[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 110 (Wednesday, July 24, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8629-S8633]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1997
The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, this year the foreign operations bill
provides $12.246 billion to administer our foreign assistance programs.
This slightly exceeds the bill signed into law last year but is more
than $700 million below the administration's request. Although this is
a substantial reduction, I believe we have crafted a bill which
addresses congressional concerns about balancing the budget while
continuing to serve vital U.S. national security priorities.
Let me briefly review both the funding levels and policy provisions
which advance our common international interests.
In title I, we have provided $632 million for export promotion
programs. The Trade Development Agency and the Overseas Private
Investment Corporation are fully funded, and the Export-Import Bank is
near the request level.
Virtually all of us have learned of the direct benefit these programs
have had in securing new markets and opportunities for American
business. While some people have expressed concern about our
subsidizing American corporations, this support we offer in this bill
is a reflection of how competitive the international market has become.
I believe our export promotion programs are essential to our long-term
economic security.
If you have any doubt about the significance of this funding, there
is one statistic which makes clear how important our competition thinks
these programs are. Last year the Export-Import Bank extended $2.9
billion in loans. Its Japanese counterpart provided $19.3 billion in
support.
While I am a strong supporter of the Bank, I have been deeply
concerned about recent management problems. Both the Office of
Personnel Management and the General Accounting Office investigated the
Bank's misuse of certain salary-related authorities. In a 1995 audit,
OPM concluded that retention allowances have been granted to
approximately 200 of the Bank's 450 employees ``contrary to law and
regulation.'' Instead of meeting the legal requirement of establishing
an employee's unique qualifications and intent to leave Government
service, the current management at the Bank treated retention
allowances as performance bonuses.
While the problem was drawn to White House attention, the acting
Chairman's nomination pending before the Banking Committee was
resubmitted as a recess appointment. This has prompted the committee to
limit funding for the Chairman's salary until this matter can be fully
reviewed in the context of a nomination hearing.
Let me now turn to title II. We have provided $1.7 billion in funding
for development assistance, including child survival programs, and the
Development Fund for Africa, the Inter-American Foundation and the
African Development Foundation. This level is close to the
administration's request and was a high priority of Senator Leahy and a
majority of the members of the committee.
Within the bilateral aid account there are a handful of earmarks
including funds for Camp David Partners, Burma and Cyprus.
Given our strong interest in securing the transition of free market
democracies, we have fully funded the administration's request for the
New Independent States of the former Soviet Union. In addition to
earmarking levels of support for Ukraine, Armenia, and Georgia, the
bill provides funding for safety programs at nuclear reactors, small
business development, strengthening agricultural productivity, and
treatment for children who are victims of the Chernobyl disaster.
While not in statute, I want to take note of important report
language regarding Russia.
President Yeltsin has made a lot of extravagant financial pledges on
the campaign trail which must be reconsidered if the nation is to stay
within IMF fiscal guidelines and sustain economic reforms. The
committee points out that the outcome of the elections reflects U.S.
assistance is less important
[[Page S8630]]
than the political and economic choices Russia's citizens and leaders
will make in the coming months.
The report states that this is an important transition year for
Russia. With over $10 billion in IMF loan commitments and $4.2 billion
in United States bilateral support, it is the committee's expectation
that most aid will be phased out and that Russia will graduate from our
foreign operations programs in fiscal 1997.
Let me now address the independent agencies which are also funded in
title II. Given the strong bipartisan support for the Peace Corps, we
were able to come close to the administration's request and provide a
total in resources of $217 million.
The International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Program has been
increased substantially over last year's level from $115 million to
$160 million. I continue to be deeply concerned that the administration
made the decision to shift resources away from transit countries to
source countries. Long-term, this approach may make sense, but the
reductions in the transit country effort seem to have been made well
before the source country strategy and programs had been put in place.
Hopefully, the strong funding level will assure we can maintain an
aggressive effort in both transit and source countries.
Mr. President, in consultation with the House, we have established a
consolidated account which includes proliferation, demining and some of
the related international organization programs. Within this account,
we have provided funding to complete our commitment to Israel's
counterterrorism effort.
This account also provides funding at last year's level for the Korea
Peninsula Energy Development Organization also known as KEDO. As the
report reflects, the committee supported the administration's request
to leave the actual funding number out of last year's bill in order not
to impede global fundraising efforts.
