[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 64 (Friday, May 20, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 20, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. MFUME. Mr. Chairman, I was unfortunately detained while chairing 
a hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building and thus missed rollcall 
vote No. 189, on the Penny amendment to terminate funding for the 
Trident D-5 missile. Had I made it to the floor time, I would have 
voted ``aye.''
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Rahall). Pursuant to the order of the 
House of Wednesday, May 18, 1994, it is now in order to consider any 
amendment printed in part 1 of the report not previously considered.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16 printed in part 1 of 
the House Report 103-509.


                    amendment offered by mr. kennedy

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Kennedy: At the end of title X 
     (page 277, after line 2), insert the following new section:

     SEC. 1038. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO OPERATE ARMY SCHOOL 
                   OF THE AMERICAS.

       Funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the 
     Department of Defense pursuant to an authorization of 
     appropriations contained in this Act may not be used to 
     operate the Army School of the Americas, currently at Fort 
     Benning, Georgia.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
earlier today, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] will be 
recognized for 10 minutes, and a Member opposed, the gentleman from 
Missouri [Mr. Skelton], will be recognized for 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the United States has a long history of involvement in 
Latin American affairs. As a bastion of democracy with a vibrant 
economy, the United States is looked to with great admiration and 
respect by millions and millions of Latin Americans.
  But our history in Latin America is checkered by our financial, 
military, and moral support and association with people like Omar 
Torrijos, the dictator of Panama; Manuel Noriega, the dictator and drug 
runner; Leopoldo Galtieri, who led the military junta in Argentina; 
Roberto d'Aubisson, organizer of the Salvadoran death squads that 
killed Archbishop Romero; 19 of the 26 Salvadoran officers that planned 
and carried out and covered up the murder of 6 Jesuit priests in 1989; 
and more than 100 of the 246 Colombian officers cited for human rights 
violations, including several instructors from the School of the 
Americas, as well as 6 Peruvian officers linked to a military death 
squad that killed 9 students in 1992, and the 3 most senior Guatemalan 
officers who backed a coup attempt in May 1993.
  What is the one thing that they all had in common?
  They are all graduates of the U.S. Army School of the Americas.
  The fact is that this is a school that has run more dictators than 
any other school in the history of the world. They boast about the fact 
that 10 separate heads of state throughout Latin America were graduates 
of the School of the Americas. Not one of them was elected through a 
democratic election, and in many cases they actually overthrew the 
civilian governments that brought them into power.
  They tell us now that the school changing, but we know and 
understand, Mr. Chairman, that the school is continuing the kind of 
modus operandi that left us with the legacy of being associated with 
some of the worst human rights abusers on the face of this planet.

                              {time}  1220

  We see just on the House steps, Father Ray Bourgeois, who has gone on 
a hunger strike for 40 days, to demonstrate his personal commitment and 
the commitment of millions of others that our association with the 
school ought to end. Let us stop the days of the cold war, let us stop 
our history with these associations, and let us get on to a new day 
with the association of the United States and Latin America through 
peaceful means, not military ones.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment. It is illogical. There is 
simply no cause-effect relationship between the problem and the 
proposed solution to kill the School of the Americas. The School of the 
Americas does teach the law of war and respect for human rights. The 
fact that this instruction does not sink into every participant during 
this span of course of several weeks' length should not surprise us. 
There are Americans who have attended seminary courses and then become 
murderers. You do not blame the seminaries for that.
  I am hearing that some graduates of the school become dictators. It 
is also true General Somoza, the late dictator of Guatemala, was a 
graduate of West Point. Did we close West Point down at that point?
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia 
[Mr. Bishop].
  (Mr. BISHOP asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to provide the House of 
Representatives with factual information regarding the School of the 
Americas at Fort Benning, GA.
  The school was established in 1963 under President John F. Kennedy's 
Alliance for Progress from the existing U.S. Army Caribbean Training 
Center in Panama. In 1984, the school was moved from Panama to Fort 
Benning, GA. Since 1963, more than 58,000 Latin American soldiers have 
graduated from the School of the Americas.
  The school was developed to train and teach Latin American militaries 
how to defend against subversion techniques from the Soviet Union and 
Cuba. However, as the cold war began to end, the School of the Americas 
began to adopt a new curriculum. The new emphasis began to focus on the 
role of military professionalism in a democratic government. The 
guiding principle of the school now is to provide professional service 
subordinate to civilian control by democratically elected governments. 
Training at the school is focused on effective response to drug 
trafficking, natural disasters, and respect for human rights.
  Instruction is conducted in Spanish to allow for others outside the 
English-speaking upper class to attend; however, approximately 122 out 
of 160 instructors are from the United States. Claims that instruction 
is extensively carried out by foreign trainers is absolutely false. The 
fact that classes are taught in Spanish has substantially reduced the 
cost of training and allowed a uniquely diverse population to attend 
the school.
  The curriculum at the School of the Americas undergoes constant 
review not only by the Army's Training and Doctrine Command but also by 
a new outside policy review board which has recently been established 
to ensure that human rights awareness is an integral part of training.
  Have there been bad apples at the school? Yes. However, many of the 
so-called bad apples attended the school before it was located at Fort 
Benning, GA. For example, Gen. Manual Noriega attended the school in 
its early inception in Panama during the mid-1960's. He did not attend 
the school of the Americas at Fort Benning, GA. Another thug routinely 
recognized by critics of the school is Gen. Domingo Monterrosa of El 
Salvador. General Monterrosa, now deceased, has been linked to the 
death squads which plagued El Salvador in the early 1980's during the 
country's bloody civil war. However, General Monterrosa also did not 
attend the School of the Americas at Fort Benning. He spent 2 weeks at 
the school when it was located in Panama in 1966. Was General 
Monterrosa trained to be a human rights violator during this time? No. 
He spent the entire 2 weeks learning to pack a parachute.

  I submit to you that the school has improved dramatically over the 
years and has responded to the changing world by taking a hard look at 
itself and making a strong effort to address those areas in need of 
improvement. In fact, President Ronald Reagan's decision to move the 
school to Fort Benning has proven to be an excellent decision. Because 
the press has spent hours upon hours detailing the few bad apples of 
the past, I want to spend a few moments detailing the successes of the 
present.
  Jose Gallardo Roman, current Minister of Defense in Ecuador, is one 
of the School of the Americas' true all-stars. General Gallardo 
strongly supports democratic principles and the need to respect human 
rights. In 1993, he signed an accord with the Latin American 
Association on Human Rights to begin a sweeping human rights training 
program throughout the Armed Forces.
  Another all-star is Gen. Hernan Jose Guzman, Army Commander in 
Columbia. General Guzman has initiated measures to prevent human rights 
abuses such as assigning judges to brigades involved in 
counterinsurgency operations. These judges accompany the brigades on 
operations and ensure that insurgents' human rights are protected.
  Minister Roman and General Guzman represent the school's all-stars in 
the realm of human rights. The School of the Americas has also had true 
success stories in the name of democracy and defeating anti-democratic 
coups.
  Brig. Gen. Fuget Borregales, the current director of operations of 
the Venezuela Army and graduate of the school, was a major player in 
defeating coup attempts in Caracas in November 1992. His unit 
recaptured the La Carlota Air Base which had been overrun by coup 
rebels.
  Another success story involves the current commander of the 4th 
Infantry Division in Venezuela and School of the Americas graduate, 
Brig. Gen. Pedro Valencia Vivas. General Vivas identified officers who 
had participated in the February 4, 1992, coup attempt. When the 
November 28, 1992, coup occurred, not a single platoon under his 
command participated in the attempt to overthrow the democratic 
government.
  I have detailed these gentlemen because they represent the 
overwhelming graduates of the School of the Americas who are currently 
playing a constructive role in Latin America. The critics of the school 
detail past graduates who did not receive training at Fort Benning and 
are no longer players in Latin America.
  I have received a number of letters from Veterans' service 
organizations supporting the School of the Americas. At this time I 
would like to read portions of those letters to you for the record.
  Ret. Vice Adm. T.J. Kilcline, president of the Retired Officers 
Association writes:

       The impact of the school has truly been significant. Not 
     only has the education been most helpful for our Latin 
     American neighbors, but the contact with Americans and the 
     positive attitudes of the American military personnel they 
     met and got to know while at Benning was the basis for 
     friendship and understanding between individuals which 
     translates to better relationships among our countries.

