[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 130 (Thursday, September 25, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H7890-H7907]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 239 and rule
XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 2267.
{time} 2243
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 2267) making appropriations for the Departments of
Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes, with
Mr. Hastings of Washington in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
{time} 2245
The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole House rose earlier
today, amendment No. 12 offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr.
Hostettler] had been disposed of and the bill was open for amendment
from page 42, line 5, to page 43, line 6.
The order of the House of today will be printed in the Record at this
point.
The text of the order of the House of today is as follows:
During further consideration of H.R. 2267 pursuant to House
Resolution 239:
(1) No further amendment shall be in order except:
amendments printed before September 25, 1997, in the portion
of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose in
clause 6 of rule XXIII; amendments numbered 2 and 3 in part 2
of House Report 105-264; one amendment offered by
Representative Rogers of Kentucky after consultation with
Representative Mollohan of West Virginia; one amendment to
the amendment printed in the Congressional Record and
numbered 4; and pro forma amendments offered by the chairman
or ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations
or their designees;
(2) Each amendment shall be considered as read and (other
than the amendments numbered 2 and 3 in part 2 of House
Report 105-264 and the amendment numbered 4 and any amendment
thereto) shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided
and controlled by the proponent and an opponent;
(3) The amendment numbered 4 shall be debatable for 60
minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and
an opponent, except that if an amendment thereto is offered
before that debate begins, then the amendment and the
amendment thereto shall be debatable for 30 minutes equally
divided and controlled by the original proponent and
opponent;
(4) The amendment numbered 4 may be offered only before
noon on Friday, September 26, 1997, or after 5 p.m. on
Monday, September 29, 1997;
(5) The amendment numbered 2 in House Report 105-264 may be
offered only on Tuesday, September 30, 1997;
(6) The amendment numbered 4 and the amendment offered by
Representative Rogers may be offered without regard to the
stage of the reading;
(7) After the sum of the number of motions to strike out
the enacting words of the bill (as described in clause 7 of
rule XXIII) or that the Committee rise offered by Members of
the minority party reaches three, the chairman of the
Committee of the Whole may entertain another such motion
during further consideration of the bill only if offered by
the chairman of the Committee on
[[Page H7891]]
Appropriations or the Majority Leader or their designee.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments to this portion of the
bill which are in order under the order of the House?
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, could I inquire where we are in the reading
of the bill?
The CHAIRMAN. We are at page 43, line 6.
If there are no further amendments at this point, the Clerk will
read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of administering the economic
development assistance programs as provided for by law,
$21,000,000: Provided, That these funds may be used to
monitor projects approved pursuant to title I of the Public
Works Employment Act of 1976, as amended, title II of the
Trade Act of 1974, as amended, and the Community Emergency
Drought Relief Act of 1977.
Minority Business Development Agency
minority business development
For necessary expenses of the Department of Commerce in
fostering, promoting, and developing minority business
enterprise, including expenses of grants, contracts, and
other agreements with public or private organizations,
$25,000,000.
Economic and Information Infrastructure
Economic and Statistical Analysis
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses, as authorized by law, of economic
and statistical analysis programs of the Department of
Commerce, $47,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 1999.
Economics and Statistics Administration Revolving Fund
The Secretary of Commerce is authorized to disseminate
economic and statistical data products as authorized by
sections 1, 2, and 4 of Public Law 91-412 (15 U.S.C. 1525-
1527) and, notwithstanding section 5412 of the Omnibus Trade
and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 4912), charge fees
necessary to recover the full costs incurred in their
production. Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, receipts received
from these data dissemination activities shall be credited to
this account, to be available for carrying out these purposes
without further appropriation.
Bureau of the Census
salaries and expenses
For expenses necessary for collecting, compiling,
analyzing, preparing, and publishing statistics, provided for
by law, $136,499,000.
Periodic Censuses and Programs
Subject to the limitations provided in section 209, for
expenses necessary to conduct the decennial census,
$381,800,000, to remain available until expended.
In addition, for expenses to collect and publish statistics
for other periodic censuses and programs provided for by law,
$168,326,000, to remain available until expended.
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses, as provided for by law, of the
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA), $17,100,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1535(d), the
Secretary of Commerce shall charge Federal agencies for costs
incurred in spectrum management, analysis, and operations,
and related services and such fees shall be retained and used
as offsetting collections for costs of such spectrum
services, to remain available until expended: Provided
further, That hereafter, notwithstanding any other provision
of law, NTIA shall not authorize spectrum use or provide any
spectrum functions pursuant to the NTIA Organization Act, 47
U.S.C. 902-903, to any Federal entity without reimbursement
as required by NTIA for such spectrum management costs, and
Federal entities withholding payment of such cost shall not
use spectrum: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Commerce is authorized to retain and use as offsetting
collections all funds transferred, or previously transferred,
from other Government agencies for all costs incurred in
telecommunications research, engineering, and related
activities by the Institute for Telecommunication Sciences of
the NTIA, in furtherance of its assigned functions under this
paragraph, and such funds received from other Government
agencies shall remain available until expended.
Public Broadcasting Facilities, Planning and Construction
For grants authorized by section 392 of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, $16,750,000, to remain available
until expended as authorized by section 391 of the Act, as
amended: Provided, That not to exceed $1,500,000 shall be
available for program administration as authorized by section
391 of the Act: Provided further, That, notwithstanding the
provisions of section 391 of the Act, the prior year
unobligated balances may be made available for grants for
projects for which applications have been submitted and
approved during any fiscal year.
Information Infrastructure Grants
For grants authorized by section 392 of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, $21,490,000, to remain available
until expended as authorized by section 391 of the Act, as
amended: Provided, That not to exceed $3,000,000 shall be
available for program administration and other support
activities as authorized by section 391: Provided further,
That of the funds appropriated herein, not to exceed 5
percent may be available for telecommunications research
activities for projects related directly to the development
of a national information infrastructure: Provided further,
That, notwithstanding the requirements of section 392(a) and
392(c) of the Act, these funds may be used for the planning
and construction of telecommunications networks for the
provision of educational, cultural, health care, public
information, public safety, or other social services.
Patent and Trademark Office
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses of the Patent and Trademark Office
provided for by law, including defense of suits instituted
against the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks,
$27,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That the funds made available under this heading are to be
derived from deposits in the Patent and Trademark Office
Fee Surcharge Fund as authorized by law: Provided further,
That the amounts made available under the Fund shall not
exceed amounts deposited; and such fees as shall be
collected pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1113 and 35 U.S.C. 41 and
376, shall remain available until expended.
Technology Administration
Under Secretary for Technology/Office of Technology Policy
Salaries and Expenses
For necessary expenses for the Under Secretary for
Technology/Office of Technology Policy, $8,500,000, of which
not to exceed $1,600,000 shall remain available until
September 30, 1999.
Science and Technology
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Scientific and Technical Research and Services
For necessary expenses of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, $282,852,000, to remain available
until expended, of which not to exceed $1,625,000 may be
transferred to the ``Working Capital Fund''.
Industrial Technology Services
For necessary expenses of the Manufacturing Extension
Partnership of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, $113,500,000, to remain available until expended,
of which not to exceed $300,000 may be transferred to the
``Working Capital Fund''.
In addition, for necessary expenses of the Advanced
Technology Program of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, $185,100,000, to remain available until expended,
of which not to exceed $74,100,000 shall be available for the
award of new grants, and of which not to exceed $500,000 may
be transferred to the ``Working Capital Fund''.
construction of research facilities
For construction of new research facilities, including
architectural and engineering design, and for renovation of
existing facilities, not otherwise provided for the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, as authorized by 15
U.S.C. 278c-278e, $111,092,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That of the amounts provided under this
heading, $94,400,000 shall be available for obligation and
expenditure only after submission of a plan for the
expenditure of these funds, in accordance with section 605 of
this Act.
Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I think we may be getting a little ahead of ourselves.
The CHAIRMAN. Is the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Lofgren] the
designee of the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan]?
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I had an amendment to
offer and we had been discussing having a colloquy. Are we prepared to
do our colloquy, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I am prepared.
Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, as you know, I had an amendment regarding
El Nino research. El Nino in extreme weather is of great concern to all
Americans and every Member of this House on both sides of the aisle. I
was concerned that the current state of the bill might not allow the
research that we all want to have happen.
However, I did want to inquire of the chairman, knowing of his great
concern, and engage in a colloquy with him on this subject.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. LOFGREN. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the concerns of the
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Lofgren] about
[[Page H7892]]
the climate and global change research program.
The bill provides $70 million for these research programs. This is a
$2 million increase over the current level. I understand there is a
difference in funding between the House and Senate. But I would be
happy to work with the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Lofgren] as we
move to that conference.
Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman
from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers]. And based on that, I do not intend to offer
my amendment. I look forward to working with my colleague in the hope
that we can achieve our mutual goal. I thank the gentleman very much
for engaging with me on this.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments to this paragraph?
Hearing none, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Operations, Research, and Facilities
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of activities authorized by law for
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
including maintenance, operation, and hire of aircraft; not
to exceed 270 commissioned officers on the active list as of
September 30, 1998; grants, contracts, or other payments to
nonprofit organizations for the purposes of conducting
activities pursuant to cooperative agreements; and relocation
of facilities as authorized by 33 U.S.C. 883i;
$1,406,400,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302 but consistent with
other existing law, fees shall be assessed, collected, and
credited to this appropriation as offsetting collections to
be available until expended, to recover the costs of
administering aeronautical charting programs: Provided
further, That the sum herein appropriated from the General
Fund shall be reduced as such additional fees are received
during fiscal year 1998, so as to result in a final General
Fund appropriation estimated at not more than $1,403,400,000:
Provided further, That any such additional fees received in
excess of $3,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 shall not be
available for obligation until October 1, 1998: Provided
further, That fees and donations received by the National
Ocean Service for the management of the national marine
sanctuaries may be retained and used for the salaries and
expenses associated with those activities, notwithstanding 31
U.S.C. 3302: Provided further, That in addition, $62,381,000
shall be derived by transfer from the fund entitled ``Promote
and Develop Fishery Products and Research Pertaining to
American Fisheries'': Provided further, That grants to States
pursuant to sections 306 and 306A of the Coastal Zone
Management Act of 1972, as amended, shall not exceed
$2,000,000: Provided further, That of the $1,498,681,000
provided for in direct obligations under this heading (of
which $1,403,400,000 is appropriated from the General Fund,
$67,581,000 is provided by transfer, and $27,700,000 is
derived from unobligated balances and deobligations from
prior years), $219,624,000 shall be for the National Ocean
Service, $326,943,000 shall be for the National Marine
Fisheries Service, $237,463,000 shall be for Oceanic and
Atmospheric Research, $511,154,000 shall be for the National
Weather Service, $119,835,000 shall be for the National
Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service,
$66,712,000 shall be for Program Support, $5,000,000 shall be
for Fleet Maintenance, and $11,950,000 shall be for
Facilities Maintenance: Provided further, That unexpended
balances in the accounts ``Construction'' and ``Fleet
Modernization, Shipbuilding and Conversion'' shall be
transferred to and merged with this account, to remain
available until expended for the purposes for which the funds
were originally appropriated.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I thank the chairman for giving me this time here tonight, and I
would like to give the opportunity for a couple of Members to talk
about their amendment if they would like to. Mr. Chairman, these
amendments are being included in the chairman's manager's amendment and
this gives them an opportunity to speak to their amendments.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey].
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment, which is partially based
upon the amendment I filed on behalf of myself, the gentleman from
Maryland [Mr. Gilchrest], the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle], the
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone], the gentleman from North
Carolina [Mr. Jones], the gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert], and
the gentlewoman from North Carolina [Mrs. Clayton], is in response to
one simple fact: our coastal waters are in trouble.
It is hard to read the newspaper lately and not come across a story
about toxic Pfiesteria, brown tides, and ecological dead zones in our
Nation's coastal waters. From the Long Island Sound to the Chesapeake
Bay, from Louisiana to Oregon, fish kills, contaminated shellfish beds,
beach closures, deteriorating coral reefs, and harmful algae blooms are
taking an enormous toll both on the environment and the economies of
our coastal areas.
While the specific sources of coastal pollutants are not always
clear, the leading cause of water quality impairment in these areas and
all of our bays, lakes and rivers is nonpoint source pollution,
polluted runoff from city streets, farms, and a variety of other
sources. In fact, nonpoint pollution is our Nation's number one water
pollution problem.
To tackle these threats to our coastal areas' economic and ecological
vitality, Congress established the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control
Program under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in
1990. This program provides technical and financial assistance to
States to address the water pollution threats to coastal waters.
Working with NOAA and the EPA, coastal States have invested millions
of dollars crafting runoff control programs. My own State of New York
has invested considerable effort in developing a plan that will benefit
Long Island Sound, the Hudson River, the Great Lakes, and the New York
City Watershed. Many State plans are ready for implementation, but
Federal support for their efforts has not been provided since 1995.
NOAA's Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Program is the only Federal program
which holds real promise for reducing nonpoint source pollution, and it
is critical that we provide funding to make sure that States continue
to make progress.
I want to personally thank the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers]
and the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan] for their help in
working with us to provide funding for this important program. The
agreement we have reached will provide $1 million, the full amount
demanded by the administration, to assist States that have already
developed management plans.
The evidence is clear that our coastal waters are sick. It is time
that we step up to the plate and wage war on these contaminants. The
money is a down payment on our environmental future. The needs among
coastal States are clearly greater.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle to provide more funding next year.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New York
[Mr. Boehlert].
(Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I rise this evening in strong support of the Lowey-
Gilchrest-Castle-Boehlert Amendment. Protecting our nation's coastal
waters from nonpoint source pollution is one of the greatest water
quality challenges facing our nation. We must do more to address
coastal nonpoint sources of pollution and this amendment is an
important step in the right direction.
Today, over half of all water quality impairment in the United States
is caused by nonpoint source pollution and coastal waters have proven
to be exceptionally vulnerable to this source of pollution. Recent fish
kills on the Pocomoke and Manokin Rivers in southern Maryland are just
a glimpse at what may be ahead for America's coastal resources. Failure
to significantly reduce nonpoint sources of water pollution will place
in jeopardy the biological, commercial, and recreational viability of
every beach, bay and estuary in America.
It should be noted that over 75% of all fish harvested by American
commercial fishermen begin their lives in estuaries like the
Chesapeake.
``Pfiesteria hysteria'' is not completely unfounded. Pfiesteria-like
organisms reside in coastal waters on the East Coast, the West Coast,
the Gulf of Mexico and throughout the Great Lakes. The time has come to
rethink our clean water paradigm.
In the last 25 years the Federal government has spent over $60
billion to assist communities in addressing point sources of pollution.
However, during this same period the Federal government has spent less
than $1 billion addressing nonpoint source pollution--the cause of over
half the water quality impairment in America. We must reform the
nonpoint source
[[Page H7893]]
pollution provisions of the Clean Water Act, the section 6217 program,
and our spending priorities to address this reality.
As the Chairman of the Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee,
which has jurisdiction over both the CWA and the Coastal Zone
Management Section 6217 program, I urge all my colleagues to support
this modest increase in funding for the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution
Control Program administered by NOAA.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Rogers
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Rogers:
Page 51, line 5, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $1,500,000)''.
Page 51, line 11, after the second dollar amount insert
``(increased by $1,500,000)''.
Page 51, line 14, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $1,500,000)''.
Page 51, line 16, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $4,000,000)''.
