[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 106 (Tuesday, June 27, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9145-S9146]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            EVENTS IN HAITI

  Mr. DODD. I was not in Haiti this past weekend as part of an observer 
group, but as I think most of my colleagues know, I have been there on 
numerous occasions. In fact, I lived on the border of that country for 
2\1/2\ years and have a more than passing interest in the awareness of 
Haiti.
  As I have listened this afternoon to several speeches now made about 
the events in Haiti over the past several days, I find it stunning in 
many ways. My colleagues, by their remarks, almost imply that the 
situation in Haiti would have been preferable had there not been an 
election or had there not been the decision by the administration in 
previous months to go back to intercede, along with the support of the 
international community, to try to restore the democratically elected 
government of that country.
  This was not a perfect election in Haiti. There were serious 
problems. But, remember, this is a country that can count free 
elections on one hand--fewer fingers in fact--that they have had over 
the years. The last free one was 4 or 5 years ago when President 
Aristide was elected. And then we watched that election be ripped from 
the people of that country through a coup.
  President Clinton, the administration, took the courageous decision 
to restore President Aristide to power in that country. And I recall 
back in those days during that debate the almost apparent 
disappointment that there was not more of a tragedy. We did not lose a 
single soldier in that effort. In fact, the President deserves great 
commendation, mind you, for the courage he showed in making an 
unpopular move. It was not popular at the time. Today, interestingly, 
the majority of people in this country think the President did the 
right thing.
  Now, over the weekend, they had an election. It is a poor country 
with a tremendous level of illiteracy and staggering economic problems. 
So it did not look like a perfect election in this country. But it is 
an effort of poor people to get out and freely choose its leadership, 
literally hundreds and hundreds of candidates for local office and 
national office in that country. And rather than castigate and denounce 
the effort for the shortcomings that certainly were obvious and 
apparent, why are we not applauding the fact that this country was 
trying to embrace democracy and do so in a noble way?
  Granted they had problems with ballot boxes and people abused the 
process. Votes were not counted. There were shortcomings, to put it 
mildly, in the process. All of that I accept. But instead of picking 
this process apart, there ought to be at least some underlying 
statements that indicate that we support this effort. We hope it is not 
just a one-time effort, but that in coming months and years we will see 
democracy take hold in this poor, little country to our south.
  And so I have been disappointed. It is just a continuum of almost the 
disappointment people expressed over the last year over the President's 
decision to go in and restore President Aristide, which was a success. 
It seems to be a continuation of that. I am disappointed by these 
remarks. This is working. It is not perfect. We have watched what 
happened in other countries, including what we are watching in the 
former Soviet Union, the New Independent Republics. Countries that are 
struggling to find their democratic feet do not do so instantaneously. 
It takes time.
  So I commend President Aristide and commend the people of Haiti for 
the courageous attempt to have a free and fair election. I am terribly 
disappointed it did not meet our high standards of a perfect election. 
But rather than spend our time denouncing the imperfections, we ought 
to take a moment out and commend these people. Some people walked 
literally miles and miles to get to a polling place in order to 
exercise their rights. Most of them are illiterate, cannot read or 
write. They have to vote by looking at colors or symbols on a ballot in 
order to choose their party or candidates. And to watch people get out 
with, I think, the returns somewhere around 60 or 70 percent--in our 
elections in 1974 we had 38 percent that turned out to vote.
  So with all its imperfections, I think the people of Haiti deserve 
our applause, our commendation for their efforts. And certainly the 
Government of Haiti does, as well, for conducting this election. And 
albeit with its shortcomings, my hope is in coming years we will see 
better results and less imperfections in the process. But they do not 
deserve to be denounced, in my 

[[Page S 9146]]
view, for the significant efforts they have made.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. McCAIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. I listened with interest to the statement just made by my 
friend from Connecticut. And all I can say is it is deja vu all over 
again. I remember the criticism that the Senator from Connecticut 
leveled at the election in El Salvador that was attended by me and 
others. And, Mr. President, he might have missed the thrust of my 
remarks. And that is, that this election, according to the same group, 
the IRI, that has observed some 48 elections around the world, did not 
meet high standards. They did not meet minimum standards, I say to the 
Senator from Connecticut.
  I applaud the effort of the people of Haiti for wanting to be 
involved in the electoral process. I applaud the efforts that have been 
made by many people. But the fact is, by objective judgment, this 
election was chaos--chaos.
  And, Mr. President, the report of our observers--I will be brief 
because I know the Senator from New York gets understandably impatient 
with this issue impeding the progress of the pending legislation. But 
this is the report of the objective observers, these same observation 
teams that, as I say, observed 48 other elections throughout the world 
and judged by the same standards, not high standards, Mr. President, 
the same standards. Here's what they said:

       General: Total breakdown in reception of ballots and tally 
     sheets to counting centers; total abandonment of materials; 
     zero supervision of materials; counting of ballots occurring 
     without supervision.
       Tally Sheets: Tally sheets being destroyed deliberately; 
     tally sheets have been created/replaced; tally sheets with 
     opposition parties leading have been destroyed in front of 
     observers; tally sheets and other electoral records are being 
     thrown out as garbage--and trash is being removed from site.
       Ballots: Ballots have been burned, both used and unused; 
     ballots have been substituted with newly marked ballots; 
     unused ballots by the hundreds of thousands are readily 
     accessible at counting sites.