  Ret. Army Gen. Roger Sandler, executive director of the Reserve 
Officers Association of the United States, writes ``I am well aware of 
this outstanding school's very important contributions to democracy in 
our hemisphere.''
  Mr. Chairman, our veterans support the School of the Americas at Fort 
Benning. At this time I would like to enter into the Record a 
resolution by the American Ex-Prisoners of War specifically supporting 
the school's continued operation and opposing the effort to eliminate 
the school's funding.

   Resolution Supporting the U.S. Army School of the Americas, Fort 
                              Benning, GA

       Whereas, the U.S. Army School of the Americas has 
     successfully trained over 54,000 troops from Latin America 
     and the United States;
       Whereas, the School of the Americas has graduated 10 
     Presidents, 38 Ministers of Defense or State, 71 Commanders 
     of Armed Forces, and 25 Service Chiefs of Staff;
       Whereas, the School of the Americas systematically 
     advocates human rights awareness and strives to graduate 
     students whose respect for such values is enlightened and 
     solidified;
       Whereas, the School of the Americas has greatly improved 
     its human rights curriculum adding new instructors and course 
     requirements;
       Whereas, the Department of Defense is using the School of 
     the Americas concept to design a new facility in Germany, the 
     George C. Marshall Institute, to educate and train former 
     Soviet Union military personnel to understand the social and 
     political benefits of a western democratic society;
       Whereas, the School of the Americas has played a major role 
     in the dramatic change in Latin America from dictatorships 
     and military juntas to military supported Democratic 
     Societies;
       Whereas, for the first time in 200 years, democracy in 
     Latin America is beginning to take hold and from Argentina to 
     Guatemala coups are being resisted due to the influence of 
     the School of the Americas;
       Whereas, on September 30, 1993, there was an active attempt 
     in the U.S. House of Representatives to close the School of 
     the Americas which was rejected by a vote of 174-256;
       Whereas, the School of the Americas is expected once again 
     to be under attack from various organizations and Members of 
     Congress during the 1994 session of the 103rd Congress;
       Now therefore be it resolved, That the members of this 
     organization do hereby go on record in full support of the 
     U.S. Army School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia; do 
     advocate its continued operation; do oppose any attempts to 
     reduce or eliminate funding for this program which has been 
     instrumental in fostering democratic principles throughout 
     Latin America; and do hereby direct that a copy of this 
     resolution be transmitted to each member of the United States 
     House of Representatives and of the United States Senate.

  Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Chairman, I would also like to enter into the Record 
a letter I received on May 18, 1994 from Gen. Barry McCaffrey, a true 
patriot and commander in chief of our Southern Command.
                                            Department of Defense,


                                        U.S. Southern Command,

                                                     May 18, 1994.
     Hon. Sanford Bishop,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Bishop: Am writing to express serious concern over 
     pending legislative action which could threaten the existence 
     of one of our most useful institutions--the U.S. Army's 
     School of the Americas [SOA]. For over forty years, the 
     school has been an effective tool for promoting foreign 
     policy objectives in Latin America. The school's reputation 
     for providing superior military training in Spanish while 
     instilling the principle of military subordination to 
     constitutional civilian rule is long-standing. My recent 
     visit to the school confirmed my belief that it is an 
     indispensable institution with no substitute.
       As you are aware, SOA has played a key role in the 
     education of many Latin American military leaders. The vast 
     majority of these graduates are positive supporters of 
     democratization, human rights, and the rule of law. 
     Unfortunately, this gets little publicity. Just a few 
     examples--
       Commander of the Colombian Army who initiated the 
     assignment of judges to units conducting counter-insurgency 
     operations to ensure the protection of human rights.
       Ecuadoran Minister of Defense who signed an accord with the 
     Latin American Association on Human Rights to begin a 
     sweeping human rights training program throughout the Armed 
     Forced.
       Current Venezuelan division commander who helped identify 
     members of a recent coup attempt against a democratically 
     elected government.
       Every course at SOA offers a regional perspective, includes 
     human rights and democratization instruction, and ensures 
     exposure to U.S. military discipline and expertise. Latin 
     American students and instructors leave the school with an 
     enhanced understanding of the proper role of the military in 
     a civilian-led democracy. Provided the opportunity to 
     continue this vital mission, SOA can play a critical role in 
     the development of Latin America's leaders well into the 
     future, further consolidating the gains for democracy in our 
     hemisphere.
       The growth of democracy throughout Latin America is a 
     direct reflection on this institution. Now is not the time to 
     abandon these efforts and the democratic momentum the school 
     helps provide. SOA plays an essential role in our strategy 
     for the region. I respectfully urge you to work to preserve 
     this important institution.
           Very respectfully,

                                           Barry R. McCaffrey,

                                                     General, USA,
                                               Commander in Chief.

  Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Chairman, it is unfortunate that the critics of the 
School of the Americas continue to look into the past. We must maintain 
a vision for the future in our foreign policy and the School of the 
Americas is an excellent tool to further our foreign policy goals. The 
Congress will continue to ensure that the school maintains its human 
rights awareness training and adapts to the varying challenges that 
will face us in the future. However, we must not ignore Latin America, 
we must not forget our role as the only remaining superpower in the 
world, we must not close the School of the Americas, and we must never 
relinquish our grasp of the democratic ideals that the School of the 
Amercias represents.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio [Mr. Hoke].
  Mr. HOKE. Mr. Chairman, today I am rising in strong support of the 
Kennedy amendment to eliminate funding for the U.S. Army School of the 
Americas. We have heard serious charges. We will hear more; that the 
School of the Americas is nothing more than a school for assassins. 
Others say that a handful of bad actors has tarnished the image of an 
otherwise reputable training facility.
  Whichever is more accurate, the real question remains, why are we 
engaged in this activity in the first place? Students at the School of 
the Americas are not integrated into regular U.S. military training 
forces. They are taught the vast majority of their course work by other 
Latin American officers. What is the justification for having foreign 
nationals training other foreign nationals on U.S. soil at U.S. 
taxpayers' expense? If there ever was one, which I seriously doubt, 
there certainly is not now.
  I have a special message for my Republican colleagues: We cannot have 
it both ways. We cannot vote to eliminate funding for the ICC, for the 
National Helium Reserve, the Rural Electrification Agency, the honey 
bee subsidy, the Appalachian Regional Commission, every single one of 
which deserves to be shut down, and shut down now and permanently. 
Then, just because a program is in the defense budget, are we are going 
to give it special kid glove status and stay away from it?
  This program is pork. It happens to be defense pork, it happens to be 
Georgia defense pork, but it is simply pork. It certainly is obsolete 
today, if it ever was justified, and it should be eliminated.
  Mr. Chairman, the graduates of the School of the Americas may be 
soldiers of righteousness. They may be soldiers of fortune. They may 
even be soldiers of evil. I suspect they have been all three. In any 
event, there are much better ways to accomplish the legitimate military 
existence and hemispheric cooperation goals of the United States. This 
is an anachronism. Right or wrong, it continues to give the United 
States a black eye with our Latin American colleagues.
  I urge my colleagues, support the Kennedy amendment and close down 
the School of the Americas once and for all.