Page 51, line 23, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced
by $2,500,000)''.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers] and a Member
in opposition each will be recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am offering the amendment on behalf of our colleagues
the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey] and the gentleman from
Maryland [Mr. Hoyer] and, in addition, to address an issue of concern
to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton].
The amendments are combined in this manager's amendment and provides
$3 million for the National Ocean Service to address the problem of
Pfiesteria and $1 million for the Nonpoint Source Pollution Program.
This amendment has been worked on from the outset by the colleagues
that I have mentioned, and they have put much time and effort into the
proposal that we are offering here this evening.
Mr. Chairman, I yield as much time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey].
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr.
Rogers] for yielding. However, during this unusual procedure, since I
already had the privilege of speaking on this very important nonpoint
pollution source amendment, I want to thank the gentleman from West
Virginia [Mr. Mollohan] for his cooperation.
{time} 2300
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. Pallone].
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from
Kentucky [Mr. Rogers], the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey] and
the other sponsors of this amendment to come to this agreement that
provides $1 million for the Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control
Program. This is the level requested in the President's budget and is
the first funding for this program in 2 years. The program is critical
to coastal states because nonpoint source pollution is the leading
cause of pollution along our Nation's coasts.
I represent the New Jersey shore where our entire way of life, our
economy and the health and safety of our residents is dependent on the
quality of our coastal waters. I know that it is the same for coastal
communities throughout the country.
The effect of nonpoint source pollution on coastal areas can be
devastating, as we have all seen over the last several weeks with what
is happening in the Chesapeake Bay. I just want to say, according to a
recent report by the Natural Resources Defense Council, coastal
nonpoint source pollution is now the leading cause of beach closings
nationwide. In fact, over half of the beach closings and advisories
last year for which there was a determined cause, 893 of 1,627 closings
and advisories were caused by nonpoint source pollution.
We have come a long way over the last 25 years to cleaning up our
Nation's waters, but now nonpoint source pollution is the final
frontier in water pollution. But it is by working together as we are
today that we are finally going to take this step and finally
accomplish the goal of the Clean Water Act, and that is swimmable,
fishable waters. This will go a long way toward accomplishing that.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer] is recognized
for 7 minutes.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I want to rise on behalf of the Members from
both sides of the aisle from Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. We are very
appreciative, all of us, to the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers]
for helping us work on this amendment and thank very much the
distinguished gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan] for his
assistance in coming to this agreement.
So that the body understands, this amendment is in two parts. The
gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey], the gentleman from New Jersey
[Mr. Pallone]), the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Tierney] and
others offered an amendment which will add $1 million to nonpoint
source research for the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration. This amendment that I rise to offer on behalf of my
colleagues from the States I mentioned is appropriating $3 million to
NOAA to assist the States in determining the factors responsible for
the toxic organism pfiesteria.
Clearly NOAA is one of the best equipped Federal agencies with the
technical expertise and the scientific know-how to determine the causes
and controls of pfiesteria outbreaks. NOAA's recently established
interagency national research program called Ecohab will use this
funding to understand what pfiesteria is and why it morphs into a toxic
state, and to establish ways to react to outbreaks when they occur.
Moreover, $1 million of this funding will be used by NOAA to assist
the affected States in expanding, monitoring and developing new, more
rapid techniques for identifying the toxic phase of pfiesteria as well
as the environmental conditions potentially conducive to these
outbreaks. This enhanced monitoring support will be essential to
overcoming the difficulty in detecting pfiesteria outbreaks because of
the sporadic nature of the organism and the rapid response needed to
observe the toxic phase.
Mr. Chairman, the Federal Government has a responsibility, a duty, to
assist the States, however possible, in this fight. It will be
important that the Congress give the agencies the necessary tools to
accomplish this task. This funding will be yet another important step
in the Congress' response to this ongoing problem.
I want to thank, as I said earlier, the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr.
Rogers] and the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan] for their
help.
Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle], the
distinguished former Governor of Delaware, who saw this problem as a
Governor, and now as a legislator in the Federal Congress is dealing
with it.
Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Maryland for
yielding. I thank everybody who has had anything to do with putting all
of this together. The problems of pfiesteria and algae, which we have
seen this summer all the way from parts of New York all the way perhaps
down to Florida, have been tremendous. In my judgment, the only way to
really coordinate and to attack from the point of view of doing
something about it, worrying about what it is doing to both fish and to
human beings, is to do it on a national level. We simply had to shift
some of the funding, and the subcommittee has been extremely
cooperative in helping to put this together.
Experts have testified on the Hill today. The various States are
getting involved in trying to coordinate their efforts also. I think
for all these reasons we are finally beginning to address the problems
that may be from the point or nonpoint sources. We do not know. We are
going to find it, and this is a tremendous start.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Maryland [Mr.
Cardin] from the Baltimore region, but also impacting on the Chesapeake
Bay.
[[Page H7894]]
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Maryland
(Mr. Hoyer) and all of those involved for arranging for this amendment
to be offered. I strongly support it. Pfiesteria is a very serious
problem that we have all along the east coast of the United States. It
is responsible for major fish kills, for the closing of recreational
and commercial waterways, and it is a major health problem for the
people of our region. This is an extremely serious matter. I am very
pleased that the Federal Government is moving in with funds to try to
deal with this problem. It is a good amendment, and I strongly support
it. Once again, I congratulate my colleague for his leadership in this
area.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman from Maryland.
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentlewoman from North Carolina, who has
worked so hard on this issue.
(Mrs. CLAYTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Mrs. CLAYTON. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, this is an important issue. I thank all of those who
have allowed us to come to the floor. Hopefully through research we
will resolve this issue.
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
(Mr. TIERNEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the provision of
money for the Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to join my colleagues who are offering this
amendment in voicing my strong support. I commend those Members who
have worked diligently to provide funding for this important program,
and I am extremely pleased that the chairman of the subcommittee has
agreed to provide $1 million in much needed funding.
Mr. Chairman, the Massachusetts Audubon Society has been tracking
this issue and has reported some alarming facts about pollution that is
damaging the coasts of Massachusetts.
According to the Massachusetts Audubon Society, pollution levels have
been measured at 1,000 times higher than existing water quality
standards for the safe consumption of shellfish and 100 times higher
than is considered safe for swimming in some areas.
Aside from protecting our environment, fighting pollution can also
yield significant economic benefits. Adequate funding to address this
problem will help open the shell fishing beds for harvest, promote
increased tourism, and generally enhance fishing, swimming, boating,
bird watching, and other recreational activities.
I am also pleased to note that this funding will boost other
initiatives that we have taken to improve the lives of the people of
Massachusetts, including funds for improvements to wastewater treatment
facilities as well as the Essex Heritage area in Essex County and
Merrimac Valley areas of Massachusetts.
The combined result will be a healthier environment, cleaner coastal
regions and waterways, and more effective wastewater treatment
programs. Providing money for the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control
Program is a positive and necessary part of this process.
Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
(Mr. ETHERIDGE asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from
Maryland and all of those who have worked so hard. This has had a
significant impact on my home State. We have lost over a billion fish,
and an awful lot of people have been sick. I thank the gentleman for
the efforts that have gone forward on this.
Mr. Chairman, I am proud to cosponsor this amendment with the
gentleman from Maryland and with many of my colleagues from North
Carolina and other mid-Atlantic States. I want to commend the gentleman
from Maryland, [Mr. Hoyer] for his leadership on this issue. For many
years he has played a leading role in protecting the environment and
cleaning up the waterways of his beautiful State and across the
country. He has now taken the lead in bringing the problem of
pfiesteria to the national stage and for what I want to express my
sincere gratitude.
I also want to thank my colleagues in the House for taking the first
step on this issue by providing $7 million in the recent appropriations
bill for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to monitor,
research, and react to the public health effects of pfiesteria.
