[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 108 (Monday, August 8, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 8, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT

  Mr. INOUYE. I ask for the immediate consideration of the pending 
business, the defense appropriations bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 4650) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1995, and 
     for other purposes.

  The Senate resumed consideration of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska is recognized.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, on Friday, Senator Inouye introduced the 
bill, H.R. 4650, and spoke to the priorities addressed by the committee 
in forwarding the bill to the Senate.
  The chairman has summarized the bill in detail. I would like to focus 
on just a few of the important initiatives that we recommend to the 
Senate today.
  This bill has one primary theme--taking care of the men and women who 
serve in our Armed Forces. Consistent with the authorization bill, we 
increased pay over the budget, and accelerated the retiree COLA.
  Several of us voted against the Warner-Sarbanes amendment during 
consideration of the armed services bill, because it forced the retiree 
COLA to compete with other critical defense programs.
  The approach taken in this bill fully funds the COLA, but places it 
where it belongs, with other mandatory accounts.
  This bill does more than simply increase pay for military personnel 
and their families. Recognizing the tremendous burden placed on 
military families by continuous deployments, we have introduced several 
new family support initiatives.
  First, $35 million is provided to improve the quality of child care 
for military families, and hold down costs.
  Second, $94 million is provided for family advocacy programs, to help 
in times of extraordinary need.
  Third, $13.3 million is provided for family support centers.
  I want to commend the chairman, Senator Inouye, for his leadership in 
this area and commitment to ensure that all military families can count 
on the resources they need.
  Of equal importance, this bill adds $1.3 billion in O&M over the 
amount provided in the House bill. That increase means readiness and 
combat effectiveness. We met that commitment by cutting lower priority 
programs.
  There is no money for peacekeeping in this bill. I will strongly 
oppose any effort to restore peacekeeping funds. Until the United 
Nations recognizes the hundreds of millions spent by the United States, 
through the Department of Defense, no more money from DOD should go for 
peacekeeping.
  We cut the funding for environmental studies and analyses. We capped 
spending on the NATO headquarters. That is how we paid the bill to take 
care of our people.
  This bill fully conforms with the authorized account limits with one 
exception--equipment for the National Guard and Reserves. Again, the 
Pentagon failed to meet this need.
  We listened to the Joint Chiefs and Secretary Perry in funding key 
procurement and R&D programs.
  This bill funds the requested six C-17 airlifters--and approves the 
business settlement.
  We fully fund the Comanche helicopter for the Army, though I share 
the chairman's concern and dismay over how the Army has managed its 
aviation programs.
  The committee report raises concerns about the cost of the new attack 
submarine. I believe it is essential that we proceed with this program, 
as an alternative to Seawolf.
  I look forward to working with the chairman, and the Navy, to ensure 
that the new attack submarine is affordable and meets the Navy's 
military requirements.
  As evidenced by missions under way today in Bosnia, Iraq, Haiti, and 
Rwanda, the demands on our military did not end with the demise of the 
cold war.
  The bill we present today meets the essential needs of the 
Department, but with no margin for new requirements. The costs of any 
expanded missions in Bosnia, Haiti, and Rwanda are not funded in this 
bill as reported by the committee.
  On July 29, the committee included $170 million to meet the needs of 
the humanitarian relief mission in Rwanda. The adoption of that 
amendment was not an endorsement of the specific costs for the Rwanda 
mission; we are still waiting for details on those costs. The adoption 
of that amendment was not an open authorization for peacemaking or 
nation building in Rwanda. I do not support any such mission.
  The chairman's amendment reduced the supplemental request from the 
administration, and I commend the chairman for limiting these amounts. 
The chairman included a number of very specific limitations on the 
scope, duration, and definition of the mission to Rwanda. These are the 
minimum requirements.
  Mr. President, this bill does not provide sufficient funds to meet 
the full range of needs for our national security. We are placing too 
many demands on too few people, and attempting to continue production 
on too many weapons systems we may not be able to support in the 
future.
  We will not be able to recruit and retain the men and women we need 
for the Armed Forces if they are constantly away from home, engaged in 
missions of unclear purpose and duration.
  When the Congress meets next year, I will join with other Members to 
work to increase the share of spending for defense, and consider the 
restoration of the walls between the various discretionary accounts. 
Unless we change the missions facing our military, the funding proposed 
in the 5-year plan advocated by the administration, and reduced further 
by Congress, simply will not do the job.
  I wish to thank the chairman and the subcommittee staff for their 
hard work on this bill, in an environment of absolute bipartisan 
teamwork. This is the sixth bill the chairman and I have presented to 
the committee and the Senate.
  I know he shares my concerns about the adequacy of funding for 
defense, and I am committed to working with the chairman to ensure that 
we meet those critical needs.
  This bill is the best we can do, under the limits imposed on the 
committee by the 602(b) allocation. Despite my concerns, I urge all 
Members to support the bill, and to move the bill this week, so we can 
proceed immediately to conference with the House.
  Again, I thank the chairman for his courtesies; also, his very 
capable assistant, Richard Collins. And I again have nothing but praise 
for my assistant, Steve Cortese.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Simon). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me say at the outset, the majority 
leader is on the floor. As we normally do, we will work out an 
agreement on when and how to vote on Bosnia amendments. He has no 
objection to my laying mine down now and he will pursue that tomorrow.