                announcement by the chairman pro tempore

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Rahall). The chair will ask visitors in 
the gallery to please refrain from expressions of support or 
disapproval of debate.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
minority whip, the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich].
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Georgia [Mr. Gingrich].
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich] 
is recognized for 2\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. GINGRICH. Mr. Chairman, I think this is a very simple question to 
address. If you think having Latin American officers come to America, 
having them learn about soldiering in a democracy, having them learn 
why America has been able to be militarily strong and free, having them 
learn a tradition different than the Latin American tradition of 
military dictatorship; if you think that the progress of the last 20 
years, as country by country in Latin America has left dictatorship to 
move towards democracy, if you think that process is useful, and you 
think that America has something to teach Latin American officers, then 
you should vote no on this amendment.
  On the other hand, if you think being tainted by visiting America 
weakens you, if you think being at Fort Benning makes you less likely 
to be for freedom, if you think that somehow there is some conspiracy 
in the School of the Americas that is showing up, then probably you 
ought to vote yes.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GINGRICH. I yield to my friend from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I do not believe there is any kind of 
conspiracy at the School of the Americas. None of us has suggested a 
conspiracy. What we do believe is that if we look at the real record of 
who has graduated, the army will cite the fact that 10 separate leaders 
of Latin America all went to the school. The trouble is, not one of 
them was duly elected. There have been changes in Latin America, but 
none of them have been because of the graduates of this school.
  Mr. GINGRICH. I would ask to gentleman, how many graduates were there 
in the last 20 years of the school?
  Mr. KENNEDY. There have been tens of thousands.
  Mr. GINGRICH. My only point would be in the current democracies, 
there are graduates of the School of the Americas currently serving 
within a democratic framework doing exactly what we are trying to teach 
the Russians, like how to soldier within a democracy.
  Mr. KENNEDY. If the gentleman will yield further, I appreciate the 
gentleman yielding. But the fact is we only have the record of those 
individuals who are involved in these hundreds and hundreds and 
hundreds of cases. We do not have the records of the ones who were not.
  Mr. GINGRICH. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, all I would say to my 
good friend, and I appreciate so much your yielding, is that if you 
looked at the total record of all the officers who are graduates, who 
are currently, today, serving in democracies, you would be proud of the 
contribution America has made to the democratization of Latin America, 
just as today I am sure you are supportive of our efforts to teach the 
Russians and Ukrainians and others to learn to serve in a democracy.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming the time I yielded, I would 
conclude by saying we have a choice. Either the thousands that you say 
have not or the thousands that did, I would say that the thousands that 
did, ruin our reputation.
  Mr. GINGRICH. Vote ``no''.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Lantos], the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
International Security, International Organizations and Human Rights.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding, 
and at the outset I want to pay tribute to my good friend from 
Massachusetts, Mr. Kennedy, who has stood with me on many, many human 
rights issues during the course of his tenure in this body. There is no 
doubt in my mind that the motivations of the distinguished gentleman 
from Massachusetts are the finest, as indeed are the motivations of all 
of my colleagues who will support his amendment.

                              {time}  1230

  I rise in the strongest possible opposition to that amendment, and I 
do so for two specific reasons.
  As one who came to this country as a student from abroad, I can 
testify that attending institutions in this country is the most 
democratizing influence for people who come from totalitarian 
societies.
  The School of the Americas is no exception. There is no doubt in my 
mind that some of the graduates of the School of the Americas have 
indeed participated in human rights violations. I am convinced that 
many more would have participated in human rights violations had they 
not attended that school.
  I am very proud of my own alma mater, the University of California. 
But I would hate to see suggestions that the University of California 
be closed down because some of the graduates of the University of 
California are serving in prisons for all kinds of violations of law.
  There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that attending the School 
of the Americas has been a very positive force for human rights in 
Latin America and in Latin American militaries. There is simply zero 
logic, zero logic to arguing that since some of the graduates of the 
School of the Americas have misbehaved, and they have, this positive 
influence on democratizing the Latin American militaries should be 
closed down.
  Vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Edwards].
  (Mr. EDWARDS of California asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. EDWARDS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. Chairman, the School of the Americas is a noble thought: Bring 
Latin American soldiers to the United States to teach them respect for 
human rights. However, this ideal couldn't be further from reality.
  Others have listed the scores of notorious human rights abusers who 
have graduated from our program. Let's look at the school itself. It is 
not much more than a country club for dictators.
  Rather than directly exposing them to the rule of law that the U.S. 
military abides by, SOA students are isolated. All other international 
military education and training programs integrate students into U.S. 
forces so that they may experience first hand deference to civilian 
authority.
  SOA students are given the chance to tour the United States, to go to 
an amusement park and a ball game. Supporters of the school claim this 
reinforces American ideals. Although I would not begrudge any visitor 
to the United States the chance to explore our great Nation, tourism, 
and materialism should not be the sole extent of the curriculum.
  A few hours of human rights training have been added to SOA courses. 
What little time is devoted to this, to what ought to be the 
fundamental thrust of the shool, is greeted with indifference or 
outright hostility by both students and instructors.
  Without the School of the Americas, Latin American soldiers will 
still be able to participate in IMET programs. Abolishing the SOA will 
end their segregation which has only fostered continued abuse of 
authority and abuse of civilian populations.
  I urge my colleagues to stand up for human rights, to support the 
Kennedy amendment and to abolish the School of the Americas.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Meehan].
  Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Chairman, I congratulate my colleague and friend, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy], for offering this 
amendment. Approximately a year-and-a-half ago, I made a speech as a 
freshman Member of Congress calling for a closing of the School of the 
Americas. There were not many Members of Congress that knew that the 
School of the Americas even existed at that time. But since that time, 
we have seen more Members of Congress become aware of the atrocities 
that have taken place at this school with very, very little being 
accomplished that is in the interest of democracy.
  I recently went to El Salvador, appointed by the President to observe 
the elections there. We are making progress. But we face a house of 
cards in El Salvador.
  What we need is, we have a new President there, just elected, who 
frankly, as one Member of Congress, I am not sure has a moral compass 
and the people around him, I am not so sure about.
  The last place we want these new leaders to go is the School of the 
Americas. More than two-thirds of the Salvadoran soldiers named by the 
Truth Commission report on human rights abuses in El Salvador were 
graduates of the School of the Americas. By itself that should be 
enough to cause some serious soul searching.
  We need to close the school and close it today.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Georgia [Mr. Collins].
  (Mr. COLLINS of Georgia asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the amendment 
of the gentleman from Massachussetts and to support the U.S. Army 
School of the Americas. The School is specialized in training select 
Latin American military officers in military operations, teaching the 
values of democracy, and, yes, the need for human rights.
  Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Massachussetts has been wrong in his 
past statements that Haitian Police Chief Michel Francois was a student 
of the School. Since 1963, not one Haitian student has attended the 
School of the Americas. It is simply wrong to suggest that any member 
of the current Haitian regime has ever attended the School.
  Similarly, there has been a noticeable absence of Cuban officers 
enrolled at the School. In its history, the School has never graduated 
a single Cuban officer. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that 
the common characteristic of the Haitian and Cuban governments is that 
they are the only two remaining countries in Latin America that are 
nondemocratic.
  Since the School was established in 1946 as the U.S. Army Caribbean 
Training Center, over 58,000 Latin American officers have graduated, 
and many have gone on to hold prominent positions in their country's 
military and government.
  In 1963, the focus of the School was sharpened by President John F. 
Kennedy, and it was renamed the School of the Americas. The focus of 
the School became the teaching of Latin American armies how to defend 
against Soviet and Cuban inspired subversion. This was the goal, even 
if it meant supporting a dictator or a military coup.
  Well Mr. Chairman, the times and politics of Latin America changed, 
and so, too, did the direction of the School. In 1983, President Reagan 
moved the School to Fort Benning, GA, with the focus again redirected 
to emphasize the role of a professional military force in a democratic 
society. Today, this includes instruction in effective response to drug 
trafficking, natural disasters, and respect for human rights.
  Yes, Mr. Chairman, there was resistance to democracy in El Salvador, 
Ecuador, Venezuela and other Latin American nations. And, yes, there 
were lives lost in this transition. Sacrifices were made, but not in 
vain. Democracy in each nation has prevailed. And due to those lives 
sacrificed, Human rights is a major part of the curriculum at the 
School.
  Over 35 Latin American nations are now governed by such a democracy 
with only 2 nations continuing to suffer under dictatorships. The 
School has represented a significant investment in this success of 
democracy throughout the region. Do not throw this investment in 
democracy out the window.
  I urge the Members to defeat the Kennedy amendment, and continue to 
support the teachings of democracy in our hemisphere.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  I want to clarify for the record the fact is that this school has, in 
fact, suggested that they have begun to teach human rights at the 
school. I had the individual who was hired by the school come to my 
office and tell me that when he taught human rights at the school, he 
was ridiculed. He was abused, and he says that the notion that this 
school has reformed itself is a joke.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Georgia [Ms. 
McKinney].
  (Ms. McKINNEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I once again come before this House with 
grave concern about the School of the Americas.
  Rather than assisting to establish democracy in a part of the world 
so important to us, the great tradition of School of the Americas 
results in a who's-who of the hemisphere's dictators. In Honduras, 
Panama, Bolivia, Argentina, Peru, and Ecuador the stain of the School 
of the Americas remains.
  The graduates of the School of the Americas include dictators and 
soldiers implicated in human rights violations all over Latin America 
thanks to the American taxpayer.
  No more should our American soldiers be introduced to the position of 
being sent into dangerous situations in order to clean up the mess made 
by a few of the graduates of the School of the Americas.
  At its best, the school is ineffective. And at its worst, it gives 
future dictators the skills to overthrow civilian democratic 
governments.
  I ask the House to vote today to close the doors on the School of the 
Americas--the School for Dictators.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
Jersey [Mr. Torricelli], chairman of the Subcommittee on Western 
Hemisphere Affairs of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
  Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time 
to me.
  I understand that the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Massachusetts is well-intentioned, but it is flawed in its logic. That 
members of the armed forces from throughout Latin America in countries 
with a history of human rights abuses and interference in politics come 
together with officers from the military of the United States with the 
greatest history of respecting political rights and human rights and by 
that association themselves become transgressors, it defies logic.
  In fact, it defies the facts. Last year in Venezuela, there was an 
attempted coup. It was officers trained by the United States who put it 
down.
  In El Salvador today, in implementing the peace accords, it is 
officers trained by the United States. When there was an attempted coup 
in Guatemala only 2 years ago, it was officers trained by the United 
States.
  Have there been transgressors? Of course, but something must explain 
that Latin America is fundamentally changing. Democracy is the coin of 
the realm. Rights are being respected again. Something is working, and 
American policy in this school is a part of that success.

