[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 25 (Monday, March 3, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1840-S1843]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. COVERDELL (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Helms):
  S.J. Res. 19. A joint resolution to disapprove the certification of 
the President under section 490(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
1961 regarding foreign assistance for Mexico during fiscal year 1997; 
read the first time.
  S.J. Res. 20. A joint resolution to disapprove the certification of 
the President under section 490(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
1961 regarding foreign assistance for Mexico during fiscal year 1997; 
to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  S.J. Res. 21. A joint resolution to disapprove the certification of 
the President under section 490(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
1961 regarding assistance for Mexico during fiscal year 1997, and to 
provide for the termination of the withholding of and opposition to 
assistance that results from the disapproval; to the Committee on 
Foreign Relations.


                        DISAPPROVAL LEGISLATION

  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I have introduced today three separate 
joint resolutions to disapprove the President's decision to certify 
Mexico as fully cooperating in our war on drugs. The first joint 
resolution will eventually be placed on the calendar by way of rule XIV 
of the Standing Rules of the Senate. The second resolution is identical 
to the first joint resolution; however, it will be referred to the 
Senate Foreign Relations Committee for their consideration.
  Finally, Mr. President, the third joint resolution I have just 
introduced would disapprove the President's certification and instead 
decertify Mexico but authorize a national interest waiver.
  Mr. President, I have been joined today by a coauthor of these 
resolutions, Senator Feinstein of California, who will make remarks in 
a moment. I will take just a few minutes to visit this subject and then 
yield the floor to Senator Feinstein.
  First, let me say, Mr. President, that this is a most difficult 
issue, and it has very broad ramifications. Mr. President, I stand here 
as a friend of Mexico and the Mexican people, but I believe the actions 
on the part of the administration were a resounding endorsement of the 
status quo. Mr. President, the status quo is unacceptable. The status 
quo sees the Government of Mexico under siege by perpetrators of fraud 
and corruption and destabilization. Mr. President, the status quo sees 
millions of new victims being ravaged by the assault of drugs within 
our community. I suspect that the actions on the part of the 
administration, of President Clinton, were an effort to be supportive 
of President Zedillo. I can understand that, but I believe this 
decision to certify without condition, versus to decertify and waive as 
our resolution calls for, misleads both nations. It suggests that 
things are going along fairly well and we just need to keep doing what 
we have been doing.
  The President of Mexico himself said the greatest single threat to 
the security of his republic are the drug cartels. Mr. President, we 
are losing this war. That is what the status quo represents. We are 
losing. The people of Mexico are losing through destabilization of 
their government at all levels, the American people are losing through 
the victimization of millions of American citizens, and the democracies 
of the hemisphere are losing because this is a pervasive cloud over our 
future as we enter the new century.
  All the opportunity one can envision about this hemisphere, the fact 
that 40 percent of our trade occurs in this hemisphere, the abounding 
opportunities that one can easily look at when

[[Page S1841]]

you see what commerce can produce in the uplifting of all of our 
peoples, the single most serious threat to all those opportunities are 
the drug cartels. It hangs as a cloud, Mr. President. I believe the 
actions on the part of the administration do a disservice to all of our 
people on both sides of the border. And I hope that we can come at this 
question more honestly and admit that we have deep problems here, and 
that the good will that exists between our peoples is vibrant enough 
and strong enough that it can face an honest problem head on. No one is 
served by sweeping it under the rug for yet another year. Every day 
that goes by, we lose a little bit more and we come closer and closer 
to a time when this becomes unresolvable.