I thought we had a clear understanding as to precisely what level had
been justified and was permissible. Unfortunately, the administration
took advantage of our effort to help them and substantially exceeded
justified levels of spending.
In documents submitted last year the administration suggested we
planned to contribute 20 percent or $10 million toward the annual costs
of 500,000 tons of heavy fuel oil. Subsequently, without submitting
required reprogramming notifications, the White House announced it
intended to provide $22 million to cover fuel oil. I think it is
important that there is no further confusion on the burden the United
States is willing to assume, so we have included a specific level of
funding.
We have also included a requirement that oil may only be made
available subject to confirmation that the North Koreans are not
diverting it for military or other illegal uses. This is consistent
with the Secretary of State's pledge to the subcommittee to assure
compliance on oil use.
Turning now to our military assistance programs in title III, we have
earmarked resources for the Camp David partners and provided sufficient
funds to cover the transfer of F-16's to Jordan. In other areas, we
have funded IMET at $40 million and provided $65 million for voluntary
peacekeeping activities.
For several years, the subcommittee has been supportive of programs
under the Partnership for Peace and Warsaw Initiative. This year we
moved forward and consistent with the NATO Participation Act and
subsequent similar legislation, the bill designates Poland, Hungary,
and the Czech Republic eligible for NATO admission. The committee has
made $20 million in loans and $30 million in grants available to these
three nations to improve their military capabilities. This is an
initiative crafted in conjunction with the former majority leader and
in which there had been strong bipartisan interest.
Finally, with regard to title IV which funds the international
financial institutions, we have done the best we could given the
enormous size of the administration's request. In response to interest
expressed by a majority of the committee, we have provided $295 million
to cover our international organizations and programs. This will allow
the administration to fully fund our pledge to UNICEF.
Our treatment of the International Development Association bears some
explanation. For the first time in history, this administration agreed
to vote for an arrangement which segregated $3.3 billion in
contributions in a new interim trust fund to be managed by IDA. The ITF
will allow only corporations and suppliers from those nations
contributing to the fund to compete for contracts. Like many of my
colleagues, I oppose the administration's decision to vote to exclude
U.S. suppliers from competition for contracts. Thus, we have provided
$626 million as a U.S. contribution to the interim trust fund. This
assures American companies will continue to have access to resources we
invest in the banks.
There is one further item worth drawing attention to. In the general
provisions section of the bill we have included sanctions legislation
regarding Burma. I recognize this is unusual in an appropriations bill
and expect some debate here on the floor on that issue. However, it is
my view, a view shared by the elected leader of Burma, Aung San Suu
Kyi, that the time has come for the United States to exercise
leadership on this issue.
That basically completes my summary of the bill.
I would like to hear from my friend and colleague Senator Leahy. We
will have a couple of amendments to lay down tonight, one of which we
expect to be able to get a vote on at 9:30 in the morning.
With that overview, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont is recognized.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am prepared to go to third reading right
now, if the distinguished chairman would want it, and save having to
come in at 9:30 in the morning, but I suspect there are some who may
disagree.
Mr. President, this is a balanced bill. It is a balanced bill only
within an allocation which, frankly, does not meet our needs. Foreign
aid would never win a popularity contest. In fact, we were able to pass
foreign aid bills in the past because the funds in the bills were
distributed among diverse constituencies. This year is no exception. It
is fast becoming more difficult because there is less money to go
around.
The bill is more than $700 million below the President's request. To
put that in perspective, President Clinton has requested for foreign
aid about 40 percent less than President Reagan used to request. It is
not that somehow there is a Democrat foreign aid giveaway. This
administration is requesting about 40 percent less than either the
Reagan or Bush administrations did, but it is also $1.5 billion below
the level for foreign operations in fiscal year 1995.
Each year, what we do is we take a larger and larger share of the
overall pie and we earmark it for the Middle East. Unquestionably that
is a major priority of the United States. But, of course, it does leave
less and less for the United States to carry out any policies in other
parts of the world.