                              {time}  1240

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  The fact of the matter is, Mr. Chairman, that three of the coup 
leaders in Guatemala all were graduates of this school. The notion that 
somehow our military are able to influence these people in these 
foreign countries is simply not the case.
  We have also brought in, since the Salvadoran soldiers killed the six 
priests, seven or eight of those individuals who killed the priests 
have come to America and went to this school after they killed the 
priests. That is the record of this school, and that is the reputation 
that rubs off on our country throughout Latin America.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. 
Kopetski].
  (Mr. KOPETSKI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. KOPETSKI. Mr. Chairman and Members, I rise in strong support of 
the Kennedy amendment, and want to make three points. First, if we do 
want to help develop leadership skills in Central America, then let us 
close the school, put the $3 or $4 million we put into that university 
in creative scholarship programs at the University of California or the 
University of Georgia.
  Second, if we do commit American troops to Haiti, remember that we 
trained the opposition that is going to be trying to kill our soldiers.
  Third, understand the purpose and the history and track record of 
this university. It is a university of shame. This is a university 
where students major in murder. This is a university where they minor 
in mayhem. They receive a master's in the art of oppression, 
repression, and reprehensible conduct by any human rights standard.
  In the name of America's honor, let us dismantle this university 
today.


                announcement by the chairman pro tempore

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Chair will admonish visitors in the 
gallery that they are here as guests of the House of Representatives. 
Expression of approval or disapproval of remarks on the floor is not 
allowed.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Hyde].
  (Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, when this school was founded in 1946, there 
were five Latin American democracies, five. Today there are over 35 
Latin American democracies. As a matter of fact, there are only two 
that are dictatorships left in Latin America, Haiti and Cuba. Those are 
the only two that have never participated in this School of the 
Americas. If we want to talk statistics, look at that.
  What this bill is is Castro's last gasp. He must really be enjoying 
this, and hoping that they can close down this school. Jesus Christ had 
12 Apostles, one of whom went wrong. You would not tell the other 11 to 
disburse because one went wrong. John Wayne Gacey murdered 33 people. I 
do not know where he went to high school, but I would not close it 
down. I suspect some people from that school were pretty decent people.
  This is a non sequitur. It does not follow. Yes, there are bad 
people. Yes, some of them go to our schools. However, are the schools 
bad? No. These are American schools, taught by American military. It is 
a non sequitur. It does not follow that some people have done wrong. 
They have done wrong despite what they were taught, not because of it.
  This is an unwise, to put the most euphemistic tone on it, an unwise 
amendment, and I hope it is resoundingly defeated.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I would inquire how much time I have 
remaining.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Rahall). The time of the gentleman from 
Missouri [Mr. Skelton] has expired. The gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Kennedy] has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin [Mr. Barrett].
  Mr. BARRETT of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of 
the Kennedy amendment to prohibit the use of funds for the Army's 
School of the Americas. This amendment is about where we have been in 
the past and about where we want to go in the future. Are we going to 
continue to uphold a tradition of human rights abuse, or are we going 
to truly promote democracy and peace in this hemisphere and around the 
world?
  The evidence against the School of the Americas is overwhelming:
  Manuel Noriega is a graduate; 124 of the 247 Colombian officers cited 
for human rights violations attended the school; and two-thirds of the 
Salvadoran soldiers cited by the truth commission for murder, torture, 
and disappearances trained at the School of the Americas.
  A ``yes'' vote today is not going to erase the human rights tragedies 
that have occurred in Latin America, but a ``yes'' vote will say loud 
and clear that the United States will no longer permit outrageous 
abuses of human rights by U.S.-trained foreign militaries. We have 
started to see positive changes taking place in some countries of this 
hemisphere, and we need to further the progress that has been made. A 
vote for this amendment will do just that.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I wish to advise the House of my absence for 
part of the debate on H.R. 4301, the National Defense Authorization Act 
for fiscal year 1995.
  Consequently, I want to explain why I requested to be paired as a 
``nay'' vote to the amendment offered by my friend, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts. I appreciate the honesty of his motives in offering this 
amendment to eliminate operations and maintenance funding for the U.S. 
Army School of the Americas [SOA]. But I disagree with his assessment 
of the school and its graduates. The closure of the SOA would be 
detrimental to our relationship with Latin American countries, and 
could hinder progress in human rights efforts in those countries.
  The SOA was established under President John F. Kennedy's Alliance 
for Progress from the existing U.S. Army Caribbean Training Center in 
Panama. In 1984, the SOA was moved from Panama to Fort Benning, GA. It 
has only been since the early 1980's that human rights instruction and 
emphasis has been a part of the curriculum. Most of the individuals 
labeled ``dictators'' in various reports and publications attended the 
school long before the SOA emphasized human rights. And since the 
inclusion of human rights training at the SOA, the curriculum is 
structured so that each student receives, on average, 30 minutes of 
human rights training and/or exposure every day.
  The purpose of the SOA is to provide guidance to Latin American 
military personnel to responde to drug trafficking, natural disasters, 
and human rights. The SOA emphasizes the role of a professional 
military force in a democratic society. I support these objectives, as 
democratically elected civilian governments of Latin America support 
them. They welcome the opportunity to have their soldiers educated at 
the SOA because of its emphasis on civilian control of military forces.
  Each year, soldier from Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa 
Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, 
Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela, and the United 
States attend the SOA. No other school in the world with such a small 
operations budget brings together future civilian and military leaders 
of 16 countries in a purposeful effort to prepare for the future, 
strengthen alliances within a hemispheric region, and increase mutual 
understand, cooperation, and the reinforcement of the principles of 
democracy among neighboring countries.
  Last October, the United States strengthened the selection process 
for candidates seeking to attend the SOA. This process includes 
checking names by U.S. intelligence agencies and State Department 
security officers. In narcotics-producing countries, the Drug 
Enforcement Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other law 
enforcement agencies evaluate possible candidates for any record of 
criminality, drug trafficking, or human rights abuses. The revised 
process makes it far more likely that human rights abusers, criminals, 
drug traffickers, and those associated with them, will not become 
students at the SOA.
  We should understand that the SOA takes on the very difficult task of 
teaching students who often come from countries with long histories of 
dictatorships and abuse, the value of promoting human rights. It is 
difficult to quantify the number of abuses that the SOA's training has 
prevented, so this debate often turns to a name-calling game that has 
little practical value. Yes, some 100 of the 58,000 graduates have 
documented human rights abuses. But, we must not forget about the other 
57,900 graduates. Over 100 SOA graduates served or currently serve 
their nation and its people from the highest levels of civilian and 
military office--from chief executive to commander of major military 
units. Furthermore, hundreds of SOA graduates currently occupy 
positions of leadership and command at all levels in their military and 
support democratically elected national leaders.
  For example, SOA graduate Gen. Hernan Jose Guzman, Colombian Army 
commander, led a determined effort to curtail human rights abuses by 
initiating innovative programs such as the assignment of judges to 
accompany brigades during counterinsurgency operations. Their presence 
helped ensure that the civil rights of all personnel were protected. 
Another graduate, Brig. Gen. Eumenes Fuguet Borregales, the current 
Director of Operations of the Venezuelan Army Staff, helped put down 
coup attempts in Caracas--February and November, 1992--while Commander 
of the 31st Infantry Brigade. This list could go on.
  In the early eighties, El Salvador was accused of about 2,000 human 
rights violations per month; in the latter part of the decade, that 
figure dropped to approximately 20 each month. Although SOA cannot take 
all the credit, almost 50 percent of El Salvadoran officers have 
graduated from the school since 1986.
  Let me make one final observation. If Congress closes the SOA, it 
will negatively affect our ability to have a meaningful and cost-
effective vehicle to promote democracy and human rights within the 
ranks of the Latin American military. The State Department, Pentagon, 
and participating Latin American governments all firmly believe the 
existing SOA program is the best approach to achieving important 
national security and foreign policy objectives. If SOA were abolished, 
training for Latin American military personnel would become more 
expensive and fewer officers and enlisted personnel would be afforded 
exposure to U.S. training and values. Opportunities to develop joint 
peacekeeping with Latin American nations and exposure to human rights 
and democratization training would be reduced. And, the United States 
would lose a valuable vehicle that exposes non-English-speaking 
officers and noncommissed officers from Latin America to democratic 
values.
  When objectively reviewed, we cannot dispute the fact that the 
overwhelming majority of SOA graduates honorably serve their countries 
as professional men and women. Clearly, there is no correlation between 
