[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 110 (Wednesday, August 10, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 10, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
    APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES ON H.R. 4603, DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, 
JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS 
       ACT, 1995 AND FISCAL YEAR 1994 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS

  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the 
Speaker's table the bill--H.R. 4603--making appropriations for the 
Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related 
agencies' programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1995, and 
making supplemental appropriations for these departments and agencies 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes, 
with Senate amendments thereto, disagree to the Senate amendments, and 
agree to the conference asked by the Senate.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Montgomery). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from West Virginia?
  There was no objection.


                Motion to Instruct Offered by Mr. Rogers

  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct.
  The clerk read as follows.

       Mr. Rogers moves that the managers on the part of the House 
     at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses 
     on the bill H.R. 4603 be instructed to agree to the Senate 
     amendments numbered 125 and 127.

  Mr. ROGERS (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the motion be considered as read and printed in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers] 
will be recognized for 30 minutes, and the gentleman from West Virginia 
[Mr. Mollohan] will be recognized for 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers].
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, my motion instructs the conferees to accept the Senate 
funding levels for contributions to the U.N. general budget and U.N. 
peacekeeping.
  Mr. Speaker, we have had to cut in this bill crimefighting money from 
the Justice Department. We had to cut job-producing programs in the 
Commerce Department. And we have had to cut peace dollars at the State 
Department; in order to fully fund U.N. contributions, we did those 
cuts.
  My motion, Mr. Speaker, will partially correct what I count as a 
mistake. This motion would reduce funding to the United Nations by $74 
million below the House level by two different means.
  First, it would make a very modest cut in the peacekeeping arrearage 
payments by $33 million. By the way, that is out of a total of $1.2 
billion so it is less than a 3-percent cut.
  Second, it would cut $41 million in arrearage payments to the general 
budget at the United Nations. That is out of a total of $914 million 
that we pay to the United Nations and related agencies. So that is 
around a 4-percent cut to the general budget.
  The savings though, Mr. Speaker, the $74 million then could be added 
back to crimefighting in America, to producing jobs in America, and to 
furthering America's peace initiatives around the world.
  Mr. Speaker, these are modest trends. I would have liked to have seen 
much, much more. In fact, I tried to get more cuts on a motion on the 
bill when it passed through the House. We did not succeed. But these 
are very, very modest cuts: 3 percent peacekeeping, 4 percent to the 
general budget of the United Nations.
  More importantly, those moneys can be directed to America's problems 
which we all know are excessive.
  We have to make choices. The President's budget request for this bill 
was almost $800 million over what we were given to spend by the budget 
process. So we had to make trims.
  We cut, as I said, Commerce Department funding. We cut Justice 
Department funding. We have cut State Department funding. In fact, we 
are cutting State Department below their current services in order to 
fund the U.N. contributions. We cannot fully fund every important 
program in this bill because of that.
  The United Nations, Mr. Speaker, should not be held harmless from the 
budget cuts that we have to endure. We should not favor a United 
Nations over domestic priorities in this country.
  Many would argue that U.N. spending is out of control. The number and 
the cost of the peacekeeping missions that the United Nations has 
undertaken have exploded. Just 6 years ago, Mr. Speaker, we only were 
involved in two peacekeeping missions in the world, the United Nations. 
Now, we are involved in 16, 8 times the number of peacekeeping missions 
we had just 6 years ago.
  What is the cost of that to us, the United States? Then we were 
paying $30 million a year. Now it is costing us $1.2 billion a year, 
and just 30 million 6 years ago.
  The American taxpayer, Mr. Speaker, is billed to much for 
peacekeeping missions because our allies are not being billed enough. 
We are paying a disproportionate share of the total U.N. cost for 
peacekeeping. We are paying or being billed for, at least, almost a 
third of the total cost of these peacekeeping missions.
  Japan is only being billed for 12.5 percent; Germany only 9 percent; 
Great Britain, 6.5 percent. That is unfair. It may have been fair in 
the immediate post-World War II world. It is not fair in today's world 
with lots of economic giants out there more able to pay really than we 
are in many cases.

