[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 198 (Wednesday, December 13, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2351-E2352]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2076, 
DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED 
                   AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1996

                                 ______


                               speech of

                            HON. TOM LANTOS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, December 6, 1995

  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, the conference report on the bill making 
appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the 
Judiciary, and related agencies has been discussed at some length by a 
number of my colleagues on this side of the aisle. I share their 
serious concerns with the deficiencies of this legislation that have 
been so eloquently expressed by my friend and colleague from Wisconsin, 
Mr. Obey, and by my friend and colleague from West Virginia, Mr. 
Mollohan.
  I want to focus my remarks on the serious defects of this bill with 
regard to the international obligations of the United States. The 
conference report that we are considering reduces by one-half our 
Nation's contributions to 

[[Page E2352]]
international peacekeeping activities. Mr. Speaker, this is an 
incredibly short-sighted reduction.
  BY supporting such peacekeeping activities under the auspices of the 
United Nations, we are encouraging our involvement and participation in 
activities to keep the peace in a number of areas around the world. By 
fostering international peacekeeping, we are encouraging the 
participation of other nations and the participation of the military 
forces of other countries in activities that encourage peace and 
stability in many regions of the world. We have supported and fostered 
such efforts in a number of areas around the world, areas which are 
important to the United States--Cyprus, the Sinai, Cambodia--to name 
only a few. Our contribution to such peacekeeping efforts is an 
indication of our commitment to international action to maintain 
stability and encourage respect for appropriate international behavior.

  Second, this conference report reduces by almost one quarter, 24 
percent, U.S. contributions to international organizations, which fund 
the U.S. share of activities in the United Nations, the International 
Atomic Energy Agency, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and other 
such international organizations. These are not good will donations to 
these organizations; these are international treaty obligations of the 
United States. These organizations support important national security 
and foreign policy interests--international sanctions against rogue 
regimes such as Iran, Libya, and Iraq; efforts to reduce nuclear 
proliferation and other weapons of mass destruction; common 
international efforts to maintain Middle East peace and security, 
including the struggle to maintain the borders of Israel and Kuwait; 
the promotion of an open international trade framework; the control of 
diseases, such as the Ebola virus; and the promotion of human rights.
  These short-sighted reductions in funding in this legislation impede 
the ability of the United States to carry out these vital national 
security and foreign policy objectives. Furthermore, the draconian cuts 
in funds severely hamper the State Department's ability to press for 
much-needed reforms at the United Nations and at other international 
organizations. Under strong pressure from many of us here in this body, 
the administration--under both Democratic and Republican leadership--
has made considerable progress in pressuring for managerial, 
administrative, and budgetary reform. The unilateral reduction of our 
contributions seriously undermines our ability to continue to press for 
these needed reforms.
  For half a century--since the end of World War II--the United States 
has spent enormous sums of money for our military forces to protect our 
national security and to further our international objectives. We 
pursued farsighted policies that had broad bipartisan support. 
Unfortunately, now that the cold war is over, we have not been willing 
to continue even the relatively modest spending that is required to 
protect these more cost-effective security and foreign policy 
interests. This is extraordinarily imprudent. This ought to be changed, 
and changing this legislation is the place to begin.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the adoption of this 
legislation before us today. We can--and we should--do better.

                          ____________________