reported misconduct by individual SOA graduates and the professional 
education and training they received at the school. All the evidence, 
anecdotal or empirical, would lead you to the opposite conclusion.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment 
to end funding for the School of the Americas and urge my colleagues to 
do the same.
  Last year, I voted against this amendment because I believed that it 
was important to try and impress upon the Latin American military 
officers who trained at the school American values, especially respect 
for human rights and democracy.
  However, it is now clear to me that the school has failed to achieve 
those objectives. Instead of providing foreign military officers with 
respect for human rights, the school's graduates have become some of 
the worst human rights abusers in the world. Many of the graduates 
returned to their home countries to participate in the violent 
overthrow of their governments and seize power themselves. The fact of 
the matter is that the School of the Americas has been a failure.
  We have heard many times during this debate that defense cuts are 
hurting the American men and women who have signed up to serve our 
country. Just today, when the Appropriations Committee marked up the 
military construction bill, we heard how defense cuts were resulting in 
the cancellation of many housing programs for military families. In my 
own State, the National Guard's Camp Smith is desperately in need of 
new housing. Camp Smith's officers, NCO's, and enlisted men and women 
are all living in cramped, dilapidated quarters. But the resources were 
not available to fund new housing at the camp.
  If we cannot even afford to adequately house our own soldiers, how 
can we continue to operate this school whose teaching is not achieving 
its stated purpose. On this item, it is time that we get our priorities 
in order.
  I hope my colleagues will join me this year in voting in support of 
this important amendment.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I consider it both a duty and a privilege 
to join in opposition to funding for the School of the Americas.
  This is not a school but a scandal. It is a training ground for 
dictators and thugs like Noriega and D'Aubuisson--who get their 
training in America with American taxpayers' dollars, and then go home 
and use their training to oppress and murder their own people.
  This school for atrocities costs American taxpayers some $40 million 
a year, if we count in salaries and living expenses for the trainees or 
perks like free trips to Disney World. What we get in return is that we 
get to be identified with tyranny and oppression.
  This is not just a boondoggle, but a shameful and murderous 
boondoggle which discredits the United States at the same time that it 
kills the people whose welfare we claim to support. End the killing and 
the waste and stop this scandal.
  Mr. REED. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy]. Simply 
stated, the School of the Americas remains the most effective way to 
ensure that Latin America military personnel respect human rights and 
the authority of the emerging democratic governments in that region.
  As the only West Point graduate serving in this body, I am most 
sensitive to the heinous deeds perpetrated by individuals trained by 
the U.S. Army. However, I am also acutely aware of the great 
contribution that military personnel can make to a democracy. It is for 
both of these reasons that I support preserving funding for the School 
of the Americas.
  Unfortunately, the positive contributions made by the vast majority 
of graduates of the School of the Americas are forgotten amidst the 
talk of those few individuals who have attended the school and later 
been implicated in human rights violations. In fact, of the 58,000 
officers that have graduated from this institution over the past 31 
years, over 99.3 percent have gone on to serve their countries in a 
professional and admirable fashion.
  Typically, though, the U.S. Army is not satisified with a failure 
rate of seven-tenths of 1 percent. In addition to incorporating 
mandatory human rights training into the school's curriculum creating 
an external review board, the Army has also thoroughly revised the 
selection process by which candidates gain admission to the school. 
This new standardized screening process requires all potential students 
to earn admission based on a demonstrated history of their respect for 
the law and human rights.
  Admittedly, there is no guarantee that these changes will prevent 
future graduates from betraying the democratic ideals drilled into them 
at Fort Benning. However, it would be even more disingenuous to claim 
that closing the School of the Americas would prevent future human 
rights abuses from occurring.
  Mr. Chairman, it is clear that we must do all we can to nurture the 
growth of democracy in Latin America. Keeping the School of the 
Americas open is critical to that effort because it is there that the 
men and women of the U.S. military interact and communicate most 
effectively with their Latin American counterparts.
  I urge my colleagues to vote against this well intentioned but 
misguided amendment.
  Mr. HAMBURG. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Kennedy 
amendment to terminate funding for the School of the Americas.
  This amendment will cut $2.5 million for the school, a small fraction 
of the amount we spend on defense in this country. But this amendment 
is not just about dollar savings; its about what those dollars fund.
  There can be no mistake that the School of the Americas has trained 
some of the most despised and corrupt military officers in Latin 
America. A list of their graduates reads like a rogue's gallery of 
individuals that have wreaked havoc and destruction on the people of 
Latin America.
  Roberto D'Aubisson, Leopoldo Galtieri, Manuel Noriega. Respect and 
promotion of human rights do not spring to mind when these names are 
read. Graduates of the School of the Americas have planned and carried 
out some of the most heinous crimes in this hemisphere, including the 
murder of six Jesuit priests in El Salvador.
  The United States, in the course of the past decade, has spent 
roughly $6 billion to wage war in El Salvador. That war is over. The 
Nation as a whole is reconciling its past and moving towards a future 
based on democratic ideals and respect for human rights.
  Our foreign policy should reflect this. We have spent billions of 
dollars to wage war, and we should now be working to ensure that a new 
mutual relationship with El Salvador based on democracy and human 
rights is established. Continued funding for the School of the Americas 
is an impediment to that process.
  People across this Nation are tired of their tax dollars being used 
in this way. Bill Thompson from my district has joined with people from 
across the country on the steps of the Capitol for the past month, 
fasting against continued funding of the School.
  I urge you to support this amendment and in doing so support the 
people of this Nation, the people of Latin America, and the future of 
U.S.-Latin American relations.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. All time has expired.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Under the rule, the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Dellums] has that right, and is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I have tried to listen to both sides of 
the aisle on this debate. I have a few remarks to make before we vote.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by my 
distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Kennedy]. I support this amendment, not, Mr. Chairman, because there 
are not good and honorable U.S. personnel currently employed at the 
school; not because there are not any School of the Americas graduates 
who moved on without becoming heinous human rights abusers; and, 
finally, not because I wish to deny Latin American military the 
opportunity to obtain training in our country.
  Rather, Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment because during the cold 
war ordinary people in Latin America came to see the school as the U.S. 
military institution at which their most brutal and vicious oppressors 
honed their military skills. Several of the previous speakers have 
outlined specifically who those persons were. I choose not to speak to 
it further.
  Let me say there have been, on numerous occasions, Members who have 
arisen in the well of the House to talk about sending signals to other 
parts of the world about our commitment to democracy, our commitment to 
human rights, sending signals from this Congress. We have an 
opportunity from these Chambers to send a signal.
  The people of the region, Mr. Chairman, fought long and hard to free 
themselves of oppressive regimes. In some cases like Haiti, Mr. 
Chairman, the struggle continues. However, in the many years that it 
has been in existence, the School of the Americas has not exactly 
established an outstanding reputation as promoting democracy, 
protecting human rights, or condemning or isolating brutal militaries.
  The cold war, Mr. Chairman, and all of its anxieties are behind us. 
The cold war is over. We must now, through the adoption of this 
amendment, in this gentleman's humble opinion, signal to our neighbors 
that we are at last free to pursue regional relationships that are 
healthy, dignified, and respectful.
  Mr. Chairman, these are the cornerstones of which the promotion of 
true democracy rests, and the establishment of mutual beneficial ties 
in a multiplicity of spheres, at a multiplicity of levels. That is the 
signal here.
  We often know that we do many things that speak to symbolism. What 
better form of symbolism, Mr. Chairman, to say that we walk away from 
the tyranny of training oppressors.
  If our Latin American neighbors perceive us as operating a school 
that has done that, what better way to do it in a post-cold-war 
environment than to get rid of that?
  Mr. Chairman, with the passage of this amendment, Latin American 
military personnel, and this speaks to the issue that our distinguished 
minority whip raised, the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich], they 
would be free and welcome to continue receiving military training in 
the United States. However, instead of being isolated in a so-called 
Latin American school environment, why not train them in the same 
places that we train every other leader throughout the world?
  It sends an incredibly bad message, given the history of oppression 
and violence that has taken place in this hemisphere from the School of 
the Americas.
  So for those who say we need training, there is no problem about 
training. There is no lack of capacity. However, why train in the 
School of the Americas and train other world leaders someplace else? 
Let them all train together. They can benefit from the military-to-
military contact that speaks to civilian rule and democratic 
principles.