                              {time}  1100

  Third, the United Nations is a bloated bureaucracy, Mr. Speaker, 
rampant with waste, fraud, and abuse. Let me make a couple of points.
  Eighty percent of the U.N. general budget, 80 percent, is used to pay 
some 14,000 U.N. employees, employees who receive, one, tax-free 
salaries guaranteed to be 20-percent higher than in the private sector 
in this country; guaranteed cost-of-living increases; guaranteed paid 
vacations of up to 2 months per year; virtually free education for all 
of their children through college. That is what employees at the United 
Nations get, subsidized by the large payments that the U.S. taxpayer 
makes to the general budget, which is 25 percent.
  Can we justify, Mr. Speaker, can we justify fully funding the United 
Nations and all of those guaranteed perks and benefits, when we cannot 
fully fund the FBI in this country, or the State Department, or the job 
production programs at the Commerce Department? I say no, we cannot 
justify that. Therefore, these very small cuts, 3 or 4 percent at the 
United Nations, are the least we should be able to do.
  Yes, Mr. Speaker, we do have a commitment to pay our bills to the 
United Nations, but we also have a commitment, Mr. Speaker, to the 
American people, a commitment to fight the war on crime in this 
country, a commitment to economic growth through technology and 
economic development programs in this country.
  This motion, Mr. Speaker, allows us to fulfill both of these 
commitments the best we can, given our budget constraints. The dollars 
my motion would cut from the United Nations could be reallocated in 
conference, Mr. Speaker, to fighting crime here at home, producing jobs 
here at home, and furthering the cause of peace on America's behalf 
around the world.
  I urge Members to address America's crime problems, while doing no 
harm to the United Nations.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of my motion, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's motion to 
instruct conferees on our 1995 Commerce, Justice, State, and Judiciary 
appropriation bill. I understand that the gentleman's amendment really 
goes to our obligations.
  This amendment would prevent us from funding arrearages, both in 
peacekeeping and in international organizations at the United Nations. 
It means we would not meet our obligations to the extent that the 
House, when we passed our bill, thought that we should meet those 
obligations.
  Mr. Chairman, I think that the House, when they consider that, want 
to meet those responsibilities in as timely as fashion as we possibly 
can.
  Mr. Speaker, we have debts to the U.N. right now which we are trying, 
in a phased way, to meet. We have debts to the international 
organizations that we need to honor. This motion would, if acted upon 
in conference, prevent us from meeting those obligations.
  Mr. Speaker, the cuts that would be made by the gentleman's 
instructions, would come, ironically, Mr. Speaker, at a time when the 
United States is making real progress in addressing some of the 
concerns, legitimate concerns, that the gentleman spoke to. Right now, 
the United Nations has taken action to create an independent inspector 
general. That is an issue that the gentleman who is making this motion 
to instruct has been very concerned with and very articulate in 
bringing his concerns to the House for a number of years now.
  However, the United Nations is addressing that, and they are 
appointing an inspector general, and there has been constructive 
cooperation between the United States and the United Nations on these 
problems. We are moving to address them. Those are legitimate concerns. 
We want the United Nations to operate carefully, we want them to 
operate in a fiscally prudent manner, and we are taking actions in the 
authorizing bill that we passed earlier this year to encourage the 
United Nations to move in that direction, and they are.
  In addition, Mr. Speaker, the United Nations and the United States 
are right now in serious negotiations. They are under way, as we speak, 
to reduce the share of peacekeeping costs that the United States is 
obligated for, from 31 to 25 percent. That is also a goal that the 
gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers] has advanced and has put forward 
on numerous occasions before this body, so they are addressing two of 
his most pressing concerns. We are very pleased that they are doing 
that.
  At the time that the United Nations is indicating that they want to 
be responsible, we do not want to be irresponsible. We do not want to 
be pikers in the eyes of the world and not meet our financial 
obligations with regard to these arrearages.
  Mr. Speaker, with regard to the gentleman's instruction, if it were 
to prevail and we were to effect it in conference, the instructions, as 
far as it relates to cutting the funding for arrearages for 
international organizations, would cut from such activities as the Food 
and Agricultural Organization. It would cut from the International 
Labor Organization our obligation to pay arrearages. It would cut from 
the U.N. Industrial Development Organization. I do not think that the 
gentleman or the body or this country wants the United States to pull 
back from its obligations in these areas.
  In addition, Mr. Speaker, this amendment would cut our contribution 
to cleaning up our arrearages for the World Health Organization. I do 
not think that is an organization that we want to indicate to the world 
that we do not support, or that we do not want to pay up our 
obligations for our arrearages; also, for the Organization of American 
States, an organization very close to home that we ought to be 
supporting, and that we ought to be indicating that we want to meet our 
part of the obligation to fund that organization. In addition, the Pan 
American Health Organization, Mr. Speaker, would be one of the 
organizations that would receive a cut in our obligation for arrearages 
if this motion to instruct went forward.
  Mr. Speaker, I would point out, finally, that the United States is 
bound by treaty to make payments that have been included in the House 
bill, have been carefully considered by our committee during the 
committee process, have been carefully considered on this House floor, 
and supported by the body when we passed our bill. The bill includes 
funding which would allow the United States to make those payments 
soon, permitting vital peacekeeping operations to continue, and 
fostering the reforms that the gentleman from Kentucky is so concerned 
about.
  Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I would hope that the body would reject the 
gentleman's motion to instruct, and I trust that we will.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. McDade], the able Republican on the 
full Committee on Appropriations.
  (Mr. McDADE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. McDADE. Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by extending my deep 
appreciation to my friend, the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers] for 
yielding me this time, and for all the members of this subcommittee who 
have worked so hard to bring us this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this motion, and I want to commend 
the gentleman from Kentucky, who has labored as long as any Member of 
this House to bring some semblance of discipline to the United Nations 
and our country's relationship with it.
  Mr. Speaker, I support this motion because it helps send a signal--to 
both the United Nations and the administration. It sends a signal the 
current path we are on with respect to peacekeeping and other U.N.-
sanctioned missions is full of confusion, inconsistencies, and a 
disregard for the actions needed to realistically deal with a series of 
growing problems abroad.
  Nothing more graphically demonstrates these problems than the tragedy 
which continues to unfold in Rwanda. All of us can, and should, Mr. 
Speaker, point with pride to the magnificent actions of our military 
and relief workers in bringing some measure of assistance to the 
hundreds of thousands of refugees in that troubled area. They have 
performed miracles.
  But the fact remains this immense tragedy unfolded in front of all of 
us while the United Nations failed to act in a timely or effective 
manner. It took nearly 2 months after the slaughter began in Rwanda for 
the United Nations to approve a peacekeeping contingent--and today, 
nearly 3 months after the United Nations finally acted, there are only 
500 peacekeepers on the ground as part of that force, only 500 troops.

