the Export-Import Bank to operate 
without a quorum until March 2000. I have nominated two 
individuals to the Bank's Board, and they should be confirmed.
    A third provision could be read to prevent the United 
States from engaging in diplomatic efforts to promote a cost-
effective, global solution to climate change. A fourth 
provision places restrictions on assistance to Indonesia that 
could harm our ability to influence the objectives we share 
with the Congress: ensuring that Indonesia honors the 
referendum in East Timor and that security is restored there, 
while encouraging democracy and economic reform in Indonesia. 
Finally, this bill contains several sections that, if treated 
as mandatory, would encroach on the President's sole 
constitutional authority to conduct diplomatic negotiations.
    In sum, this appropriations bill undermines important 
American interests and ignores the lessons that have been at 
the core of our bipartisan foreign policy for the last half 
century. Like the Senate's recent vote to defeat the 
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, this bill reflects an 
inexcusable and potentially dangerous complacency about the 
opportunities and risks America faces in the world today. I 
therefore am returning this bill without my approval.
    I look forward to working with the Congress to craft an 
appropriations bill that I can support, one that maintains our 
commitment to protecting the Social Security surplus, properly 
addressing our shared goal of an America that is strong at home 
and strong abroad, respected not only for our leadership, but 
for the vision and commitment that real leadership entails. the 
American people deserve a foreign policy worthy of our great 
country, and I will fight to ensure that they continue to have 
one.

                                                William J. Clinton.
    The White House, October 18, 1999.
    
    