  Finally, Mr. Chairman, the Kennedy amendment gives the United States 
an important opportunity to signal a new beginning, symbolically as 
well as substantively, in our dealings with the region. It presents and 
represents an opportunity to break, both symbolically and 
substantially, with all of the errors and all of the pain of the past.
  I would argue that we step forward boldly into a new reality, into a 
new future, into a new set of relationships. I urge my colleagues to 
vote for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Kennedy].
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I have said on other occasions that I have been amazed 
at the fact that our maker has endowed us with minds that allow us to 
look at the same facts and arrive at conclusions 180 degrees apart from 
one another.

                              {time}  1250

  Having said that, I never cease to be amazed at the agility of the 
minds of our liberal friends. They can stand reason on its head.
  Someone said not long ago that liberals cause arthritis. I do not 
know if that is true or not. But they cause all kinds of other 
mischief. Today is a good example.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Darden].
  Mr. DARDEN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the distinguished ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Armed Services yielding to me, and 
I join with my colleagues from Georgia and my former colleagues from 
the Committee on Armed Services in opposing in the most strong as 
possible terms this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, The purpose of the School of the Americas is to develop 
and conduct doctrinally sound, relevant, and cost-effective military 
training. It is designed to foster cooperation among Latin American 
armies, to promote military professionalism, and to expand knowledge of 
United States customs and democratic traditions to the armed forces of 
Latin America.
  The question then arises, is the School of the Americans meeting 
these objectives? In my opinion, there is no doubt that this 
institution is an overall success story.
  The School of the Americas has laid a strong democratic base for the 
more than 58,000 Latin American and Caribbean military officers, 
cadets, and noncommissioned officers who have successfully completed 
the professional military education and training courses. Without this 
school there is no way to tell how many Latin Americans would have 
faired at the hands of their leaders. There is no way to tell how many 
might have been treated inhumanely and denied the basic fairness 
associated with democratic principles. But the presence of this school 
has been an important reason that democracy now flourishes in Latin 
America.
  I will not deny that several students of the School of the Americas 
have been abusive to the citizens of their nation. However, I would 
suggest that these abuses are not a product of the School of the 
Americas. These abuses would have occurred regardless of participation 
in the school's courses. I do not believe that anyone here really 
believes that this school is teaching Latin Americans to return to 
their country and deny the principles of democracy and violate human 
rights. That is inconceivable and it simply is not happening.
  What has happened is that a small percentage of graduates of the 
school have returned to their country and been abusive. But I submit, 
this is the responsibility of the individual, not the School of the 
Americas. We simply cannot close an institution because a small 
percentage of participants are bad. If we closed every institution that 
had a few bad participants, none of us would come to work Monday 
because we would have to close Congress.
  In closing, Mr. Chairman, the School of the Americas is critical if 
the democratic gains we have made in Latin America are to continue. I 
urge opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Hunter].
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, the School of the Americas is taught by your military 
officers. Those military officers are your neighbors, your friends in 
some cases, your children, your grandchildren, and who can say that 
associating with American officers the caliber of Colin Powell is not 
going to make those particular Latin American officers most honest, 
more supportive of democracy and more in keeping with our traditions 
and values?
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. 
Laughlin].
  Mr. LAUGHLIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding and I 
would say that my friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts is right in 
the facts he cited but the gentleman did not cite all the facts and, 
that is, there have been over 58,000 Latin American officers being 
exposed to democracy in America and where better should we expose those 
people that come from regions of the world to democracy than in our own 
country where our military has a history of being subservient to 
civilian control?
  Mr. Chairman, we have heard all the horrible examples that have been 
cited. Let me give two success stories of the graduates:
  First, none of the Haiti rulers today in power went to that school. 
Second, General Guzman, Colombian army commander, has instituted human 
rights reform by assigning judges to the brigades as they go out in the 
field. Third, Brig. Gen. Borregales has helped put down coup attempts 
in Venezuela.
  Mr. Chairman, this is what democracy training at the School of the 
Americas is about.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Solomon].
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Kennedy amendment. 
This is an extremely ill-advised idea, based on sensationalism and 
hyped-up charges against a key part of our strategy to spread democracy 
in Latin America. And the School of the Americas is that key part of 
our strategy.
  Over 58,000 graduates, the overwhelming majority of whom have never 
ever been implicated in human rights abuses, have returned home to 
serve their countries honorably. And who today would claim that our 
Latin American strategy has not been working, Mr. Speaker? That is, who 
except Fidel Castro and the thug who runs Haiti, the only two remaining 
dictators in Latin America?
  In the early 1980's, Latin America was almost completely run by 
dictators. It was awash in civil war and violent repression. Today, as 
I said it is just these two pathetic thugs in Havana and Port-au-
Prince.
  Our military training of these people works. To those who say that we 
encourage and even teach repression to Latin American officers, I would 
offer the example of El Salvador. Would the supporters of this 
amendment really claim that repression in El Salvador increased in 
proportion with our military involvement? The facts say otherwise.
  In 1981, death squad killings exceeded 800 per month. By 1987, after 
several years of U.S. involvement, including training at the School of 
the Americas, total political killings were under 100.
  Mr. Chairman, today Latin America is making great strides toward 
democracy. Political violence is way down. Free-market economics has 
conquered Marxism. The unbearably stupid and stultifying doctrines of 
Third World ideology and liberation theology are on the ash heap of 
history.
  But let's face it. The military is deeply entrenched in Latin 
American history and culture. Rather than pretend this isn't so, as 
this amendment does, we need to recognize reality and continue to work 
to make that reality better.
  Mr. Chairman let's kill this very bad amendment.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Gilman].
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, this is not an easy issue. Both sides have 
made valid arguments about whether the School of the Americas should be 
maintained or terminated.
  I strongly support continued funding for the School of the Americas. 
However, my support is with an important qualification--that the 
changes the administration has told us are underway be implemented 
promptly and unconditionally.