We should ask what that means. For example, last week the Agency for
International Development laid off 200 employees. Some of these were
among the finest in or out of government, people who had a decade,
sometimes even two decades, of exemplary experience, exemplary and
loyal service to the United States. Some programs, including ones that
everyone here strongly supports--in agriculture, in the environment, in
education--they lost half their staff. A number of these programs
directly or indirectly created jobs here in the United States through
our export programs. They are gone--to say nothing of what it does to
our security.
There is actually a crisis in our foreign aid programs that few
people even know about. Senators on both sides of the aisle, Democrats
and Republicans, need to understand this. Both Senator McConnell and I
had some very difficult choices to make. This bill represents a
delicate compromise. Any attempt to alter that balance by shifting
significant amounts of money from one account to another, I believe,
would seriously threaten its prospects for passage.
We have worked with Republicans and Democrats across the political
spectrum, in this body, to try to use what small allocations we had to
make them work. In doing that, we have had
[[Page S8631]]
to basically rob from almost every single allocation except for one
area. And now if we try to change those, a lot of the support this bill
has disappears.
Senator McConnell has made clear what his priorities are and what the
priorities of the Republican side are. Let me give one example. Despite
a lower allocation than last year and cuts in many programs, funding
for counternarcotics activities in this bill is increased. It is
increased by $45 million. That is a 39-percent increase for the 1996
level.
I believe the evidence is indisputable that despite huge amounts of
money over the past 6 years, over $1 billion, the program really has
not reduced the flow of illegal drugs into this country. I know this is
a priority of my friend from Kentucky and that we do need to support
this effort, although other programs will have to be cut short to fund
the increase. I would not want to see them cut further.
There are many, some on the other side, who would like to cut further
our support for international development programs. Now we shift to a
priority on this side of the aisle. In fact, it is not only a priority
of mine, but a priority of Senators on both sides. Some of these
programs were cut by as much as half this year.
So there is a balance. I want to preserve that balance. I know
Senator McConnell would want to.
Basically, what we have been told to do by the Senate is to take an
allocation which is way below what is necessary, but within the
realities it is the only allocation we could have, take a foreign aid
program which is about 40 percent less than what we had in the past two
Republican administrations, and make it work. We have done the best we
can. I hope Senators on both sides of the aisle will refrain from
taking apart that balance.
The statement of administration policy in this bill is relative to
what I have just said. The White House said they can live with most of
the budgetary levels in the bill as Senator McConnell and I presented
it. If a couple of problems are solved, the President's advisers will
recommend he signs the bill even though it is funded far below his
request levels. They know the allocation left us no alternative.
But understand the reality: The bill does not meet our international
needs and responsibilities. That is not the fault of the managers of
this bill. We did the best we could with too little money. We face
enormous challenges and opportunities in a dangerous and competitive
world.
Our foreign policy has suffered from a lack of strategic thinking
since the cold war. We seem to lurch from crisis to crisis without a
clear sense of where we are going or how to get there. It is a concern
of mine and should be a concern of every Member of the Senate of either
party.
We are now the most powerful democracy history has ever known. Much
of the rest of the world looks to us for direction and guidance, but we
seem to determine our direction and our guidance based on what is on
the evening news. We must have a clear policy. We must have a clear
policy of our foreign policy, our foreign aid, our foreign involvement
as we go into the next century.
Certainly, every other country does. Japan does. Japan spends more
money in this area than we do but creates more jobs as a result of it.
They know where they are going. A lot of other countries do. We have
the world's largest economy, but our future hinges on building foreign
markets in supporting democracy. If we want to create jobs for
Americans, export jobs in other countries, we have to help create those
jobs. They are not going to happen all by themselves. That is why Japan
and the Netherlands and all these other countries go out and create the
jobs. We cut back the money so we don't do it.
If we don't want to find ourselves caught up in wars around the
world, we should be supporting democracies. That is what less powerful
nations do. Yet, we cut back. We spend less than 1 percent of our
budget on foreign aid, and we continue to cut it. Other countries see
an opening. Japan and others spend a lot more.
In fact, a dozen or more countries spend more, a higher percentage of
their budget than we do on foreign aid. Several spend more money in
actual dollars. Why? Because they figure if the United States does not
want to go after those jobs, if the United States does not want to go
after the influence in other parts of the world, they will. So they
spend the money, their products get sold, jobs in their countries are
created, we lose the jobs, they create the expertise in foreign policy,
we fire and get rid of the people having the expertise in this country,
and they get the influence.