  Mr. President, we will hold hearings on these resolutions in the very 
near term. I compliment my colleague from California for her extended 
work in this area for a considerable period of time.
  At this point, I yield the floor to my colleague from California, 
Senator Feinstein.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Chair and I thank the Senator from 
Georgia. I am pleased to join with him in this joint resolution, 
disapproving the certification of Mexico.
  Mr. President, my disappointment in the administration's decision to 
certify Mexico's antidrug efforts last week, I think, was known to all. 
I believe that decision was a mistake, and I said so.
  The decision to certify Mexico in the face of what I consider to be 
an overwhelming lack of cooperation undermines the integrity of the 
certification process itself, as well as damaging the credibility of 
the United States in our dealings with other countries with whom we 
seek cooperation.
  I rise today to join with the Senator from Georgia and a number of my 
colleagues in introducing this resolution. But I do so with some 
regret. I regret the need for the resolution for two reasons. First, 
Mexico is a neighbor, a friend, and an ally of our country. Second, I 
very much regret the need to disagree with my President on this issue. 
I believe he made what he believes to be the right decision, but I 
respectfully disagree with him.
  Our intention is clear: We believe that the evidence overwhelmingly 
supports decertification of Mexico, and then if the President sees fit, 
invoking a vital national interest waiver. For that reason, Senator 
Coverdell has introduced a second resolution that allows the President 
to waive the sanctions on grounds of vital national interest after we 
enact our resolution of disapproval.
  Last week, a bipartisan group of 39 Senators sent a letter to the 
President urging that this be his decision.
  I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record 
following my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See exhibit 1.)
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, section 490 of the Foreign Assistance 
Act requires the President to certify that Mexico has cooperated fully 
with the United States, or taken adequate steps on its own to combat 
drug trafficking. It's just not tenable to claim that Colombia did not 
meet that standard, but Mexico did. Let me read one sentence from the 
decertification of Colombia in 1996. It reads:

       Critical to the U.S. judgment that the Government of 
     Colombia did not fully cooperate on counternarcotics in 1995 
     is the assessment that corruption remains pervasive, despite 
     the efforts of some dedicated Colombians to root it out.

  That is no different from the situation in Mexico today. There are 
dedicated efforts in Mexico, but the corruption is pervasive.
  I think the events of last week are an example in point.
  Just hours before the President's decision on certification of Mexico 
was to be announced, Mexican officials were touting the arrest of a 
reputed cartel leader, Humberto Garcia Abrego, brother of Juan Garcia 
Abrego, who was expelled from Mexico during last year's certification 
process.
  Then, just a few hours after the decision to certify was announced, 
guess what? Garcia Abrego simply walked away from Mexican custody a 
free man. The Mexican Attorney General's office claimed responsibility 
for setting him free. His release was ``inexplicable,'' they said.
  Mr. President, this is just one example of the kind of cooperation 
the United States has received. It has tightened up just before 
certification and then, just after certification, it's business as 
usual.
  With 70 percent of the cocaine, a quarter of the heroin, 80 percent 
of the marijuana, and 90 percent of the ephedrine used to make 
methamphetamine entering the United States from our southern border, 
Mexico's drug problem is America's drug problem, and the problem is 
getting worse, not better.
  Last year at this time, Senator D'Amato and I compiled a list of 
actions we considered necessary for the Mexican Government to take in 
order to show progress on their antidrug efforts. Regrettably, I 
believe the evidence shows there has been little or no progress on 
nearly all of the items on this list.

  Some of these failures are due to inability; others are due simply to 
a lack of political will.
  For example, some questions: Has Mexico extradited one Mexican 
national on outstanding drug charges? The answer is no. I was puzzled 
because the Secretary of State, in her statement on certification, made 
this statement: ``Mexico has set a precedent by extraditing its own 
nationals.'' One might conclude that this includes Mexicans wanted on 
drug charges. Yet, to the contrary, both the Department of Justice and 
the DEA tell me that not a single Mexican national has been extradited 
to this country on drug-related charges.
  If the State Department has information that Mexican nationals are 
being extradited on drug-related charges--and there are 52 of them on 
the extradition list--I ask them now to make that list public. Tell us 
which Mexican nationals have been extradited on drug-related charges.
  Francisco Arellano-Felix of the notorious Tijuana cartel is currently 
in custody in a Mexican prison and wanted on narcotics charges here in 
the United States. I say to Mexico, why not show good faith and 
extradite him?
  Mexican authorities tell us that there has been an agreement in 
principle on extraditing Mexican nationals, but there has been no 
change in their actions.
  Question 2: Has Mexico implemented new laws aimed at curbing the 
rampant laundering of drug money? No.
  Nearly a year ago, the Mexican Parliament passed criminal money 
laundering laws. But the new laws are a far cry from the stronger 
legislative action sought by U.S. officials. The new laws do not even 
require banks to report large or suspicious currency transactions. 
Promises to enact such regulations have, so far, gone unfulfilled.
  To my knowledge, not one money exchange house in Mexico has changed 
its operations.
  Have Mexican authorities significantly increased their seizure rate 
of cocaine or their arrest of drug traffickers? Let's take a look at 
it. The answer to that clearly is no. Cocaine seizures by Mexico, which 
increased slightly last year, are barely half of what was seized in 
1993.