Since 1991 over 1 billion fish have been killed in North Carolina
alone as a result of pfiesteria. Recently, fish kills have also been
reported in Maryland and it is feared that past fish kills in other
States may have been caused by pfiesteria. Pfiesteria has been blamed
for sores, burning skin, respiratory ailments, and short-term memory
loss in human beings. This is a serious public health and environmental
issue that requires national leadership. Pfiesteria has become a
genuine and immediate public health concern for at least seven States
between Delaware and Florida and if not address its eventual impact
could go far beyond these States. Like fish, pfiesteria knows of no
State boundaries. Our natural resources and our waterways are simply
too valuable for us not to act to protect them and the public health.
I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this $3 million
appropriation for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[NOAA] to effectively respond to pfiesteria and pfiesteria-like
conditions throughout the eastern seaboard. NOAA has the mechanisms in
place to study and assess the causes and how we can begin to control
pfiesteria. I hope this marks the beginning of a strong Federal-State
partnership to protect American citizens, our waterways, and the marine
life in them that is so important to our food supply.
Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Maryland for taking the
lead on this issue. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes''
on this important amendment.
Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Maryland, my
very good friend, who probably works as hard on these issues as anybody
I know and does so with great knowledge and great sensitivity. I am
proud that he is a Member of our delegation.
Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Maryland [Mr.
Hoyer] and those distinguished people and staff that have worked on
this process for many, many months now to achieve an end that we are
all seeking.
When we deal with these kinds of issues, which are basically
scientifically driven, we as policymakers sometimes find it difficult
to understand the mechanics of all of the details. But what we need to
understand is that it is time to understand the mechanics of natural
processes and how they impact all of us and the quality of our lives. I
would just leave my colleagues with this statement to drive policy for
environmental issues: Mortgage payments and lung tissue. We have got to
have both.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comment.
Mr. Chairman, I also want to mention in particular the gentleman from
North Carolina [Mr. McIntyre] and the gentleman from North Carolina
[Mr. Hefner], the gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella], the
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Wynn], the gentleman from Maryland [Mr.
Ehrlich] and the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Price] who have
joined with us in the offering of this amendment along with, as I said,
the other Members from the Atlantic Coast States.
I want to in closing again thank the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr.
Rogers] and the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan], who have
worked very closely, I know, with the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs.
Lowey] and her staff on the nonpoint source pollution, which, of
course, is very much a part of the pfiesteria problem so that this is a
very closely related issue.
I want to thank Jennifer Miller as well, who has been so
conscientious in assisting us to get this agreement.
We thank the gentleman from Kentucky very much, all of us who know
that this issue is so critically important to our States, to our
people, to the economy as well as the ecology of our waterways and our
land.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, part of Mr. Rogers' amendment addresses an
important matter regarding the Atlantic herring and mackerel fishery.
This amendment would reduce the operations, research and facilities
account for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. This
account funds the National Marine Fisheries Service. The purpose of the
amendment is to prohibit any fiscal year 1998 funds to be used by the
Department of Commerce to issue or renew a fishing permit or
authorization for any fishing vessel of 165 feet in length or larger
and of 3,000 or more horsepower.
[[Page H7895]]
By way of background, on July 28, 1997, the House of Representatives
approved an emergency measure, H.R. 1855, to place a moratorium on the
entrance of new large fishing vessels in the Atlantic herring and
mackerel fisheries. These stocks are under an imminent threat. There
are up to four huge factory trawler/freezer vessels which are poised to
enter this fishery within a very short timeframe. One such vessel plans
to begin harvesting this fall and is working feverishly to obtain the
necessary permits, despite the overwhelming vote of the House.
As the subcommittee chairman of the authorizing committee, I am
extremely concerned about this threat to these fisheries. This is a
potentially disastrous situation that needs to be remedied quickly.
Based on testimony before the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation,
Wildlife and Oceans, it is clear that the mackerel fishery can only
sustain a 150,000 metric ton annual harvest. The capacity of each of
these vessels exceeds 50,000 metric tons per year. Three of these large
fishing vessels would easily meet and possibly exceed this harvest
within 1 year. It is not clear that the resource can withstand this
massive fishing effort and remain viable. Because of this threat to the
resource off the East Coast, I feel compelled to offer this amendment
to implement emergency action for 1 year through the appropriations
process.
During this 1-year cooling off period, it will be possible to obtain
the necessary population data so that the Department of Commerce can
make an accurate forecast of how many fish can be caught--before
another crisis occurs.
The limitation contained in this amendment closely parallels the
authorization bill I introduced on the matter, H.R. 1855, which passed
the authorizing committee, House Resources, with no objection. It also
was debated on the House Floor on July 27, during which there was not
one word of dissent. It passed on suspension of the rules by voice
vote. Its vocal supporters include Don Young, Resources Committee
chairman, George Miller, Resources Committee ranking Democratic member,
Neil Abercrombie, Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and
Oceans ranking Democratic member.
The NMFS seems content to wait until the stocks crash before taking
action to protect these fisheries. We have seen how the agency's
inaction has caused precipitous declines in the Gulf of Mexico with
redfish, in the Atlantic with sharks, in the Pacific with sea urchins
and in New England with cod and haddock. As someone who has witnessed
the pain and economic suffering experienced by those fishermen, I do
not believe that we should fish now and pay later. We must end this
cycle of destroying our resources without knowing how much fishing
pressure they can endure. Help me to conserve our Atlantic herring and
mackerel stocks.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak on an amendment that
will protect a resource in my district from being overutilized and
depleted.
This amendment, introduced by the chairman of the Fisheries
Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans Subcommittee, serves to prohibit
large fishing vessels from obtaining a permit and engaging in the
harvest of Atlantic herring and Atlantic mackerel within our EEZ
waters.
I believe that we must prohibit large vessels from the Atlantic
herring and mackerel fishery until accurate information has been
collected. To date, no ship of this size has fished this vulnerable
fishery. There is no way for us to know how a large vessel would effect
the fishery.
Mr. Chairman, large vessels have the potential of depleting any
fishery and have it overutilized in a short amount of time. Large
fishing trawlers are highly efficient and have the ability to harvest
five or six times more than any vessel currently registered on the
Atlantic Coast.
Furthermore, the processing capacity of large vessels is so great
that they, themselves, can fill fishing quotas. As a result, these
ships would compromise the Atlantic herring and the Atlantic mackerel
fishing seasons. Mr. Chairman, if you are not aware, stock quotas are
spread over a number of ships and are not designed to be filled by a
small percentage of ships.
My fear is that a large, highly efficient ship could close a fishery
and reduce its stock simply by the number of fish it can catch.
I am also concerned with the National Marine Fisheries Service's
ability to react to this fishery if overutilization occurs and the
fishery needs to shut down. If a ship of this size is allowed to
harvest this fishery, and there is a mistake as to the size of the
herring and mackerel stock, we will have a problem. If we are to guess
as to the size of the stock and its preservation, I would rather make
the mistake on the side of conservation, no exploitation.
In the past, we have encouraged highly efficient gears to fish
underutilized stocks. In the 1980's we redirected efforts towards the
shark species. At the time, sharks were considered to be underutilized.
As a result, a drop in various sharks species has occurred. We must now
take emergency measures in protecting those shark species. Mr.
Chairman, have we not learned from our past mistakes?
A vote in support of this amendment is a vote for conservation and a
vote for the protection of one of our largest public resources. This is
an opportunity for Members of the House to protect a fish stock not
only for those fishermen whose livelihood depends on this resources,
but for future generations of fisherman as well. As a member of the
subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans, I strongly
urge my colleagues to support and pass this amendment.
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the
amendment. It provides $3 million for NOAA's national ocean service
account to help States with scientific and technical assistance in the
fight against pfiesteria. This amendment is needed to enable NOAA to
better assist States--NOAA has the expertise to help states to study
and analyze the causes of, and possible solutions to, the fish kills
linked to pfiesteria in several Chesapeake Bay tributaries.
