[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 92 (Thursday, June 20, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1125]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               DO NOT PUT HARD-WORKING AMERICANS AT RISK

                                 ______


                           HON. GREG LAUGHLIN

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 19, 1996

  Mr. LAUGHLIN. Mr. Speaker, like other Members of this body, I abhor 
terrorism and support ongoing efforts to reduce the spread of weapons 
of mass destruction. But I also want to be sure that we do not hurt 
hard-working Americans in our efforts to achieve foreign policy 
objectives. From the outset, I have been particularly concerned that 
enactment of this bill might hurt the citizens of the 14th District of 
Texas and American families throughout the country.
  As the chairman of the Trade Subcommittee knows, I was particularly 
concerned that the bill, as reported by the International Relations 
Committee, could have two potentially harmful effects. First, the 
initial bill would have put at risk the jobs of Americans at totally 
innocent U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies. Second, the initial 
bill could be read to apply retroactively to investment commitments 
made and contractual obligations undertaken many years ago.
  Through the strong leadership and personal intervention of the 
chairman of the full committee and of the Trade Subcommittee, these 
concerns have been addressed. I am gratified that the unprecedented 
innocent subsidiary provision was dropped in its entirely. That change 
alone will ensure that workers in my district will not have their 
livelihoods affected by the actions of others that were well beyond 
their control. Moreover, the bill was redrafted to ensure that the 
long-standing principle of contract sanctity is preserved. To eliminate 
any possible interpretive ambiguity, the definition of investment makes 
clear that the legislation applies only to activities undertaken 
pursuant to an agreement entered into with the Government of Iran or 
the Government of Libya (or nongovernmental entities formed by those 
governments) after the date of enactment. Thus, for example, companies 
can continue to honor their contractual obligations under existing 
contracts without fear of being sanctioned. As a result, the supply of 
services and other subcontracts, farm-in arrangements, and the like in 
connection with contracts entered into prior to the date of enactment 
will not expose companies to potential sanctions. Similarly, companies 
may continue the development of oil resources as contemplated under 
exploration and production-sharing agreements signed long before 
introduction of this legislation. By addressing these legitimate 
concerns of the business community, our committee has preserved an 
important principle while reducing the likely exposure of U.S. 
companies and U.S. workers to foreign government retaliation.
  As the administration made clear in its testimony before the Trade 
Subcommittee, it too shares my concerns about the potential unintended 
consequences of the legislation. I was pleased that the administration 
indicated that the bill should apply only prospectively, to future 
contracts and to future investments. With the bill before us today, the 
administration should be in a better position to ensure that hard-
working Americans in the 14th District or anywhere in our great land 
will not be put at risk.
  In closing, I wish to again commend our Committee leadership for 
producing a bill that maintains long-standing principles, reduces the 
risk of harmful retaliation, and provides the President with the 
flexibility needed to ensure that the American economy is not adversely 
affected by our pursuit of foreign policy objectives.

                          ____________________