  Here are seizures in 1993--46.2 tons. Here they are in 1995--22.2 
tons. And they are just slightly above that in 1996. Actually, instead 
of 22.2 tons, in 1996 they are 23.5.
  So that is the record. It has been effectively downhill, and then a 
straight line, and a small little jog up.
  Let's take a look at drug-related arrests in Mexico. Drug-related 
arrests last year are less than half of what they were in 1992. Here 
are the figures. In 1992, 27,369; down in 1993; down in 1994; and way 
down in 1995, all the way to 9,700. We don't have 1996 on this chart 
yet, but the 1996 figures are 11,245. That is a startling drop since 
1992.
  So here is a country being certified as fully cooperative, and drug 
seizures have gone down and drug arrests have gone down in the last 3 
years.
  One has to ask then: What is ``full cooperation"?
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I certainly will.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I have a comment on the statistics just demonstrated, 
because I was reading in the New York Times, and they begin the data in 
1994.

[[Page S1842]]

 So it shows a slight increase. But the dramatic case that the Senator 
made is absolutely correct. You have to go back to 1992 and 1993 to see 
what really is happening with arrests and seizures of narcotics.
  I just point out that it is good that the Senator is making the point 
because our adversaries like to start measuring statistics in 1994. We 
can't do that.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. The Senator is correct. I thank him very much for 
that comment because he is absolutely right. The jog up is so small 
when you compare it with the drop which is so steep and pronounced. So 
I thank the Senator very much.
  It leads me to the conclusion that the situation with Mexico has 
never been worse. DEA has suspended American agents going into Mexico 
because, just last month, Mexico forbade United States drug agents from 
carrying weapons on the Mexican side of the border.
  I understand that there may be some agreement again to enable our 
agents to be armed, and then they will go in again. However, it should 
be pointed out that death threats against our agents are up.
  I would like to ask that all Members, if they would be willing, to 
simply read the testimony provided by Thomas Constantine, Administrator 
of the Drug Enforcement Administration, before the House Government 
Reform and Oversight Committee, the National Security, International 
Affairs, and Criminal Justice Subcommittee, last week. It was played 
about three times on C-SPAN over the weekend. I heard it. I also read 
the remarks. And the remarks are really very, very profound.
  In this report, Mr. Constantine points out again:
       Since 1993, 23 major drug-related assassinations have taken 
     place in Mexico. Virtually all of these murders remain 
     unsolved. Many of them have occurred in Tijuana, or have 
     involved victims from Tijuana in the last year. Twelve law 
     enforcement officers, or former officials, have been gunned 
     down in Tijuana, and the vast majority of the 200 murders in 
     that city are believed to have been drug related.

  The Administrator also points out that of the 1,200 firings firings 
of Government officials for corruption made by President Zedillo, no 
successful prosecutions of these individuals have ever taken place. So 
of the 1,200 Government officials fired for corruption, there has not 
been a single successful prosecution.