                           Amendment No. 2479

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk for myself, 
Senator Lieberman, Senator McCain, Senator Moynihan, Senator Wellstone, 
Senator Exon, Senator Feingold, Senator Hatch, Senator DeConcini, 
Senator Lugar, I ask Senator Helms be added as cosponsor, and I ask for 
its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is it the intention to offer this amendment to 
the bill?
  Mr. DOLE. Yes; the amendment will be offered to the bill. I will ask 
it be laid aside.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the committee amendments 
are set aside. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Dole] for himself and Mr. 
     Lieberman, Mr. McCain, Mr. Moynihan, Mr. Wellstone, Mr. Exon, 
     Mr. Feingold, Mr. Hatch, Mr. DeConcini, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. 
     Helms proposes an amendment numbered 2479.

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the appropriate place, add the following:

     SEC.   . TERMINATION OF ARMS EMBARGO.

       (1) Termination.--The President shall terminate the United 
     States arms embargo of the Government of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina no later than November 15, 1994 so that 
     Government may exercise its right of self-defense under 
     Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.
       (2) Definition.--As used in this section, the term ``United 
     States arms embargo of the Government of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina'' means the application to the Government of 
     Bosnia and Herzegovina of--
       (A) the policy adopted July 10, 1991, and published in the 
     Federal Register of July 19, 1991 (58 F.R. 33322) under the 
     heading `Suspension of Munitions Export Licenses to 
     Yugoslavia'; and
       (B) any similar policy being applied by the United States 
     Government as of the date of receipt of the request described 
     in paragraph (1) pursuant to request described in paragraph 
     (1) pursuant to which approval is denied for transfers of 
     defense articles and defense services to the former 
     Yugoslavia.
       (3) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     interpreted as authorization for deployment of United States 
     forces in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina for any 
     purpose, including training, support, or delivery of military 
     equipment.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas is recognized.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am offering this amendment on behalf of 
myself and the distinguished Senator from Connecticut, Senator 
Lieberman, and others. I am especially pleased that among the 
amendment's cosponsors, this time there are some who opposed the 
previous Dole-Lieberman amendment to end the U.S. arms embargo on 
Bosnia.
  We have not done anything in the text. It is essentially the same as 
it was, except it gives the President more than 3 months to terminate 
the United States arms embargo on the Government of Bosnia and 
Herzegovina. The embargo is to be terminated no later than November 15, 
1994.
  The intent of this amendment is the same, as well: to allow the 
Bosnian Government to exercise its inherent right to self-defense. That 
is what this debate has been all about time after time after time: 
Whether Bosnia, an independent nation, a member of the United Nations, 
has a right to self-defense. We think it is a right which is being 
violated by the U.N. arms embargo that was imposed on the former 
Yugoslavia, a state that no longer exists. There is no longer any 
Yugoslavia, so we cannot have an arms embargo on Yugoslavia.
  We all know that the administration is pursuing a relatively new 
multilateral approach through the so-called contact group. While the 
Bosnian Government unconditionally agreed to the contact group's 
partition plan, the Bosnian Serbs have rejected the contact group 
proposal at least four times.
  Mr. President, watching the events of the last few weeks makes me 
feel as if I am watching a rerun--a rerun of the spring of 1993, when 
the Vance-Owen plan was hailed as the new hope for peace. While some of 
the actors have changed, the plot and the dialog are still the same. 
Once again, the Bosnian Government has signed up to a bad deal; once 
again, the Bosnian Serbs are defiant; once again, there are unfulfilled 
promises of tough action; and, once again, the situation in Sarajevo 
and throughout Bosnia is rapidly deteriorating.
  The administration insists this time it is different, this time the 
international community is serious and tough. Well, maybe it is a 