  This includes changes in the courses of instruction, the amount of 
human rights training, the candidate vetting process, the creation and 
implementation of an outside civilian advisory board, and opening the 
school to a larger number of civilian instructors and students.
  The United States Army has a positive contribution to make in the 
evolution of Latin American militaries. Our values as a society can 
be--and have been--transmitted to a large number of Latin officers 
through the School of the Americas.
  This is not to ignore the number of Latin officers who have committed 
abuses after being trained at the school. I do not believe, however, 
that their subsequent conduct resulted from the training they received 
at the school. They were bad apples, pure and simple.
  Based on a recent joint State Department-U.S. Army briefing for 
Foreign Affairs Committee staff, the School of the Americas recognizes 
that the cold war is over and that the school must reflect new 
missions, including counternarcotics, peacekeeping, and demining.
  We need an effective mechanism to develop and conduct doctrinally 
sound, relevant, and cost-effective military training; to foster 
cooperation with Latin American armies; to promote military 
professionalism; and to expand knowledge of United States democratic 
traditions to Latin armed forces.
  Rather than arbitrarily discontinuing the School of the Americas, we 
would be better served by requiring that we support it and make it live 
up to the legislative mandates that attended its establishment.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Dornan].
  (Mr. DORNAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DORNAN. Mr. Chairman, a former Member who left here in disgrace 
graduated from my college. I do not want to shut it down.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Rahall). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was recorded.
  The vote was taken by electronic device and there were--ayes 175, 
noes 217, not voting 46, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 190]

                               AYES--175

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allard
     Andrews (ME)
     Applegate
     Baesler
     Barca
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Beilenson
     Berman
     Blackwell
     Blute
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Byrne
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carr
     Clay
     Clayton
     Coble
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Coyne
     de Lugo (VI)
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dooley
     Duncan
     Durbin
     Edwards (CA)
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Fingerhut
     Fish
     Foglietta
     Ford (TN)
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Glickman
     Gonzalez
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamburg
     Harman
     Hastings
     Hefner
     Hinchey
     Hochbrueckner
     Hoke
     Holden
     Inslee
     Jacobs
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Kopetski
     Kreidler
     Lambert
     LaRocco
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Long
     Lowey
     Maloney
     Manton
     Margolies-Mezvinsky
     Markey
     Martinez
     Matsui
     McCloskey
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Meyers
     Mfume
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Moran
     Morella
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Norton (DC)
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Penny
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Ravenel
     Richardson
     Roemer
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sangmeister
     Schenk
     Schiff
     Schroeder
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sharp
     Shays
     Shepherd
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Stark
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Studds
     Stupak
     Swett
     Swift
     Synar
     Taylor (NC)
     Thompson
     Thurman
     Torkildsen
     Unsoeld
     Upton
     Valentine
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Volkmer
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Wheat
     Williams
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Yates

                               NOES--217

     Andrews (NJ)
     Andrews (TX)
     Archer
     Armey
     Bacchus (FL)
     Bachus (AL)
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bentley
     Bereuter
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Bliley
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (FL)
     Bunning
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Chapman
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Coppersmith
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Darden
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeLay
     Derrick
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fields (TX)
     Fowler
     Franks (CT)
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Gallo
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Green
     Gunderson
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hayes
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilliard
     Hoagland
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Huffington
     Hughes
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hutto
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Inhofe
     Istook
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, Sam
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kennelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klein
     Knollenberg
     Kyl
     Lancaster
     Lantos
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Levy
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Lloyd
     Lucas
     Machtley
     Mann
     Manzullo
     Mazzoli
     McCandless
     McCrery
     McCurdy
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McMillan
     McNulty
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Murtha
     Myers
     Ortiz
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Payne (VA)
     Peterson (FL)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce (OH)
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Reed
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Ridge
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Romero-Barcelo (PR)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Rowland
     Royce
     Rush
     Santorum
     Sarpalius
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Shaw
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Solomon
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stump
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Tejeda
     Torricelli
     Traficant
     Tucker
     Underwood (GU)
     Visclosky
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Weldon
     Whitten
     Wise
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                             NOT VOTING--46

     Barlow
     Becerra
     Brooks
     Brown (CA)
     Calvert
     Clement
     Crane
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Emerson
     Faleomavaega (AS)
     Farr
     Flake
     Ford (MI)
     Gephardt
     Gordon
     Grams
     Grandy
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     Lehman
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (FL)
     Livingston
     McCollum
     Michel
     Miller (CA)
     Murphy
     Neal (NC)
     Pickle
     Roberts
     Rose
     Rostenkowski
     Sawyer
     Slattery
     Smith (IA)
     Smith (TX)
     Stenholm
     Sundquist
     Thomas (CA)
     Thomas (WY)
     Thornton
     Torres
     Towns
     Washington
     Wilson

                              {time}  1314

  The Clerk announced the following pairs:
  On this vote:

       Mr. Slattery for, with Mr. Dingell against.
       Mr. Miller of California for, with Mr. LaFalce against.
       Mr. Sawyer for, with Mr. Calvert against.
       Mr. Becerra for, with Mr. Kolbe against.
       Mr. Washington for, with Mr. Thomas of California, against.
       Mr. Grams for, with Mr. Emerson against.