  Let me repeat that. Perhaps the Senator from Connecticut feels it is 
a real high standard not to expect unused ballots by the hundreds of 
thousands readily available at counting sites.

       Unused ballots being mixed in with marked ballots; new 
     ballots clearly being marked at counting sites; crumpled 
     ballots, registration materials, and ballot boxes 
     accumulating in trash heaps, inside and outside counting 
     sites.
       Ballot Boxes: Ballot boxes universally unsealed; ballot 
     boxes being sealed at counting sites with serial numbered 
     seals that may not correspond to actual voting site number; 
     sealed ballot boxes are being thrown away.
       Registration Cards: Registration records in total disarray; 
     registration records being jettisoned into the trash in large 
     quantities; unused registration cards (remember one million 
     missing) found in large quantities.

  This is not a result of underdevelopment nor simple mismanagement; 
this is orchestrated chaos.
  Mr. HARKIN. Would the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. McCAIN. I would be glad to.
  Mr. HARKIN. You mentioned--I do not know who IRI is.
  Mr. McCAIN. The International Republican Institute, which was there 
monitoring this election, as they have some 48 elections throughout the 
world. I say to my friend from Iowa, there are certain standard 
procedures used in judging any election, whether it be Russia, El 
Salvador, Haiti, anywhere else. These minimum standards are what an 
election is judged by.
  Mr. HARKIN. If I could ask another question.
  It is the International Republican Institute. I did not know that.
  Second, in this institute, did they monitor the elections that were 
held in Haiti about, if I am not mistaken, a little over 2 years ago 
when the junta, the military, was in charge and there was an election 
there?
  I am wondering whether they monitored that election and if they drew 
any comparisons between this election and that election. I only ask 
that question because----
  Mr. McCAIN. My answer is, as you know, that that election was so 
fraudulent there was no international observer groups allowed there. 
But in the words of other people who observed the 1990 election, this 
was far worse than the 1990 election conducted in Haiti which was 
observed by international organizations.
  Mr. HARKIN. May I ask one more question? Does the Senator know how 
much money the United States or other nations may have provided and 
support that we may have provided in order to help that electoral 
process in Haiti, being a poor country? I just wonder if there are any 
figures on how much we did in terms of monitoring assistance to help 
them do the things that the Senator has pointed out were shortcomings 
in that election.
  Mr. McCAIN. I respond to my friend from Iowa, I do not know the 
amount of money. I do know what the commitment on the part of the 
American Government was. But I know the election should have met 
certain minimum standards. Otherwise, there is no sense in holding an 
election. And the observers who came in to observe this election and 
others did not believe those standards were met. I mean, the front page 
of the Washington Post this morning, ``chaos'' and other descriptions 
along those lines clearly indicate that if we did spend money, and I am 
sure we did, that it was either misplaced or improperly used or 
something.
  The real point here, I say to my friend from Iowa, is I do not know 
how much money was spent. I know money was spent, but I know that these 
are trained observers who observe election after election after 
election around the world and judged the election in Russia to be 
overall fair, the election in El Salvador to be fair, the election in 
Nicaragua to be fair, the recent election in Chile to be fair. This is 
the first time they have judged this election not to be, that I know 
of, one which was fair and open. But they certainly did not judge the 
previous election to be in any way acceptable. They did not even go to 
see it because everybody knew what that election was all about.
  Mr. HARKIN. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank my friend. I always appreciate this dialog with 
my friend from Connecticut. I think he may have misunderstood the point 
when I made my statement. I also admire the tenacity, desire, the will 
of the Haitian people to obtain freedom. They are people who deserve, 
if any one group of people in this hemisphere deserves our assistance 
and help, and they deserve a freely elected government after all they 
have suffered through.
  I am just saying to my friend from Connecticut that there are certain 
standards that must be observed, that must be adhered to in any 
election; otherwise, the people do not have that precious right, and 
that is to choose their own leadership.
  It is not clear to me yet what all the reasons behind this failure 
were but, in my view, it has been a significant failure.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. GRAHAM addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, it had been my intention at this point to 
offer an amendment, but I ask unanimous consent for time as in morning 
business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________