problem with definition. But to me, last week's microscopic NATO air 
strike, which destroyed one 76 millimeter gun--that was the effect of 
the air strike--is not a sign of toughness. Indeed, it is another 
indication of lack of resolve to seriously respond to blatant Serbian 
violations of the NATO ultimatum and the NATO exclusion zones.
  Setting my skepticism of the contact group's approach aside, this 
amendment is intended to give the administration one last chance and 
more than 90 days to do what they said they would do for months now, 
and the President has been talking about opening it again, so I am 
encouraged. That would be to seek a U.N. Security Council vote on 
lifting the U.N. arms embargo on Bosnia.
  We are hearing signals from the French, and others, that maybe it is 
time to lift the embargo.
  The amendment is designed not for any confrontation with the 
President, but to give the President flexibility, give the President 
enough time up to November 15. And if it is not taken multilaterally, 
the United States would definitely end its involvement in this immoral 
and illegal arms embargo on November 15, 1994.
  By setting a November deadline, this amendment also gives those 
allies with troops on the ground in Bosnia time to redeploy or 
withdraw. We are not trying to put anybody else in harm's way. That 
never was the purpose of the amendments offered in the past by 
Republicans, Democrats, or both.
  According to statements made by Ambassador Chuck Redman to the DOD 
authorization conferees, the British and French said they need up to 90 
days to withdraw their forces. Now, some have argued that the United 
States cannot act unilaterally because of the potential effect on other 
U.N. embargoes. I believe this argument is used to confuse the issue 
and as a scare tactic.
  The arms embargo in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is the victim of 
international aggression, cannot be compared to the legal U.N. 
embargoes intended to punish aggressor states, such as Libya and Iraq. 
Bosnia is a friendly State. They have great respect for Americans. They 
appreciate what we have done. They appreciate what President Clinton 
has done. They appreciated the air strike last week, even though it was 
not particularly effective, not because of the Americans involved or 
anybody else but because of bad weather and, I think, very selective 
targets.
  I believe that we and our allies are capable of understanding the 
difference between the arms embargo in Bosnia and sanctions against 
Iraq and Libya.
  So the only question before us today is whether we will act to 
finally bring this matter to a close or whether we want to be here next 
year after another peace plan has failed debating whether the Bosnians 
should be allowed to exercise their inherent right to self-defense in 
the wake of 3 years of aggression and ethnic cleansing.
  Mr. President, I believe we must act now. I believe it would send a 
signal to Mr. Karadzic and others, who seem to be, as he said, all 
alone now in their defiance, after the Bosnians accepted a bad 
agreement, were urged by the contact group to accept a bad agreement, 
where they get 51 percent of their country back, and they are supposed 
to be happy. The Serbs are supposed to get 49 percent of their country, 
and they are not happy. It is true, the Serbs now have about 70 percent 
of Bosnia. It seems to me they have been the aggressor nation, and it 
is not a very just settlement in the first place.
  So, Mr. President, I strongly believe the United States must lead the 
world in doing what is just and right. I believe, as Senator Lieberman 
and others who cosponsored this amendment, this is just and right. This 
is bipartisan. An equal number, we hope, of Democrats and Republicans 
may support the amendment this time.
  Again, I believe it would send precisely the right signal to the 
Bosnian Serbs and will give the President the flexibility he needs.
  As I understand it, other Senators may want to speak on this 
amendment, if not this afternoon, maybe tomorrow morning.
  So I guess the amendment will be set aside if there are other 
amendments to be offered.
  Mr. HELMS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina is recognized.
  Mr. HELMS. I thank the Chair. I am glad to see my neighbor in the 
Dirksen Building presiding.
  What is the pending business, Mr. President?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Dole amendment, No. 2479.
  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that that amendment 
be set aside so that I may offer an amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