The States of Maryland and Virginia, and possibly several others,
face a very serious threat to the health of our ecosystem and
watersheds. The toxic outbreaks of pfiesteria also have had an adverse
impact on our fishing industry, our tourism industry, and the health of
some of our citizens. We must do everything possible to assist the
affected States in responding to this challenge. The funding provided
through this amendment will ensure that the States have access to the
expertise needed to adequately respond not only to this regional
problem, but also to avoid future recurrences nationwide.
I urge my colleagues to vote for the amendment. Give the States the
scientific and technical assistance they need to effectively respond to
this environmental and public health threat.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, more than 20 years ago, my predecessor in
this Chamber helped enact landmark legislation to ensure that foreign
fleets would no longer be allowed to deplete fish stocks off our
coasts. Well, here we go again. Unless this amendment is approved,
factory trawlers are poised to return--this time with advanced
technology aimed at two of the few healthy stocks we still have left:
Atlantic herring and mackerel.
In late July, this House passed legislation banning factory trawlers
from harvesting Atlantic herring and mackerel until a fisheries
management plan is in place. Similar legislation is pending before the
other chamber.
Even since then, a great deal has happened that brings the
devastation of mackerel and groundfish stocks off the New England coast
closer to a reality.
At least one factory trawler has been granted an exemption by the
National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS] and, as we debate, is being
retrofitted to set sail for the waters off the New England coast. This
one vessel alone is capable of harvesting 50,000 metric tons of
mackerel a year--a third of the sustainable yield for the whole
Atlantic coast--not to mention the likely impact of bycatch from this
harvest on haddock and scores of other marine species.
And now, we learn that at least two other factory trawlers may be
charting course for the east coast. A classified advertisement, in the
October issue of ``National Fisherman,'' seeks ``captains, mates,
engineers, deckhands * * * to fill positions'' on ``two freeze trawlers
locating on U.S. East Coast to fish herring and mackerel.''
This is an emergency. If you had heard the testimony at last spring's
hearing, it would be alarmingly clear that no one--including NMFS--
knows enough about the population dynamics of herring and mackerel to
risk placing such enormous new pressures on these species. And those of
us who live in the coastal communities which depend upon them to
sustain a healthy economy. Without this amendment, we stand to repeat
the mistakes of the past.
Everything we've gained these past decades is at risk if we don't
pass this amendment.
In the late 1960's and early 1970's, large Russian and Polish vessels
plied our shores and threatened to decimate our fishing industry and
our stocks. It took the passage of the Magnuson Act to push them from
our waters, leaving what we thought was plenty of fish to go around.
Less than a year after the House reauthorized that statute, we face the
prospect of factory vessels again invading our fisheries. This is
absurd.
New England fishermen--already stressed by declining stocks, higher
prices, and shortened seasons--continue to face bleak times as we await
the slow process of rebuilding groundfish stocks. Already, we have too
many boats chasing too few fish; and far too many vessels that will
never again go to sea at all. To allow these huge trawlers to return
would be a disaster of major proportion.
[[Page H7896]]
Unless we pass this amendment, local fleets trying to diversify their
harvests will be driven from the seas, with drastic consequences to
their livelihood and way of life.
For the sake of both fish and the fishermen, it is my own hope that
the Fisheries Council will implement management plans that make further
congressional action unnecessary. This House spoke clearly in July and
I urge my colleagues to join in supporting this amendment, to show that
we can learn from our mistakes.
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Lowey-
Gilchrest-Castle-Pallone-Jones amendment.
This amendment will provide critical funding to the NOAA budget for
the development and implementation of nonpoint source pollution plans.
States, in conjunction with businesses and farmers, will be able to
establish programs to control the run-off from farms and communities
that have been associated with the recent pfiesteria outbreak in
several Chesapeake Bay tributaries and the deaths of thousands of fish
and manatees in Florida. Such programs are critical if we are to
preserve not only our beaches and the health of our citizens, but to
protect the tourism and fisheries industries in coastal states.
I commend the chairman and ranking minority member for their
understanding and support for this effort. Vote ``yes'' on the Lowey-
Gilchrest amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers].
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last
word.
The CHAIRMAN. Is the gentleman the designee of the ranking member?
Mr. BROWN of California. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
(Mr. BROWN of California asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chairman, I know it has been a long
evening. I will try to be as brief as possible.
The gentleman from Kentucky knows of my concern about the
proliferation of science and technology agreements engineered by the
State Department between this country and other countries. I have been
very much concerned about this for a number of years. The Department
currently reports more than 800 international science and technology
cooperative agreements with more than 90 countries. The negotiations
are costly and raise expectations in other countries that the U.S. is
indeed serious about pursuing a substantive cooperative research
arrangement. However, these agreements have not generally produced any
substantive scientific research agreements.
I am anxious to have more information about the extent of these
agreements and whether we can do something about reducing the cost of
this vast proliferation of agreements that apparently result in no
particular results from a research standpoint. I am going to ask the
cooperation of the chairman in seeking more information about these
from the State Department.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BROWN of California. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I am well aware of the gentleman's concerns
on this issue, and he raises valid points. As the gentleman is aware, I
have been working to improve the efficiency of the State Department,
and this is another example where the State Department could do a
better job. I am not aware of any information that indicates the
magnitude of the problem.
Mr. BROWN of California. I thank the gentleman for that response. I
would merely like to request that the gentleman join me in requesting
that the Department submit to Congress a quarterly report listing any
trips that it approves for negotiations or assisting in negotiations of
international S&T agreements as well as the amount of Federal funds
available to implement the research envisioned by the terms of the
agreement; and secondly, any consultations under existing agreements,
as well as the amount of Federal funds to support the research projects
envisioned in the agreements. I believe this will be the first step in
quantifying the size and scope of this issue and may force the
Department to take a hard look at its operations in this area.
Mr. ROGERS. The gentleman is, of course, entitled to request any
information of the State Department that he sees fit. If it is helpful
to him that I join him in his request, I would, of course, be willing
to do so.
Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman
very much for his assistance in this matter. I look forward to working
with him on this issue.
Mr. Chairman, may I add one additional point? The amendment of the
gentleman that was just passed is of extreme importance on the west
coast as well as the east coast. For example, just last month, we had a
fish kill of over a million fish within 1 day. I think that it may be
connected to the same kind of problems that are affecting fish on the
east coast. I look forward to exploring this issue, also. Again I thank
the gentleman very much for his courtesy.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder
of title II be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to
amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Kentucky?
There was no objection.
The text of the remainder of title II is as follows:
capital assets acquisition
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of capital assets acquisition or
construction, including alteration and modification costs, of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
$460,600,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That not to exceed $116,910,000 is available for the advanced
weather interactive processing system, and may be available
for obligation and expenditure only pursuant to a
certification by the Secretary of Commerce that the total
cost to complete the acquisition and deployment of the
advanced weather interactive processing system and NOAA Port
system, including program management, operations and
maintenance costs through deployment will not exceed
$186,300,000: Provided further, That unexpended balances of
amounts previously made available in the ``Operations,
Research, and Facilities'' account and the ``Construction''
account for activities funded under this heading may be
transferred to and merged with this account, to remain
available until expended for the purposes for which the funds
were originally appropriated.
Coastal Zone Management Fund
Of amounts collected pursuant to section 308 of the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1456a), not to exceed
$7,800,000, for purposes set forth in sections 308(b)(2)(A),
308(b)(2)(B)(v), and 315(e) of such Act.
Fishermen's Contingency Fund
For carrying out the provisions of title IV of Public Law
95-372, not to exceed $953,000, to be derived from receipts
collected pursuant to that Act, to remain available until
expended.