                              {time}  1110

  That, Mr. Speaker, is less than 10 percent of what the United Nations 
announced it would send to Rwanda. Not only has the United Nations 
failure to act contributed to this tragedy but it may cause even more 
suffering and more calamities. The French, Mr. Speaker, who have sent 
2,000 peacekeepers to Rwanda, are going to leave in less than 2 weeks. 
Most observers who are in the country believe that unless they are 
replaced by United Nations as peacekeepers, it will spark additional 
violence and another mass migration of Rwandans, perhaps, Mr. Speaker, 
as many as 1 million more refugees, and there are 1.2 million in Goma 
alone in Zaire, as we speak.
  Without question, Mr. Speaker, this threatens our efforts in Rwanda. 
There, our initial strategy seems straightforward: Have our military 
provide sustenance for more than 1 million refugees near Goma, Zaire, 
for a short period until they are returned to Rwanda. But, Mr. Speaker, 
the entire strategy depends on convincing the refugees to return home. 
Unhappily, they are not doing so. But why, Mr. Speaker? They are not 
doing so because the former Rwandan Government and its military have 
refused to concede defeat, sowing fear and confusion among the 
refugees. They are not doing so, they are not returning home, because 
there is no sign that the international community will provide for 
their safety if they return to their homes.
  All this, Mr. Speaker, points to an unravelling of the 
administration's planning for Rwanda, meaning, I regret to suggest, an 
extended stay for our troops, an increase in the cost required; a 
continued stretching of our military as it struggles to meet this 
mission as well as the demands of Haiti, of Bosnia, of Korea, of Iraq, 
of Somalia, not to mention, Mr. Speaker, areas of passing interest such 
as Japan, Western Europe, and the former Soviet Union.
  Yet, Mr. Speaker, have we seen this unfortunate turn of events dealt 
with by the administration? As of today, we have not. Have we seen the 
administration attempt to explain this deteriorating situation and the 
challenges posed to our mission, to the American people and, Mr. 
Speaker, to the Congress? We have not, Mr. Speaker. Have we seen the 
administration describe an exit strategy which lays the foundation for 
our troops to conclude their mission? We have not, Mr. Speaker. Have we 
seen any concerted, high profile effort in the United Nations by our 
representatives to bring together peacekeeping contingents to prevent 
further tragedy in Rwanda and enable our troops to come home? We have 
not, Mr. Speaker. Instead we see our forces--our efforts focused on 
getting the United Nations to approve a United Nations invasion of 
Haiti.
  Mr. Speaker, it is clear that both our Government and the community 
of nations must take decisive actions soon to prevent the Rwandan 
tragedy from descending into even greater depths of despair.
  Mr. Speaker, I see the gentleman's motion as a means to send a signal 
today, a warning shot across the bow, indeed, that we believe the 
administration and the United Nations have to refocus on Rwanda as well 
as all the other peacekeeping missions we have embarked on. They must 
level with the American people. They must level with the Congress. We 
must refocus and get our House in order. We must enlist the community 
of nations to solve this problem.
  And, oh, yes, Mr. Speaker, the United Nations needs reform 
immediately.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of the motion to 
instruct conferees.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Montgomery). Without objection, the 
previous question is ordered on the motion to instruct.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers].
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 177, 
nays 250, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 384]

