[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 140 (Wednesday, October 2, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12200-S12201]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                INTERNATIONAL FAMILY PLANNING ASSISTANCE

 Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the Senate version of the Foreign 
Operations bill included my amendment to provide $410 million for 
international family planning assistance, an increase of $54 million 
above last year's level. That amendment also deleted a House provision 
which would have penalized private organizations that use their own 
funds for abortions, even where abortion is legal.
  This is the remaining issue to be decided in the conference on this 
bill, and it is now in the hands of the White House and the House and 
Senate leadership. I appreciate the White House's support for my 
position. This is an issue of critical importance to the welfare of 
hundreds of millions of women around the world, especially in poor 
countries where family planning services are often lacking or 
inadequate.
  Last year, after going back and forth with the House several times on 
this same issue, the House sent us a provision that resulted in a 
drastic cut in funding for family planning. Chairman Hatfield, who has 
consistently voted pro-life, opposed that provision, as did I, because 
it cut family planning services to millions of women with the 
inevitable result that there would be an increase in unwanted 
pregnancies and abortions.
  But the House recessed immediately after, and in order to avoid 
another Government shutdown the Senate reluctantly acquiesced in the 
House provision. I, and I know others feel likewise, do not want to see 
a repeat of that fiasco.
  This year, the House included a provision which not only continues 
the one-third cut in funding for family

[[Page S12201]]

planning, but it also included a version of the Mexico City policy by 
imposing restrictions on what private organizations can do with their 
own money in order to receive U.S. Government funds.
  Why we would want to do that when there are hundreds of millions of 
people who want family planning services but cannot get it, and the 
world is struggling with the enormous pressures of over a billion 
people living in poverty already, is beyond me.
  I understand the herculean efforts that Congressman Callahan and 
others on the House side have made to try to resolve this matter in a 
way that does not damage the Agency for International Development's 
family planning program. I also greatly appreciate the tireless efforts 
of Senator Hatfield, who has tried every conceivable approach to 
reconcile the House and Senate provisions.
  However, I urge the administration to stand firmly on the side of 
women, on unrestricted access to family planning, and on the right of 
private organizations to use their funds as they see fit--including for 
abortions, consistent with the laws of the countries where they 
operate. At a time when the world's population will double in the next 
50 years and 90 percent of the new births will occur in countries that 
cannot even feed and care for their own people today, there is no more 
pressing issue for American leadership.

                          ____________________