Foreign Fishing Observer Fund
For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the
Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of 1975, as amended (Public Law
96-339), the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act of 1976, as amended (Public Law 100-627), and
the American Fisheries Promotion Act (Public Law 96-561), to
be derived from the fees imposed under the foreign fishery
observer program authorized by these Acts, not to exceed
$189,000, to remain available until expended.
Fisheries Finance Program Account
For the cost of direct loans, $250,000, as authorized by
the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, as amended: Provided, That
such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall
be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974: Provided further, That none of the funds made
available under this heading may be used for direct loans
for any new fishing vessel that will increase the
harvesting capacity in any United States fishery.
General Administration
Salaries and Expenses
For expenses necessary for the general administration of
the Department of Commerce provided for by law, including not
to exceed $3,000 for official entertainment, $28,490,000.
Office of Inspector General
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act
of 1978, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 1-11 as amended by Public
Law 100-504), $20,140,000.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
operations, research, and facilities
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances available under this heading,
$5,000,000 are rescinded.
General Provisions--Department of Commerce
Sec. 201. During the current fiscal year, applicable
appropriations and funds made available to the Department of
Commerce by this Act shall be available for the activities
specified in the Act of October 26, 1949 (15
[[Page H7897]]
U.S.C. 1514), to the extent and in the manner prescribed by
the Act, and, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3324, may be used for
advanced payments not otherwise authorized only upon the
certification of officials designated by the Secretary of
Commerce that such payments are in the public interest.
Sec. 202. During the current fiscal year, appropriations
made available to the Department of Commerce by this Act for
salaries and expenses shall be available for hire of
passenger motor vehicles as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343 and
1344; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and uniforms
or allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-
5902).
Sec. 203. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to support the hurricane reconnaissance aircraft and
activities that are under the control of the United States
Air Force or the United States Air Force Reserve.
Sec. 204. None of the funds provided in this or any
previous Act, or hereinafter made available to the Department
of Commerce, shall be available to reimburse the Unemployment
Trust Fund or any other fund or account of the Treasury to
pay for any expenses paid before October 1, 1992, as
authorized by section 8501 of title 5, United States Code,
for services performed after April 20, 1990, by
individuals appointed to temporary positions within the
Bureau of the Census for purposes relating to the 1990
decennial census of population.
Sec. 205. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made
available for the current fiscal year for the Department of
Commerce in this Act may be transferred between such
appropriations, but no such appropriation shall be increased
by more than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That
any transfer pursuant to this section shall be treated as a
reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and
shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except
in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
Sec. 206. (a) Should legislation be enacted to dismantle or
reorganize the Department of Commerce, the Secretary of
Commerce, no later than 90 days thereafter, shall submit to
the Committees on Appropriations of the House and the Senate
a plan for transferring funds provided in this Act to the
appropriate successor organizations: Provided, That the plan
shall include a proposal for transferring or rescinding funds
appropriated herein for agencies or programs terminated under
such legislation: Provided further, That such plan shall be
transmitted in accordance with section 605 of this Act.
(b) The Secretary of Commerce or the appropriate head of
any successor organization(s) may use any available funds to
carry out legislation dismantling or reorganizing the
Department of Commerce to cover the costs of actions relating
to the abolishment, reorganization, or transfer of functions
and any related personnel action, including voluntary
separation incentives if authorized by such legislation:
Provided, That the authority to transfer funds between
appropriations accounts that may be necessary to carry out
this section is provided in addition to authorities included
under section 205 of this Act: Provided further, That use of
funds to carry out this section shall be treated as a
reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and
shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except
in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
Sec. 207. Any costs incurred by a Department or agency
funded under this title resulting from personnel actions
taken in response to funding reductions included in this
title shall be absorbed within the total budgetary resources
available to such Department or agency: Provided, That the
authority to transfer funds between appropriations accounts
as may be necessary to carry out this section is provided in
addition to authorities included elsewhere in this Act:
Provided further, That use of funds to carry out this section
shall be treated as a reprogramming of funds under section
605 of this Act and shall not be available for obligation
or expenditure except in compliance with the procedures
set forth in that section.
Sec. 208. The Secretary of Commerce may award contracts for
hydrographic, geodetic, and photogrammetric surveying and
mapping services in accordance with title IX of the Federal
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C.
541 et seq.).
Sec. 209. (a) Any person aggrieved by the use of any
statistical method in violation of the Constitution or any
provision of law (other than this Act), in connection with
the 2000 or any later decennial census, to determine the
population for purposes of the apportionment or redistricting
of members in Congress, may in a civil action obtain
declaratory, injunctive, and any other appropriate relief
against the use of such method.
(b) For purposes of this section, the use of any
statistical method in a dress rehearsal or similar test or
simulation of a census in preparation for the use of such
method, in a decennial census, to determine the population
for purposes of the apportionment or redistricting of members
in Congress shall be considered the use of such method in
connection with that census.
(c) For purposes of this section, an ``aggrieved person''
includes--
(1) any resident of a State whose congressional
representation or district could be changed as a result of
the use of a statistical method challenged in the civil
action;
(2) any Representative or Senator in Congress; and
(3) either House of Congress.
(d)(1) Any action brought under this section shall be heard
and determined by a district court of 3 judges in accordance
with section 2284 of title 28, United States Code. Any order
of a United States district court which is issued pursuant to
an action brought under this section shall be reviewable by
appeal directly to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Any such appeal shall be taken by a notice of appeal filed
within 10 days after such order is entered; and the
jurisdictional statement shall be filed within 30 days after
such order is entered. No stay of an order issued pursuant to
an action brought under this section shall be issued by a
single Justice of the Supreme Court.
(2) No sums appropriated under this or any other Act may be
used for any statistical method, in connection with any
decennial census, to determine the population for purposes of
the apportionment or redistricting of members in Congress
after a civil action is commenced challenging or seeking to
uphold the use of such method, until that method has been
judicially finally determined to be authorized by the
Constitution and by Act of Congress.
(3) It shall be the duty of a United States district court
and the Supreme Court of the United States to advance on the
docket and to expedite to the greatest possible extent the
disposition of any matter brought under this section.
(e) Any agency or entity within the executive branch,
having authority with respect to the carrying out of a
decennial census, may in a civil action obtain a declaratory
judgment respecting whether or not the use of a statistical
method, in connection with such census, to determine the
population for the purposes of the apportionment or
redistricting of members in Congress is forbidden by the
Constitution and laws of the United States.
(f) For purposes of this section--
(1) the term ``statistical method'' means an activity
related to the design, planning, testing, or implementation
of the use of sampling, or any other statistical procedure,
including statistical adjustment, to add or subtract counts
to the enumeration of the population; and
(2) a matter shall not be considered to have been
judicially finally determined until it has been finally
determined on the merits in appellate proceedings before the
Supreme Court of the United States.
(g) This section shall apply in fiscal year 1998 and
succeeding fiscal years.
(h) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize the
use of any statistical method, in connection with a decennial
census, for the apportionment or redistricting of members in
Congress.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to this portion of the bill?
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
TITLE III--THE JUDICIARY
Supreme Court of the United States
salaries and expenses
For expenses necessary for the operation of the Supreme
Court, as required by law, excluding care of the building and
grounds, including purchase or hire, driving, maintenance,
and operation of an automobile for the Chief Justice, not to
exceed $10,000 for the purpose of transporting Associate
Justices, and hire of passenger motor vehicles as authorized
by 31 U.S.C. 1343 and 1344; not to exceed $10,000 for
official reception and representation expenses; and for
miscellaneous expenses, to be expended as the Chief Justice
may approve; $29,278,000.
care of the building and grounds
For such expenditures as may be necessary to enable the
Architect of the Capitol to carry out the duties imposed upon
him by the Act approved May 7, 1934 (40 U.S.C. 13a-13b),
$3,400,000, of which $410,000 shall remain available until
expended.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
salaries and expenses
For salaries of the chief judge, judges, and other officers
and employees, and for necessary expenses of the court, as
authorized by law, $15,507,000.