                               YEAS--177

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus (AL)
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bentley
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bunning
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Clinger
     Coble
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cunningham
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Fowler
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Gallegly
     Gallo
     Gekas
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Grams
     Grandy
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Hall (TX)
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hayes
     Hefley
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Horn
     Huffington
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Inhofe
     Istook
     Jacobs
     Johnson, Sam
     Kasich
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kyl
     Lazio
     Levy
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (FL)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Livingston
     Lucas
     Machtley
     Manzullo
     Mazzoli
     McCandless
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meyers
     Mica
     Michel
     Miller (FL)
     Molinari
     Moorhead
     Myers
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Paxon
     Petri
     Pombo
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce (OH)
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Ridge
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Royce
     Santorum
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Sensenbrenner
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Snowe
     Solomon
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sundquist
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas (CA)
     Thomas (WY)
     Torricelli
     Traficant
     Upton
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Walsh
     Weldon
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                               NAYS--250

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews (ME)
     Andrews (NJ)
     Andrews (TX)
     Applegate
     Bacchus (FL)
     Baesler
     Barca
     Barcia
     Barlow
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blackwell
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Brooks
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Byrne
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carr
     Chapman
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Coppersmith
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Danner
     Darden
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Derrick
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Durbin
     Edwards (CA)
     Edwards (TX)
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Fingerhut
     Fish
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford (MI)
     Ford (TN)
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilman
     Glickman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamburg
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hoagland
     Hochbrueckner
     Holden
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hughes
     Hutto
     Inslee
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klein
     Klink
     Kopetski
     Kreidler
     LaFalce
     Lambert
     Lancaster
     Lantos
     LaRocco
     Laughlin
     Leach
     Lehman
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lloyd
     Long
     Lowey
     Maloney
     Mann
     Manton
     Margolies-Mezvinsky
     Markey
     Martinez
     Matsui
     McCloskey
     McCurdy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moran
     Morella
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Neal (NC)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Parker
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Penny
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pickle
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Roemer
     Rose
     Rostenkowski
     Rowland
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sangmeister
     Sarpalius
     Sawyer
     Schenk
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sharp
     Shepherd
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slattery
     Slaughter
     Smith (IA)
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Studds
     Stupak
     Swett
     Swift
     Synar
     Tanner
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Towns
     Tucker
     Unsoeld
     Valentine
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Wheat
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Dornan
     Herger
     McMillan
     Ravenel
     Roukema
     Washington
     Whitten

                              {time}  1135

  Mr. HOYER and Mr. STRICKLAND changed their vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  Mr. HALL of Texas changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to instruct was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaRocco). Without objection, the Chair 
appoints the following conferees: Messrs. Mollohan, Smith of Iowa, Carr 
of Michigan, Moran, Skaggs, Price of North Carolina, Obey, Rogers, 
Kolbe, Taylor of North Carolina, and McDade.
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________