    Amendment No. 2480 to the Committee Amendment on Page 2, Line 15

       (Purpose: To limit military assistance and military sales 
     financing to the Government of Colombia until the President 
     certifies that it is fully cooperating in 
     counternarcotics efforts)

  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask 
that it be stated.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Helms] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 2480.

  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the Committee amendment, on page 2, line 15, 
     add the following:

     SEC.   . LIMITATION ON THE USE OF FUNDS FOR UNITED STATES 
                   COUNTERNARCOTICS PROGRAMS IN 
                   COLOMBIA.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, none of the funds appropriated by any provision of law 
     to carry out military assistance or FMF programs shall be 
     obligated or expended for the Government of Colombia, and 
     none of the funds appropriated by this Act shall be obligated 
     or expended for United States military activities in or with 
     Colombia, until the President determines and certifies to the 
     Congress that the Government of Colombia is taking actions 
     to--
       (1) apply vigorously all law enforcement resources to 
     investigate, track, capture, and incarcerate narcotics 
     kingpins and their accomplices;
       (2) create an ``elite corps'' of investigators to track 
     down corruption and prosecute those responsible for it or 
     otherwise involved in it;
       (3) reform Colombia's penal code, including increasing 
     penalties for drug traffickers and removing loopholes in the 
     plea-bargain system;
       (4) present to Colombia's Congress stringent anti-
     corruption legislation;
       (5) introduce new legislation to strengthen laws against 
     money-laundering; and
       (6) pursue international anti-narcotics initiatives, 
     including the creation of a Caribbean Basin multilateral 
     anti-narcotics force, controls on precursor chemicals, and 
     the adoption of a new inter-American convention to ban 
     financial safe havens for narcotics traffickers in this 
     Hemisphere.
       (b) Commercial Arms Exports Prohibited.--None of the funds 
     appropriated by any provision of law may be used to license 
     the commercial export of items on the United States Munitions 
     List under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act to 
     Colombia until the President makes the determination and 
     certification described in subsection (a).
       (c) Report Required.--Whenever the President makes a 
     certification under subsection (a), the President shall 
     submit to the Congress, together with such certification, a 
     report describing the actions taken by the Government of 
     Colombia upon which such certification is based.
       (d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) the term ``FMF'' means the foreign military financing 
     program under section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act; and
       (2) the term ``military assistance'' means assistance 
     provided under chapter 2 of part II of the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If the Senator from North Carolina will 
suspend--I am advised by the Parliamentarian--I have to ask whether 
there is objection to the Senator offering a second-degree amendment.
  Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from North Carolina is recognized.
  Mr. HELMS. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, yesterday, a distinguished citizen of Colombia was 
inaugurated as the new President, Ernesto Samper-Pizano. When I took 
note of that yesterday, I recalled that in July I received a very 
interesting and encouraging letter from President-elect Samper. I want 
to read it. He wrote:

                                                    July 15, 1994.
     Hon. Jesse A. Helms,
     Ranking Committee on Foreign Relations, Senate Dirksen Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Helms: Next month I will assume the Presidency 
     of Colombia at a very important time in the relations between 
     our two countries and in our common struggle against drug 
     trafficking. I am well aware of your dedication and interest 
     in this issue and I appreciate your efforts in support of 
     Colombia. As I prepare my administration for the challenges 
     which lie ahead, I wanted to take this opportunity to share 
     with you my views about the ways we can strengthen our fight 
     against drug trafficking.
       I know, in a very personal way, the kind of threat 
     drugtraffickers represent to our democracies. The four 
     bullets still lodged in my body are a constant reminder of 
     the 1989 Cartel attempt to assassinate me at Bogota 
     International Airport. I was lucky, unlike many of my 
     compatriots who have fallen victim of the brutal violence the 
     cartels have wreaked in my country.
       Once again, we are the target of their diabolic 
     machinations. The taping of telephone conversations between a 
     Cali Cartel leader and a journalist known to be on the 
     Cartel's payroll revealed their frustrated efforts to 
     infiltrate the campaign organizations of Colombia 
     presidential candidates.
       I was perfectly aware of this threat when I entered the 
     Presidential race. That is why I established an independent 
     moral ombudsman in my campaign. That is why my campaign books 
     and records have always been open to public scrutiny. I also 
     expelled several sympathizers when it became evident that 
     they were not up to our rigid ethical standards. We rejected 
     several contributions because of their unclear or obscure 
     origin. That is why I am completely confident that my 
     campaign was successful in rejecting drug traffickers 
     undercover efforts to spread their corrupting influence. 
     Nevertheless, I have called for a special investigation 
     to carefully examine all of these issues and will take 
     further action as needed to protect the integrity of my 
     government.
       Those who thought that the drug war was over with the 
     destruction of Pablo Escobar's organization were wrong. We 
     are entering what could be the last but decisive phase of the 
     drug war. The Cartels know that their campaign of terror and 
     intimidation has failed. Nevertheless, they will try to 
     regain the ground lost during the past years. The Cali Cartel 
     will rely on powerful weapons of choice: violence and fear, 
     bank accounts, legal loopholes, computer networks and 
     corruption.
       Today, the task is much more complex and the international 
     community has to readjust its strategy, sharpen its skills 
     and develop new legal and institutional tools. Starting on 
     the day of my inauguration, I will aggressively seek to 
     secure the tools we will need to win, both at home and 
     abroad. I invite the United States to join Colombia in 
     leading this effort.
       First, we will continue doing what we have done 
     successfully: vigorously applying all our law enforcement 
     resources to investigate, track and put in jail the drug 
     lords and their accomplices. We know who the bosses of the 
     Cali Cartel are and we will capture them. To achieve that 
     goal we need a continuous commitment from the U.S. in terms 
     of technical support, training, intelligence and evidence 
     sharing. We must establish a high-level bilateral commission 
     to permanently evaluate our cooperation, improve its 
     performance and promptly overcome any problem or obstacle.
       My administration will accelerate the reform of Colombia's 
     penal code, increasing the penalties for drug traffickers and 
     removing the loopholes in our plea-bargaining system. We will 
     not tolerate leniency.
       Drug traffickers failed in taking over our democracy 
     through terrorism and assassination. Now they want to destroy 
     it through infiltration and corruption. They will not 
     succeed. An ``elite corp'' of investigators will be created 
     to track down corruption and send the political cronies of 
     the cartels to jail and we will present to Colombia's 
     Congress stringent anti-corruption legislation. Additionally, 
     we will introduce new legislation to strengthen our laws 
     against money-laundering that should be enforced with the 
     support of a U.S.-Colombian financial crime task force, 
     conformed by our best prosecutors and experts.
       Equally important, we will urge the U.S. Congress to 
     establish mandatory targets for the reduction of domestic 
     drug consumption and to provide the resources needed to 
     achieve those targets.
       Our two countries cannot solely bear the burden of the 
     global war on drugs. Consequently, my administration will 
     work towards the enactment of the following initiatives:
       The creation of a Caribbean Basin multilateral anti-
     narcotics force.
       Joining current radar capabilities in a Hemispheric network 
     to track trafficking activities.
       The implementation of a global export monitoring system to 
     impose strict controls on the flows of precursor chemicals, 
     crucial to drug production, as well as assault and automatic 
     weapons used by cartel hitmen.
       The adoption of a new Inter-American convention to ban 
     financial safe havens in the hemisphere. Drug traffickers 
     cannot be allowed to enjoy the benefits of their ill-gotten 
     gains.
       These are concrete initiatives I will launch August 7th, 
     the day of my inauguration. I hope the United States will 
     choose to help Colombia win the drug war instead of being 
     paralyzed by the drug lords' disinformation campaign. I 
     invite the United States to redouble its fifth in the 
     determination and courage of Colombians by joining us again 
     in the difficult battles that lie ahead.
       My administration looks forward to working with you on 
     these issues and others of interest to both our countries.
           Sincerely,
                                            Ernesto Samper Pizano,
                                      President-elect of Colombia.