United States Court of International Trade
salaries and expenses
For salaries of the chief judge and eight judges, salaries
of the officers and employees of the court, services as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and necessary expenses of the
court, as authorized by law, $11,478,000.
Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services
salaries and expenses
(including transfer of funds)
For the salaries of circuit and district judges (including
judges of the territorial courts of the United States),
justices and judges retired from office or from regular
active service, judges of the United States Court of Federal
Claims, bankruptcy judges, magistrate judges, and all other
officers and employees of the Federal Judiciary not otherwise
specifically provided for, and necessary expenses of the
courts, as authorized by law, $2,700,069,000 (including the
purchase of firearms and ammunition); of which not to exceed
$13,454,000 shall remain available until expended for space
alteration projects; and of which not to exceed $10,000,000
shall
[[Page H7898]]
remain available until expended for furniture and furnishings
related to new space alteration and construction projects.
In addition, for expenses of the United States Court of
Federal Claims associated with processing cases under the
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, not to exceed
$2,450,000, to be appropriated from the Vaccine Injury
Compensation Trust Fund.
violent crime reduction programs
For activities of the Federal Judiciary as authorized by
law, $40,000,000, to remain available until expended, which
shall be derived from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund,
as authorized by section 190001(a) of Public Law 103-322, and
sections 818 and 823 of Public Law 104-132.
defender services
For the operation of Federal Public Defender and Community
Defender organizations; the compensation and reimbursement of
expenses of attorneys appointed to represent persons under
the Criminal Justice Act of 1964, as amended; the
compensation and reimbursement of expenses of persons
furnishing investigative, expert and other services under the
Criminal Justice Act (18 U.S.C. 3006A(e)); the compensation
(in accordance with Criminal Justice Act maximums) and
reimbursement of expenses of attorneys appointed to assist
the court in criminal cases where the defendant has waived
representation by counsel; the compensation and
reimbursement of travel expenses of guardians ad litem
acting on behalf of financially eligible minor or
incompetent offenders in connection with transfers from
the United States to foreign countries with which the
United States has a treaty for the execution of penal
sentences; and the compensation of attorneys appointed to
represent jurors in civil actions for the protection of
their employment, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 1875(d);
$329,529,000, to remain available until expended as
authorized by 18 U.S.C. 3006A(i).
fees of jurors and commissioners
For fees and expenses of jurors as authorized by 28 U.S.C.
1871 and 1876; compensation of jury commissioners as
authorized by 28 U.S.C. 1863; and compensation of
commissioners appointed in condemnation cases pursuant to
rule 71A(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (28
U.S.C. Appendix Rule 71A(h)); $66,196,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That the compensation of
land commissioners shall not exceed the daily equivalent of
the highest rate payable under section 5332 of title 5,
United States Code.
court security
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for,
incident to the procurement, installation, and maintenance of
security equipment and protective services for the United
States Courts in courtrooms and adjacent areas, including
building ingress-egress control, inspection of packages,
directed security patrols, and other similar activities as
authorized by section 1010 of the Judicial Improvement and
Access to Justice Act (Public Law 100-702); $167,214,000, to
be expended directly or transferred to the United States
Marshals Service which shall be responsible for administering
elements of the Judicial Security Program consistent with
standards or guidelines agreed to by the Director of the
Administrative Office of the United States Courts and the
Attorney General.
Administrative Office of the United States Courts
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Administrative Office of the
United States Courts as authorized by law, including travel
as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1345, hire of a passenger motor
vehicle as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b), advertising and
rent in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, $52,000,000,
of which not to exceed $7,500 is authorized for official
reception and representation expenses.
Federal Judicial Center
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Federal Judicial Center, as
authorized by Public Law 90-219, $17,495,000; of which
$1,800,000 shall remain available through September 30, 1999,
to provide education and training to Federal court personnel;
and of which not to exceed $1,000 is authorized for official
reception and representation expenses.
Judicial Retirement Funds
payment to judiciary trust funds
For payment to the Judicial Officers' Retirement Fund, as
authorized by 28 U.S.C. 377(o), $25,000,000; to the Judicial
Survivors' Annuities Fund, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 376(c),
$7,400,000; and to the United States Court of Federal Claims
Judges' Retirement Fund, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 178(l),
$1,800,000.
United States Sentencing Commission
salaries and expenses
For the salaries and expenses necessary to carry out the
provisions of chapter 58 of title 28, United States Code,
$9,000,000, of which not to exceed $1,000 is authorized for
official reception and representation expenses.
General Provisions--The Judiciary
Sec. 301. Appropriations and authorizations made in this
title which are available for salaries and expenses shall be
available for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
Sec. 302. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made
available for the current fiscal year for the Judiciary in
this Act may be transferred between such appropriations, but
no such appropriation, except ``Courts of Appeals, District
Courts, and Other Judicial Services, Defender Services'' and
``Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial
Services, Fees of Jurors and Commissioners'', shall be
increased by more than 10 percent by any such transfers:
Provided, That any transfer pursuant to this section shall be
treated as a reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this
Act and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure
except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that
section.
Sec. 303. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
salaries and expenses appropriation for district courts,
courts of appeals, and other judicial services shall be
available for official reception and representation expenses
of the Judicial Conference of the United States: Provided,
That such available funds shall not exceed $10,000 and shall
be administered by the Director of the Administrative Office
of the United States Courts in his capacity as Secretary of
the Judicial Conference.
Mr. ROGERS (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the remainder of title III be considered as read, printed
in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Kentucky?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments?
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
TITLE IV--DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED AGENCIES
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Administration of Foreign Affairs
Diplomatic and Consular Programs
For necessary expenses of the Department of State and the
Foreign Service not otherwise provided for, including
expenses authorized by the State Department Basic Authorities
Act of 1956, as amended; representation to certain
international organizations in which the United States
participates pursuant to treaties, ratified pursuant to the
advice and consent of the Senate, or specific Acts of
Congress; acquisition by exchange or purchase of passenger
motor vehicles as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343, 40 U.S.C.
481(c) and 22 U.S.C. 2674; and for expenses of general
administration; $1,715,087,000: Provided, That all fees
collected under the authority of section 140(a)(1) of the
Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and
1995 (Public Law 103-236) shall be deposited in fiscal year
1998 as an offsetting collection to appropriations made under
this heading to recover the costs of providing border
security and shall remain available until expended.
Of the funds provided under this heading, $24,856,000 shall
be available only for the Diplomatic Telecommunications
Service for operation of existing base services and not to
exceed $17,312,000 shall be available only for the
enhancement of the Diplomatic Telecommunications Service and
shall remain available until expended.
In addition, not to exceed $700,000 in registration fees
collected pursuant to section 38 of the Arms Export Control
Act, as amended, may be used in accordance with section 45 of
the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C.
2717); in addition not to exceed $1,252,000 shall be derived
from fees collected from other executive agencies for lease
or use of facilities located at the International Center in
accordance with section 4 of the International Center Act
(Public Law 90-553), as amended, and in addition, as
authorized by section 5 of such Act $490,000, to be derived
from the reserve authorized by that section, to be used for
the purposes set out in that section; and in addition not to
exceed $15,000 which shall be derived from reimbursements,
surcharges, and fees for use of Blair House facilities in
accordance with section 46 of the State Department Basic
Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2718(a)).
Notwithstanding section 402 of this Act, not to exceed 20
percent of the amounts made available in this Act in the
appropriation accounts ``Diplomatic and Consular Programs''
and ``Salaries and Expenses'' under the heading
``Administration of Foreign Affairs'' may be transferred
between such appropriation accounts: Provided, That any
transfer pursuant to this sentence shall be treated as a
reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and
shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except
in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
In addition, for counterterrorism requirements overseas,
including security guards and equipment, $23,700,000, to
remain available until expended.
salaries and expenses
For expenses necessary for the general administration of
the Department of State and the Foreign Service, provided for
by law, including expenses authorized by section 9 of the Act
of August 31, 1964, as amended (31 U.S.C. 3721), and the
State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended,
$363,513,000.