  The arrest last month of Gen. Jesus Gutierrez Rebollo brings, I 
think, the level of drug-influenced corruption in Mexico into some 
glaring relief. It is frightening. But, as I have pointed out, it is 
just the tip of the iceberg.
  In September, a federal police commander, Ernesto Ibarra, who had 
vowed to take down the Tijuana cartel, was murdered, and some of the 
assailants were his own officers.
  That should tell us a great deal about the level of corruption.
  The celebrated army raid of a wedding last month of the sister of 
Amado Carillo-Fuentes, Mexico's most powerful cartel leader, seems to 
be an elaborate charade. The raid, which was organized by General 
Gutierrez, who we now know was on the Carillo-Fuentes payroll and the 
target of the raid, was tipped off in advance and either never did come 
to the wedding or escaped. Federal police were found to be protecting 
the drug traffickers at that wedding. The federal police were 
protecting drug traffickers. I find that just amazing.
  As former DEA Administrator Robert Bonner said, ``It would be hard 
for anyone to say with a straight face that the Mexican Government is 
taking effective action against the major drug traffickers at this 
juncture.''
  Yet, they were just certified as so doing.
  The purpose of section 490 was not to deliver merit badges to nations 
whose leaders have good intentions. The world is filled with leaders 
who have good intentions. The act was designed to measure uniformly the 
actions taken by countries to assist the United States in antidrug 
efforts.
  Colombia was decertified last year and again this year because their 
efforts were ineffectual.
  How Mexico cannot be held to the same standards I have a hard time 
understanding. To certify Mexico in the face of overwhelming evidence 
to the contrary undercuts the certification process.
  So I ask all of my colleagues to join the distinguished Senator from 
Georgia and myself in voting to disapprove the President's decision on 
certification of Mexico but to allow him, if he sees fit, to enact a 
national-interest waiver.
  Then we should work with the President to devise conditions under 
which Mexico would be eligible for recertification.

                               Exhibit 1


                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                Washington, DC, February 26, 1997.
     The President,
     The White House, Washington, DC
       Dear Mr. President: We are writing to urge you to deny 
     certification that Mexico has taken sufficient actions to 
     combat international narcotics trafficking when you report to 
     Congress on the anti-narcotics efforts of major drug 
     producing and drug-transit countries. We believe a reasonable 
     examination of the facts leads to no other decision.
       Regrettably, we have concluded that there has been 
     insufficient progress, or no progress, on a wide range of key 
     elements of an effective counternarcotics program in Mexico. 
     Some of these failures are due to inability; others are due 
     to a lack of political will. But all have set back the urgent 
     effort to end the plague of drugs on our streets.
       We want to bring to your attention a number of the most 
     significant examples of Mexico's inability and unwillingness 
     to deal with the drug trafficking problem effectively:
       Cartels: There has been little or no effective action taken 
     against the major drug cartels. The two most powerful--the 
     Juarez Cartel run by Amado Carillo Fuentes, and the Tijuana 
     Cartel, run by the Arellano Felix brothers--have hardly been 
     touched by Mexican law enforcement. Those who have been 
     arrested, such as Hector Palma, are given light sentences and 
     allowed to continue to conduct business from jail. As DEA 
     Administrator Thomas Constantine says, ``The Mexicans are now 
     the single most powerful trafficking groups''--worse than the 
     Colombian cartels.
       Money Laundering: Last year, the Mexican parliament passed 
     criminal money laundering laws for the first time, but the 
     new laws are incomplete and have not yet been properly 
     implemented. These laws do not require banks to report large 
     and suspicious currency transactions, or threaten the banks 
     with sanctions if they fail to comply. Promises to enact such 
     regulations--which prosecutors need to identify money-
     launderers--have so far gone unfulfilled. Mexican officials 
     said that such regulations would be developed by January, 
     but they were not produced.
       Law Enforcement: While there have been increases in the 
     amounts of heroin and marijuana seized by Mexican 
     authorities, cocaine seizures remain low. Although slightly 
     higher than last year's figures, the 23.6 metric tons seized 
     in 1996 is barely half of what was seized in 1993. A modest 
     increase in drug-related arrests brought the total to 11,245 
     in 1996--less than half of the 1992 figure.
       Cooperation with U.S. Law Enforcement: Our own drug 
     enforcement agents report that the situation on the border 
     has never been worse. Last month, the Mexican government 
     forbade U.S. agents to carry weapons on the Mexican side of 
     the border, putting their lives in grave danger. Recent news 
     reports indicate that death threats against U.S. narcotics 
     agents on the border have quadrupled in the past three 
     months. Some U.S. agents believe that all their cooperative 
     efforts are undone almost instantly by the corrupt Mexican 
     agents with whom they work.
       Extraditions: Mexico also has made very little progress in 
     the area of extraditions. In the past year, they have failed 
     to capture and extradite a single high-ranking member of any 
     of the major drug cartels. There are 52 outstanding U.S. 
     extradition requests for drug dealers, and Mexico has failed 
     to comply with a single one of them. No Mexican national has 
     ever been extradited to the United States on drug charges. In 
     the last year, Mexico has fired two directors of its National 
     Institute to Combat Drugs, one Attorney General, and several 
     high-ranking officials in the federal police for their 
     corrupt involvement with the drug lords. We should expect 
     Mexico to pursue the cartel leaders with the same level of 
     intensity used to expose and punish corruption by government 
     officials.
       Corruption: Mexico's counternarcotics effort is plagued by 
     corruption in the government and the national police. Among 
     the evidence are the eight Mexican prosecutors and law 
     enforcement officials who have been murdered in Tijuana in 
     recent months. There has been considerable hope that the 
     Mexican armed forces would be able to take a more active role 
     in the counternarcotics effort without the taint of 
     corruption. But the revelation that Gen. Jesus Gutierrez 
     Rebollo, Mexico's top counternarcotics official and a 42-year 
     veteran of the armed forces, had accepted bribes from the 
     Carillo Fuentes cartel, casts grave doubts upon that hope.
       Recent news reports indicate that U.S. law enforcement 
     officials suspect judges, prosecutors, Transportation 
     Ministry officials, Naval officers, and Governors of 
     corruption and actively facilitating the work of drug 
     traffickers. The National Autonomous University of Mexico 
     estimates that the drug lords spend $500 million each year to 
     bribe Mexican officials at all levels, and many consider that 
     figure to be a gross under-estimation.