  Mr. RICHARDSON changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I do 
so in order to explain to my colleagues that it would be the intention 
of this chairman to move that the Committee do now rise.
  The reason that we do so is because there still remains important 
debate on two significant amendments, one offered by the distinguished 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] and one offered by this 
gentleman, regarding the selective service draft registration. These 
are important issues. They need to be discussed and debated and voted 
upon. The problem we have is one of time constraint.
  Mr. Chairman, I have been asked either to have the debate and roll 
votes over until Monday, which seems to me to be a rather bizarre 
process because I think the votes ought to occur at the time we debate, 
otherwise by Monday Members are not even sure what they are voting on.
  So it is the judgment of his person, if everyone concurs, that the 
Committee would now rise and come back on Monday, have the debate on 
these issues, vote on Monday rather than rolling the votes, which seems 
to me to be a much more rational way to proceed.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DELLUMS. I certainly yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. SOLOMON. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I think that is certainly a reasonable request. The 
Committee on Rules is about to come to an agreement on a rule for the 
remainder of this most important bill that will come before this body 
this year or any other year. We need to meet this afternoon, and we 
cannot meet if we are on this floor during the next hours on these two 
amendments. I think it is a reasonable request, and certainly we on 
this side would agree to it.
  Mr. DELLUMS. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. MONTGOMERY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DELLUMS. I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. 
Montgomery].
  Mr. MONTGOMERY. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to have an idea, maybe the gentleman has 
stated it, does he have any idea when these last two amendments would 
come up? I am interested in the suspensions.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Reclaiming my time, these two amendments, the regular 
order would be to finish the amendments that were laid out in the first 
rule that we adopted. So it would mean that the Solomon amendment and 
the Dellums amendment would be the first two items to be debated and 
voted upon. That is the regular order under the proceedings of the 
first rule.
  Mr. MONTGOMERY. Mr. Chairman, we have suspension bills. I would 
assume that we would go back on this bill after the suspensions.
  Mr. DELLUMS. That is a call of the leadership. I am simply saying 
that at the time that the DOD authorization bill, H.R. 4301, comes to 
the floor, these two amendments would be debated first.

                              {time}  1320

  Mr. Chairman, as I understand it, the leadership will make a 
scheduling announcement later, but these two items will be debated 
first when we come back on this bill.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DELLUMS. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, what I am concerned about is most of the 
Members will not be back in this body to participate in that debate. If 
we just come back, and we take up both of these bills, most of the 
Members are going to be on airplanes across America coming back and 
will not have the opportunity to participate.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Not if they do the suspensions first; and, No. 2, this 
gentleman has to fly all the way to California. But my job is also to 
be back here Monday, and I plan to do that, as I am sure the gentleman 
has planned to do.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DELLUMS. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, there are 17 suspension on Monday. There 
is no chance any debate will take place on this before 5 o'clock. I am 
sure every Member will be back in time for that.
  Mr. DELLUMS. So, Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is going to be 
protected; no problem.
  Mr. SYNAR. Mr.Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 4301, the 
Department of Defense authorization for fiscal year 1995. This 
legislation makes great strides to balance our national security needs 
with Federal deficit concerns. H.R. 4301 accomplishes this goal and 
bolsters our ability to conduct national security given the end of the 
cold war and the domestic economic situation.
  One such stride is a provision in the committee report which deals 
with an issue that I have had an interest in since the early 1980's. At 
issue is the possible use of the B-1B in maritime support roles for the 
Navy. During these time of tighter budgets, like many of my colleagues, 
I have concerns for protecting our military's state of readiness. 
Specifically, with an aging carrier fleet and a reduction in the number 
of new carrier battle groups, the time is right to revisit the issue of 
assigning the B-1B to maritime roles.
  In its' report, the committee has asked the Department of Defense to 
give serious consideration to the feasibility of the B-1B being used in 
maritime roles. The committee directs Secretary Perry to review this 
option and report back to the relevant committees no later than April 
15, 1995. Mr. Chairman, because the committee has taken this action I 
chose not to ask for an amendment to H.R. 4301 asking for such a study. 
However, I wait with great interest for the results of this study and 
stand prepared to take the necessary actions to ensure that Secretary 
Perry and the Department give this option every consideration.
  Currently, the Navy plans to retire its' A-6E force by 1998. This 
will leave the Navy without an aircraft having all weather strike 
capabilities until the proposed Joint Advanced Strike Technology [JAST] 
Program produces an operational aircraft. Such an aircraft is not 
estimated to be operational until 2007. The ability of the carrier 
battle group to remain on station as a demonstration of U.S. interest, 
concern, and resolve cannot be duplicated by any Air Force. Given the 
essential role of the carrier battle group in U.S. diplomacy, it is 
important that they are in a constant state of readiness.
  Simultaneously, Russia is maintaining a strong Navy, strongly 
oriented to the anticarrier mission. It is making efforts to develop 
new highly capable antiship missiles, for use by their navy and for 
sale to others. Many of the Republics in the former Soviet Union are 
obtaining Naval and other forces which pose potential threats to U.S. 
carrier battle groups and maintain a presence in areas of concern to 
the United States. This will without question place our ships and 
sailors at risk. Unfortunately the tactical protection through an all 
weather strike capability can only be achieved through tactical control 
of the assets by the battle group commander which cannot be based in 
the United States.

  Recently, Gen. Merrill McPeak of the Air Force recently called for 
the 30 to 36 B-1B's be placed in ``attrition reserve'' as called for in 
the Clinton administration's Bottom-Up Review [BUR]. Under this plan, 
these aircraft will not undergo the modification program projected for 
the B-1B fleet to fit it for conventional missions as called for in 
H.R. 4301. The Congress has spent $20 billion--$30 billion in today's 
dollars--on the B-1B and less than 10 years after the first delivery 
the Air Force is planning to scrap about one-third of its fleet. This 
is the sort of waste which breeds popular cynicism about the Pentagon, 
the Congress, and Government.
  I suggest that the Air Force be forced to modify the entire B-1B 
fleet. If the Air Force finds a surplus of the aircraft, I believe this 
surplus could be put to good use by the Navy, pending the 
reintroduction of a carrier based aircraft with all weather strike 
capabilities. There are several reasons why the B-1B's should be 
considered for helping to project naval capabilities throughout the 
world. The two most important being readiness and taxpayer savings. 
Using the B-1B in this role is an opportunity for the American taxpayer 
to get the most value out of a ready strategic investment. Therefore, 
Mr. Speaker the B-1B's must be used to defend our sea lanes and 
compensate for bomber shortages created by our aging bomber and carrier 
fleets.
  There is consensus among the American people and this Congress that 
we commit considerable amounts of taxpayer dollars to our national 
defense. This Congress must do everything in its' power to ensure that 
our investment in national defense is maximized. Therefore, we must 
guarantee that this government make the fullest use of the weapons 
systems it procures. It is in this spirit that I urge my colleagues to 
support H.R. 4301.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Kildee) having assumed the chair, Mr. Rahall, Chairman pro tempore of 
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported 
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 
4301) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1995 for military 
activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military 
personnel strengths for fiscal year 1995, and for other purposes, had 
come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________