[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 85 (Wednesday, June 18, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Page S5925]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  STATE DEPARTMENT AUTHORIZATION BILL

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise to express my concern about the 
passage of S. 903, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 
1997. Some of my distinguished colleagues have cited this legislation 
as historic in scope and worthy of support because of the consolidation 
of the U.S. Information Agency, the Arms Control and Disarmament 
Agency, and parts of the Agency for International Development into the 
Department of State. I do not object to this consolidation, but I am 
concerned that the Senate is yet again infringing too much on the 
Presidential prerogative to be the primary architect of U.S. foreign 
policy. This bill gives microlevel direction on how consolidation 
should occur, and I feel that this is not appropriate for the Senate to 
be trying to micromanage the performance of our State Department 
agencies, offices, and employees.
  Mr. President, I have other concerns as well with S. 903. As Senators 
Lugar and Sarbanes have articulated, I feel that we have established 
inappropriate benchmarks for the United Nations in this legislation so 
that moneys obligated by the United States to the United Nations can be 
released. I feel that it is important for the United States to 
communicate its concerns to the United Nations about its management 
problems. But I also feel it is important for the United States to 
honor its already incurred obligations and pay our debts. Furthermore, 
some of the tests that we impose on the United Nations are very 
inappropriate. For instance, during the first year, only $100 million 
of the $819 million in arrears payments after a sovereignty test, which 
states that efforts must be taken to ensure that no U.S. law be over-
ridden or changed by any action of the United Nations. I don't believe 
that there are many legislators in this Congress who believe for a 
moment that any U.N. law would purport to have such authority, nor 
would the United States allow such authority to be vested in the United 
Nations. However, the inclusion of this in S. 903 sends a signal to our 
constituents that this is a serious problem. I was sent to the Senate 
to try and address real problems, not to stir up fake ones.
  On another front, it seems to me strange that we would be abolishing 
two agencies and preparing for the absorption of a third into the 
Department of State and at the same time creating a brand-new stand-
alone agency to oversee the broadcasting functions that were 
traditionally part of the U.S. Information Agency and under the 
auspices of the Board for International Broadcasting, which was 
abolished by the International Broadcasting Act of 1994. We should be 
basing our current institutional consolidations on the basis that the 
cold war has ended and that we need to reorganize to meet the 
challenges of a new and different international system. This 
legislation however, which sets up a structure virtually identical to 
the Board for International Broadcasting will cover, among other 
activities, our broadcasting to Cuba activities. I think that it is not 
wise to build new institutions, which this bill does, which will keep 
our Nation mired in a cold war mode.
  For these and other reasons, Mr. President, I am registering my 
objection to this State Department authorization bill, S. 903. I 
realize that this bill will pass with overwhelming support from this 
Chamber, but I believe that sometimes we can give away too much on the 
commonsense front to strike a deal.

                          ____________________