There are several things in this bill that concern me. None of us are
going to get everything we want. Some things will be revisited in
conference. I do want to mention one item. The bill caps the United
States contribution to the Korea Economic Development Corporation at
$12 million below the President's request.
The administration said this could undermine our nuclear agreement
with North Korea. I would not want to see that agreement unravel. It is
in our national security interest, it is in our regional interest in
that part of the world that that agreement go through. I hope that we
will resolve this, but I also compliment Senator McConnell and his
staff for the way they have worked with us on this bill, and I hope
perhaps before the end of this week, we can have this bill finished.
I yield the floor.
Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, it is my understanding Senator McCain
and Senator Coverdell both have amendments to lay down. The McCain
amendment is the one we will be able to schedule a vote on at 9:30 in
the morning. It is my understanding the distinguished Senator from
Arizona would like to proceed first.
Mr. McCAIN. If that is agreeable with the distinguished managers of
the bill.
Amendment No. 5017
(Purpose: To require information on cooperation with United States
anti-terrorism efforts in the annual country reports on terrorism)
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask
for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The bill clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain], for himself, Mr.
Coats, Mr. Craig, Mr. D'Amato, Mr. Faircloth, Mrs. Feinstein,
Mr. Frist, Mr. Grams, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Levin, Mr. Lott, and
Ms. Moseley-Braun, proposes an amendment numbered 5017.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading
of the amendment be dispensed with.
Mr. LEAHY. Reserving the right to object, and I will not object, I
would like to see, however, a copy of it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Does the Senator from
Vermont still reserve the right to object?
Mr. LEAHY. I have no objection. I understand a copy is on its way.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 198, between lines 17 and 18, insert the following:
information on cooperation with united states anti-terrorism efforts in
annual country reports on terrorism
Sec. 580. Section 140 of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989 (22 U.S.C.
2656f) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) and
inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) with respect to each foreign country from which the
United States Government has sought cooperation during the
previous five years in the investigation or prosecution of an
act of international terrorism against United States citizens
or interests, the certification of the Secretary--
``(A) whether or not the government of the foreign country
is cooperating fully with the United States Government in
apprehending, convicting, and punishing the individual or
individuals responsible for the act; and
``(B) whether or not the government of the foreign country
is cooperating fully with the United States Government in
preventing further acts of terrorism against United States
citizens in the foreign country; and
``(4) with respect to each foreign country from which the
United States Government has sought cooperation during the
previous five years in the prevention of an act of
international terrorism against such citizens or interests,
the certification of the Secretary described in paragraph
(3)(B).''; and
(2) in subsection (c)--
[[Page S8632]]
(A) by striking ``The report'' and inserting ``(1) Except
as provided in paragraph (2), the report'';
(B) by indenting the margin of paragraph (1), as so
designated, 2 ems; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) If the Secretary determines that the transmittal of a
certification with respect to a foreign country under
paragraph (3) or (4) of subsection (a) in classified form
would make more likely the cooperation of the government of
the foreign country as specified in such paragraph, the
Secretary may transmit the certification under such paragraph
in classified form.''.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, it is my understanding, if it is agreeable
with the distinguished managers of the bill, that we will debate this
in the morning at about 9 or 9:15, whatever is agreeable to the
managers of the bill.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I say to my friend from Arizona, the
leader was hoping to schedule a vote at 9:30. You graciously agreed to
let it be on this amendment. As to when the debate occurs, we can
accommodate the Senator from Arizona on that.
Mr. McCAIN. I ask both the Senator from Kentucky and the Senator from
Vermont, if it is agreeable, I don't need more than 10 minutes. We
could start, say, at 9:10 with the amendment, if the leader insists on
a vote at 9:30, if that is agreeable.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, let me suggest we have the vote at 9:45
and start at 9:30.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I would like to see the amendment. I hate
to agree to a time, and I am sorry to upset the clerk by saying that,
but it is a little bit difficult to get the exact time when we might
vote. I am not sure exactly what the amendment is. I hate to cut off
other people.
Why don't we agree on an hour evenly divided? The amendment I now
have in my hand ends ``this transmits certification such paragraph
in.''