  Now, in beginning my remarks about the pending amendment, Mr. 
President, I wish to emphasize what I believe to be the absolute 
necessity of the Government of the United States to work with President 
Samper because a great deal can be accomplished to the benefit of both 
the United States and his country.
  As for the pending amendment, it was on July 15, Mr. President, that 
this Senate expressed concern about allegations of official corruption 
in Colombia. I was gratified that the Senate by a vote of 94 to zero 
approved a measure to provide foreign aid to Colombia once the 
President of the United States determines and certifies to Congress 
that the Government of Colombia is taking steps to investigate 
corruption and is continuing to cooperate in counternarcotics efforts.
  I hope it is understandable that I was astonished to learn later that 
when the House and Senate conferees met on the underlying legislation--
the fiscal year 1995 foreign aid appropriations--the House conferees 
vigorously objected to stipulating that either the President or the 
Secretary of State must give Congress assurances that the Colombian 
Government both is doing something about corruption and is continuing 
its narcotics cooperation. So the Senate amendment that I had offered--
and which was overwhelmingly and unanimously approved 94 to nothing--
did not make it into the foreign operations conference report.
  Now, Mr. President, I imagine there was rejoicing and jubilation in 
the villas of the drug traffickers after the Senate amendment on 
Colombia was dropped. I was disturbed to learn that the Colombian 
Ambassador to Washington had a little champagne party to mark the 
occasion of the dropping of the Helms amendment from the conference 
report. I understand that several State Department officials were 
present at the Colombian Embassy in Washington and joined in toasting 
the demise of the Helms amendment.
  The corrosive effect of narcotics corruption on the government and 
the people of Colombia is nothing to celebrate. We can rejoice only 
when the narcotics traffickers are put out of business.
  Mr. President, the pending amendment reflects continuing concerns as 
voiced by the Senate in July. It provides that no United States 
military assistance will be provided to Colombia and that no United 
States military activities be conducted in or with Colombia until the 
President of the United States certifies and reports to Congress that 
the Government of Colombia is taking actions:
  First, to apply vigorously all law enforcement resources to 
investigate, track, capture, and incarcerate narcotics kingpins and 
their accomplices;
  Second, to create an elite corps of investigators to track down 
corruption and prosecute those responsible for it or otherwise involved 
in it;
  Third, to reform Colombia's penal code, including increasing 
penalties for drug traffickers and removing loopholes in the plea 
bargain system;
  Fourth, to present to Colombia's Congress stringent anticorruption 
legislation;
  Fifth, to introduce new legislation to strengthen laws against money 
laundering; and.
  Sixth, to pursue international antinarcotics initiatives, including 
the creation of a Caribbean Basin multilateral antinarcotics force, 
control of precursor chemicals, and the adoption of a new Inter-
American convention to ban financial safe havens for narcotics 
traffickers in this hemisphere.
  Now, these six initiatives were proposed by the new President of 
Colombia whose letter I have just read into the Record. I reiterate 
that he was inaugurated yesterday. All six are his ideas to combat the 
narcotics cartels, to deal with corruption, and to continue cooperative 
counternarcotics efforts. They are good initiatives.
  Now, Mr. President, there was a great deal of misinformation and 
probably some intentional disinformation about the Helms amendment that 
was dropped by the conferees earlier. There will probably be some 
misinformation about this amendment, too, so perhaps I should clarify 
just a couple of points.
  First of all, I do not propose to criticize or question the 
sacrifices made by the Colombian people in our joint fight against the 
narcotics cartels. Mr. President, no people have seen more blood 
spilled in the fight against drugs than have the Colombians. The 
Colombian people have my admiration and heartfelt thanks. They know 
that, as does the new President of Colombia. The Colombian people also 
have the sincere gratitude of the American people for their 
contribution to the war against drugs.
  Second, we are not asking the Government of Colombia to certify 