[[Page S1843]]

       Mr. President, we believe that the evidence is overwhelming 
     and can lead to no decision other than the decertification of 
     Mexico. It would send a strong signal to Mexico and the world 
     that the United States will not tolerate lack of cooperation 
     in the fight against narcotics, even from our close friends 
     and allies. Accordingly, we urge you to establish a clear set 
     of benchmarks by which you will judge if and when to 
     recertify Mexico for counternarcotics cooperation. These 
     benchmarks must include, but not be limited to: effective 
     action to dismantle the major drug cartels and arrest their 
     leaders; full and ongoing implementation of effective money-
     laundering legislation; compliance with all outstanding 
     extradition requests by the United States; increased 
     interdiction of narcotics and other controlled substances 
     flowing across the border by land and sea routes; improved 
     cooperation with U.S. law enforcement officials including 
     allowing U.S. agents to resume carrying weapons on the 
     Mexican side of the border; and a comprehensive program to 
     identify, weed out, and prosecute corrupt officials at all 
     levels of the Mexican government, police, and military.
       You may feel, as many of us do, that U.S. interests in 
     Mexico, economic and otherwise, are too extensive to risk the 
     fall-out that would result from decertification. That is why 
     Congress included a vital national interest waiver provision 
     in Section 490 of the Foreign Assistance Act. But other vital 
     interests are not a valid reason to certify when 
     certification has not been earned. If you feel that our 
     interests warrant it, we urge you to use this waiver. But an 
     honest assessment of Mexico's cooperation on counternarcotics 
     must fall on the side of decertification.
           Sincerely,
         Wayne Allard, Jeff Bingaman, Barbara Boxer, John Breaux, 
           Richard Bryan, Max Cleland, Susan M. Collins, Kent 
           Conrad, Paul Coverdell, Larry Craig, Alfonse D'Amato, 
           Pete Domenici, Byron Dorgan, Dick Durbin, Russ 
           Feingold, Dianne Feinstein, Wendell Ford, Slade Gorton, 
           Judd Gregg, Chuck Hagel, Jesse Helms, Kay Bailey 
           Hutchison, Tim Hutchinson, Dirk Kempthorne, Bob Kerrey, 
           Jon Kyl, Mary Landrieu, Frank Lautenberg, Connie Mack, 
           Patty Murray, Frank Murkowski, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, 
           Carol Moseley-Braun, Jack Reed, Harry Reid, Rick 
           Santorum, Ted Stevens, Robert Torricelli, and Ron 
           Wyden.

                          ____________________