Mr. McCAIN. I have a better copy for the Senator.
Mr. LEAHY. I thank the Senator. The Senator from Arizona has given me
another copy. He may want to send that one to the desk. I believe the
one at the desk may have had a typo. I certainly have no objection to
having him substitute.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to send a revised
version of the amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The
amendment is revised.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, if this is agreeable with the distinguished
Senator from Kentucky, why don't we have the vote, say, at 9:45, either
a vote on it or a vote on tabling. I expect it will be a vote up or
down. I just don't want to give up that right. I am sure the Senator
from Arizona can understand that. And maybe have, prior to the vote, 20
minutes on each side. Will that be agreeable?
Mr. McCAIN. That is certainly agreeable. I only need 10 minutes on
this side.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the Senator from Arizona and the
distinguished Senator from Vermont are going to discuss the amendment
that is currently at the desk. What we would like to do at this point
is to have an opening statement from Senator Coverdell on the amendment
that he is going to be offering, which will be laid aside and will be
taken up subsequent to the vote on the McCain amendment.
So, Mr. President, the order will be, we will hopefully vote on the
McCain amendment sometime as early as possible in the morning and then
go to the Coverdell amendment which Senator Coverdell is now prepared
to discuss. I yield the floor.
Mr. COVERDELL addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I wonder if the Senator from Kentucky
would yield for a moment. Would it be appropriate to go ahead and lay
the amendment down, and then I would make an opening statement? At the
time they resolve that, you can set mine aside and proceed with the
other amendment.
Mr. McCONNELL. I suggest to my friend from Georgia, go on and make
the statement. By the time you finish, it will probably be ready to be
laid down.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia is recognized.
Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, at the appropriate time, I will be
sending to the desk an amendment that deals with international
narcotics and law enforcement.
As you know, Mr. President, the President of the United States and
this Senator have been in extended disagreement about drug policy in
the United States. I have been exceedingly critical of the reduction of
an investment in drug interdiction. I have been critical of the
reduction of our resources available for international narcotics law
enforcement. I have been critical of the fact that the drug czar's
office was virtually closed. I have been critical of the fact that the
message coming from the White House has been less than clear to the
young people of our country on how dangerous drugs are to them.
I find myself tonight in the unusual circumstance of defending
President Clinton's policy for his 1997 budget request for
international narcotics and law enforcement.
Mr. President, President Clinton requested that $213 million be
appropriated for international narcotics and law enforcement. That
figure is only half what the investment in this arena was in 1992,
which is just another example of the downsizing of the drug role. But
unfortunately, the House bill only appropriates $150 million in
international narcotics and law enforcement, and the Senate, as we have
it before the floor, is $160 million.
The purpose of my amendment will be to restore the President's
request, to honor the President's request. He has requested $213
million. I think it should be more, but it certainly, in my judgment,
should not be less.
My amendment restores $53 million to this effort. Where does it come
from? Mr. President, the Senate's position that is before us assigns
$356 million to international operations and programs, a significant
program. That is $31 million higher than the President's request, $31
million more than the President requested for international operations
and programs.
So my proposal would take $28 million from this proposal and shift it
to international narcotics and law enforcement. In other words, we are
taking money from an account for which the President requested less,
but we would put in more and shift it over to where he requested more
but got less. Second, we take $25 million from development assistance,
that is AID, which is requiring only a 2 percent reduction in the
Senate-proposed appropriations, which is $1.929 billion. Having
accomplished these two shifts, $28 million from international
operations programs, $25 million from AID or development assistance, we
would have the effect at the end of the day of having restored--
restored--this very important function, international narcotics and law
enforcement.
Mr. President, in the last 3 years, as an underpinning for my
amendment and for the President's request, which I am trying to
fulfill, we have created in the United States a full-fledged drug
epidemic. Until I had seen the figures I could not believe it. From
1980 to 1992, drug use among our teenagers was cut in half. In the last
36 months it has doubled. Every statistic--marijuana use, heroin use--
we are seeing a war flash across our country. In fact, Mr. President,
if the casualties we are taking were from people in uniform, we would
have declared war in our hemisphere by what is happening across the
board.