anything to the United States. We are asking the President of the 
United States--who is responsible for conducting our relations with 
other nations--to make a judgment about the United States cooperative 
relationship with Colombia. Certifications are anything but new around 
this place. They are an important mechanism by which the U.S. Congress 
can demand accountability for the use of American taxpayer dollars 
overseas.
  I have always felt, and have taken the position over and over again 
on this Senate floor, that the American people should be given some 
assurances by their own government that we are working with and 
supporting other governments who share our values and our principles. 
One of those values is fighting the narcotics traffickers and 
narcotics-related corruption. The best way to fight corruption is to 
shine a light both on those attempting to do the corrupting and on 
those who are being or who have been corrupted.
  Neither the earlier amendment nor the one that I offer today say that 
corruption has to be ended in Colombia. It does not say that the 
program outlined by President Samper has to be fully implemented. It 
requires the Government of Colombia to take important steps to 
implement what President Samper himself told us he wants to do about 
the narcotics problem and the corruption associated with it.
  What prompted the Senate's earlier unanimous vote was the concern 
stemming from credible and disturbing allegations of corruption in 
Colombia. When the Senate voted in July, the allegations touched the 
President-elect of Colombia, who had been publicly accused of receiving 
large ``campaign contributions'' from the Cali Cartel, which--as I 
describe it--is the 800-pound gorilla of the world's cocaine trade. 
That gorilla still exists. It still operates; and it continues to exert 
a criminal influence both in Colombia and in the United States.
  Since the allegations against Mr. Samper surfaced, there have emerged 
questions about the head of the Colombian National Police, Maj. Gen. 
Octavio Vargas Silva. According to the Los Angeles Times, 10 days after 
the Senate first voted on Colombia, the head of the Drug Enforcement 
Administration refused to meet with General Vargas because ``the U.S. 
Government has reason to believe that Vargas is corrupt.'' Mr. 
President, that is a startling report about the senior Colombian law 
enforcement official.
  The Colombian National Police are on the front lines of the drug war. 
They are our most significant ally in the drug war. They are an 
impressive group whose dedication has been the linchpin of our 
cooperative efforts.
  Mr. President, the allegations against President Samper and General 
Vargas need to be monitored. They need constant followup. They need 
constant observation. President Samper has persuasively denied the 
accusation. But as recently as August 3, the senior State Department 
official responsible for narcotics control testified, ``the totality of 
the evidence would cause one to think that there was a certain amount 
of credence to the reports.'' I take seriously the continuing 
allegations emerging from Colombia.
  In other words, let us cooperate with the new President. But let us 
watch his government, and let us watch him in terms of the distribution 
of foreign aid to Colombia.
  That is the reason I have offered this amendment. The continuing 
allegations of corruption are enough to merit Senate approval of this 
amendment. As President Samper and Colombia cooperate, of course, they 
are going to get the foreign aid. If he does not cooperate, then they 
will not.
  Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  Mr. HELMS. I believe we had better seek the return of the managers.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is not presently a sufficient second.
  If there is no objection, the quorum call is withheld.
  Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. HELMS. I thank the Chair. I thank the managers of the bill.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ford). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, would the Chair advise the Senator from 
Nevada as to the parliamentary matter before the body?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending amendment is the Helms amendment 
No. 2480.
  Mr. REID. To which bill?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. To the committee amendment on page 2, DOD 
appropriations, H.R. 4650.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the I be 
permitted to speak as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________