[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 110 (Monday, July 10, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H6702-H6703]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
GLOSSING OVER THE ROUGH SPOTS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of May
12, 1995, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss] is recognized during
morning business for 5 minutes.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, when credible and respected observer
organizations, notably the International Republican Institute, returned
from the June 25 elections in Haiti to report their documented
observations--both the good and the bad--they were not received with
open arms. It was more like a shoot-the-messenger situation here and
elsewhere in Washington because at that time international
organizations, the Clinton administration officials, and some of the
national media even were too busy painting rosy pictures of what was
going on in Haiti--glossing over widespread irregularities in the
elections that actually happened hailing the relatively non-violent
atmosphere on election day as the measure of a successful electoral
[[Page H 6703]]
process in Haiti, never mind the widespread and serious mismanagement,
chaos, confusion, and disorganization that disenfranchised so many
candidates and so many voters.
Now the flurry of election reports of 2 weeks ago in Haiti has
dwindled to a few inches of space in the major papers. Last Friday, for
example, the news that the run-off elections, the important run-off
elections scheduled for the end of this month were being pushed back to
August. This was buried in the deepest recesses of the major papers.
Even the New York Times barely gave it mention, and none among the
major media dared question the wisdom of the provisional electoral
council's intention to announce results on this past Saturday despite
the protests of most of the parties that participated in the election
on
June 25.
This week, the news that 23 of the 27 parties who actually
participated in the elections of June 25 in Haiti have signed official
communiques calling for the elections to be annulled, and that still
has not made the cut in the smattering of the Haiti-related articles in
the major press outlets in this country either.
The New York Times did take the time to editorialize and declare the
delay of the run-offs as a step that will give officials time to learn
from their mistakes. Of course, some might question whether or not it
is appropriate to hold a run-off for an election that is being
challenged by almost all the participants, because it was characterized
by the widespread disenfranchisement of voters and candidates alike, as
we now all know.
But the Clinton administration marches onward down the yellow brick
road. At the State Department briefing this weekend, Spokesman Burns
declared that Haiti ``now has a functioning democracy * * *'' and that
the administration believes ``* * * the Haitians did rather well, if
you look at this election as it should be properly viewed in the
context of the environment in Haiti and the history of Haiti.''
Well, indeed, it is good news that democracy has come to Haiti. Now
perhaps we can bring back thousands of troops that are down there at
taxpayers expense providing security and stability in that country and
perhaps we can cut back on the hundreds of millions of dollars being
sent to Haiti every day to help get democracy started.
Mr. Speaker, the truth is the Haitian people who toiled long and hard
on election day trying to make the best of a
bad process deserve more than the cursory analysis and condescending
statements of support we have been hearing from the administration and
the media in this country.
Rather than pressure to simply move on, Haitians need the support of
the White House, the State Department and the American media to find
the truth of what actually went wrong in the elections on the 25th--and
to get it fixed. And before this December's Presidential elections
because they are going to be very important, and more importantly for
the American people, we need to be kept abreast of where are the
taxdollars the Clinton administration has been doling out for the
elections and for U.S. operations in Haiti? And what good, if any, they
are doing? It is a lot of money. The White House owes us an accounting
and it is overdue.
At the most basic level, these elections were about Haitians being
free to elect the entire local governmental structure in Haiti and a
new national parliament, a congress, being free to construct in those
offices the checks and balances envisioned and provided for in the new
Haitian constitution. The success of the process will determine how
soon we can bring our troops home and whether or not anything lasting,
in fact, does come out of all the money, time, and effort the American
people have poured into that small friendly Caribbean nation.
Glossing over the rough spots in this process does not help any of
the parties involved.
I say to my colleagues, ``If you want to shoot the messenger, go
ahead, but the fact of it is that there are some problems, and they
need to be fixed.''
Even the distinguished New York Times today has had the temerity to
suggest what they would not suggest 2 weeks ago after the elections,
and I quote from the editorial page from the Times today: ``Haiti is
wise to postpone its next round of elections. The first round, on June
25, was marred by massive disorganization,'' et cetera. They would not
admit that, and now they admit it. We are making progress. We are
getting at the truth.
____________________