What am I talking about, Mr. President? What I am talking about is
that 2 million--2 million--more teenagers are into drugs tonight than
there were 3 years ago--2 million. That is as large as the city of
Atlanta, the host of the 1996 Olympics. Two million sisters, brothers,
fathers, mothers, 2 million friends, associates, folks who live next
door, somebody in the workplace, whose lives are stunted, tragically
altered, and the line is going straight up.
[[Page S8633]]
The drug war was shut off. It needs to be turned back on. We need to
be concerned about what is happening to children in our own country.
Mr. President, this is the first war that has been waged against
children. In the 1960's and 1970's, the target audience was 17 to 21
years old. Today the drug war is waged against kids who are 8 to 13
years of age. It is a tragedy occurring right before our eyes.
The President has appointed a new drug czar. He has called for new
international narcotics money. While we may disagree on the policies
that got us here, I agree with his effort to get the war back on.
Mr. President, I yield for a moment. Apparently the Senator from
Arizona and the Senator from Vermont have worked out their differences.
I will yield and return and submit my amendment officially after they
have concluded their work.
Mr. McCAIN addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
Amendment No. 5017
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I understand the managers have agreed to a
unanimous consent that we have a vote at 10 tomorrow with one-half hour
equally divided.
Mr. LEAHY addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the agreement was--I understand that the
Republican leader has a scheduling concern--that we would go to the
amendment of the distinguished Senator from Arizona at 9:30 in the
morning, that we would have one-half hour equally divided in the usual
form, but obviously we could yield that back. I mean, technically we
could be on the vote at 9:31.
I say that only because I do not want the two leaders, my
distinguished friends from Mississippi and South Dakota, to suddenly
have to hear from Members, why are we having a vote at 9:30, not 10?
But my understanding is that the distinguished chairman will soon ask
unanimous consent on behalf of the distinguished majority leader that
we would be on the McCain amendment at 9:30, one-half hour equally
divided, though we can yield back.
Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, in fairness to the Members, I think it
is better to have a time certain for the first vote.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that that vote occur on or in
relation to the McCain amendment no later than 10 a.m., Thursday, and
that the time between 9:30 and 10 a.m., be equally divided in the usual
form.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I understand that would be a McCain
amendment, and that there would be no second-degrees in order.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I also ask, if I could have unanimous
consent, that a modification would be in order tomorrow morning, as we
are still in negotiations with the Senator from Vermont concerning,
perhaps, modifications for the amendment.
I ask unanimous consent I be allowed to modify the amendment tomorrow
morning in agreement with the Senator from Vermont.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the McCain
amendment be set aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 5018
(Purpose: To increase the amount of funds available for international
narcotics control programs, offset by reductions in other
appropriations)
Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk that
amends the bill in more than one place, and I ask unanimous consent
that it be immediately considered, and no second-degree amendments be
in order.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I did not
hear.
Mr. McCONNELL. Let me say that the amendment of the Senator from
Georgia will be laid aside after he finishes his discussion.
We will vote first in the morning on the amendment of the Senator
from Arizona, Senator McCain, and no time agreement will be entered
into tonight for a time certain on a vote on the Coverdell amendment.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the request of the Senator
from Georgia is agreed to.
The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Georgia [Mr. Coverdell], for himself, Mr.
Lott, Mr. Helms, and Mr. Grassley, proposes an amendment
numbered 5018.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 104, line 19, strike ``$1,290,000,000'' and insert
``$1,262,000,000''.
On page 124, line 20, strike ``$160,000,000'' and insert
``$213,000,000''.
On page 138, line 5, strike ``$295,000,000'' and insert
``$270,000,000''.
Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I have basically concluded my opening
statement on the proposal, and explained that we are restoring funding
to the President's request in the arena of international narcotics.
I did misspeak when I said we were taking $28 million, the figure is
$25 million for international narcotics; and I said $25 million from
development and assistance, and it is $28 million. I got them reversed.
Just to reiterate, we are in the midst of a drug epidemic. This is
not a time to undercut the Presidential request for direct funding to
the war on narcotics and the war on 8- to 13-year-olds in America--8 to
13 years of age. They are the target. The havoc that we would pay for
this is immeasurable and indescribable.
I yield the floor.
Mr. McCONNELL. I commend the Senator from Georgia for his amendment.
I support it.
As far as I know, there is no further business to be conducted this
evening, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________