[[Page H7899]]
{time} 2315
Amendment No.33 Offered by Mr. Gilman
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Gilman:
Page 67, line 19, insert before the period the following:
: Provided, That, of such amount, not more than
$356,242,740 shall be available for obligation until the
Secretary of State has made one or more designations of
organizations as foreign terrorist organizations pursuant to
section 219(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1189(a)), as added by section 302 of Public Law 104-
132 (110 Stat. 1214, 1248).
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman].
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I will be brief.
I am pleased to join my colleague from New York [Mr. Schumer] in
offering this important amendment to the Commerce, Justice, State, and
Judiciary appropriations bill to address a threat of terrorism here at
home.
Back in April 1996 the President signed into law the comprehensive
antiterrorism measure which included the administration's request for
authority to designate certain groups as terrorist organizations with
links to foreign state sponsors of terrorism such as Iran. Our State
Department is responsible for carrying out that authority.
The bill also included the administration's request for authority to
take preventive action against these groups, such as freezing their
financial assets. Our Treasury Department is responsible for that
aspect once the State Department has made its designations.
The administration considered this authority so important that a veto
was threatened unless until the bill contained those provisions. Yet,
17 months have gone by and the administration is yet to exercise that
authority that it so ardently sought. It is difficult to understand the
reasons for such a delay.
The FBI has provided the State Department with extensive material on
a number of terrorist groups, including Hizballah and Hamas and their
front organizations, some of which are operating right here in our own
Nation. The statute does not envision a one-time list that had to
include each and every possible foreign terrorist organization. The
State Department can add and delete groups as circumstances and
evidence warrant.
However, the State Department has declined to make the designations
because of what it has said is a strong desire to avoid a false
perception that it might be singling out certain groups for
identification. This is quite puzzling, Mr. Chairman, to say the least,
because we in Congress understand that targeting these terrorist groups
was the very purpose of this legislation.
Our amendment withholds 2 percent of the State Department's salaries
and expense budget, approximately $7.25 million, until it complies with
this provision. Our amendment should send a clear message that we, the
Congress, will not wait any longer. The terrorist bombing of the New
York World Trade Center in 1993 was a wake-up call the administration
apparently missed. Those of us in the Congress did not miss such a
call.
The administration's inaction also is evidence that it is not taking
seriously the threat from foreign terrorist organizations, especially
those doing business and raising funds right here in our own Nation.
The American people are entitled to reasonable efforts to protect their
security and to timely enforcement of our laws to fight international
terrorism which clearly is directed against our own Nation.
The time is long overdue for the State Department to single out
foreign terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Hizballah, the Kurdistan
Worker's Party, the Revolutionary Armed forces of Columbia, as was
intended when the President signed this into law in April of 1996.
Accordingly, I urge the administration to hear our wake-up call that
this amendment sends and to act now. Accordingly, we urge adoption of
this amendment.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GILMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, we have inspected the amendment and have no
objection.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr.
Rogers].
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman].
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 239, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman]
will be postponed.
Are there further amendments to this portion of the bill?
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the bill
through Page 70, line 7 be considered as read, printed in the Record
and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Kentucky?
There was no objection.
The text of the bill from Page 67, line 20, through Page 70, line 7,
is as follows:
capital investment fund
For necessary expenses of the Capital Investment Fund,
$50,600,000, to remain available until expended, as
authorized in Public Law 103-236: Provided, That section
135(e) of Public Law 103-236 shall not apply to funds
appropriated under this heading.
office of inspector general
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General
in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act
of 1978, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), $28,300,000,
notwithstanding section 209(a)(1) of the Foreign Service Act
of 1980, as amended (Public law 96-465), as it relates to
post inspections.
representation allowances
For representation allowances as authorized by section 905
of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended (22 U.S.C.
4085), $4,300,000.
protection of foreign missions and officials
For expenses, not otherwise provided, to enable the
Secretary of State to provide for extraordinary protective
services in accordance with the provisions of section 214 of
the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C.
4314) and 3 U.S.C. 208, $7,900,000, to remain available until
September 30, 1999.
security and maintenance of United States missions
For necessary expenses for carrying out the Foreign Service
Buildings Act of 1926, as amended (22 U.S.C. 292-300), and
the Diplomatic Security Construction Program as authorized by
title IV of the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism
Act of 1986 (22 U.S.C. 4851), $373,081,000, to remain
available until expended as authorized by section 24(c) of
the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C.
2696(c)): Provided, That none of the funds appropriated in
this paragraph shall be available for acquisition of
furniture and furnishings and generators for other
departments and agencies.
emergencies in the diplomatic and consular service
For expenses necessary to enable the Secretary of State to
meet unforeseen emergencies arising in the Diplomatic and
Consular Service pursuant to the requirement of 31 U.S.C.
3526(e), $5,500,000 to remain available until expended as
authorized by section 24(c) of the State Department Basic
Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2696(c)), of which not to
exceed $1,000,000 may be transferred to and merged with the
Repatriation Loans Program Account, subject to the same terms
and conditions.
repatriation loans program account
For the cost of direct loans, $593,000, as authorized by
section 4 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of
1956 (22 U.S.C. 2671): Provided, That such costs, including
the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in
section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. In
addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry out
the direct loan program, $607,000 which may be transferred to
and merged with the Salaries and Expenses account under
Administration of Foreign Affairs.
payment to the american institute in taiwan
For necessary expenses to carry out the Taiwan Relations
Act, Public Law 96-8, $14,000,000.
payment to the foreign service retirement and disability fund
For payment to the Foreign Service Retirement and
Disability Fund, as authorized by law, $129,935,000.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there amendments to this portion of the bill?
[[Page H7900]]
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
International Organizations and Conferences
contributions to international organizations
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary to meet
annual obligations of membership in international
multilateral organizations, pursuant to treaties ratified
pursuant to the advice and consent of the Senate, conventions
or specific Acts of Congress, $978,952,000, of which not to
exceed $54,000,000 shall remain available until expended for
payment of arrearages: Provided, That none of the funds
appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act for
payment of arrearages may be obligated or expended unless
such obligation or expenditure is expressly authorized by the
enactment of a subsequent Act that makes payment of
arrearages contingent upon reforms that should include the
following: a reduction in the United States assessed share of
the United Nations regular budget to 20 percent and of
peacekeeping operations to 25 percent; reimbursement for
goods and services provided by the United States to the
United Nations; certification that the United Nations and its
specialized or affiliated agencies have not taken any action
to infringe on the sovereignty of the United States; a
ceiling on United States contributions to international
organizations after fiscal year 1998 of $900,000,000;
establishment of a merit-based personnel system at the United
Nations that includes a code of conduct and a personnel
evaluation system; United States membership on the Advisory
Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions that
oversees the United Nations budget; access to United Nations
financial data by the General Accounting Office; and
achievement of a negative growth budget and the establishment
of independent inspectors general for affiliated
organizations; and improved consultation procedures with the
Congress: Provided further, That any payment of arrearages
shall be directed toward special activities that are mutually
agreed upon by the United States and the respective
international organization: Provided further, That 20 percent
of the funds appropriated in this paragraph for the assessed
contribution of the United States to the United Nations shall
be withheld from obligation and expenditure until a
certification is made under section 401(b) of Public Law 103-
236 and under such other requirements related to the Office
of Internal Oversight Services of the United Nations as may
be enacted into law for fiscal year 1998: Provided further,
That certification under section 401(b) of Public Law 103-
236 for fiscal year 1998 may only be made if the
Committees on Appropriations and Foreign Relations of the
Senate and the Committees on Appropriations and
International Relations of the House of Representatives
are notified of the steps taken, and anticipated, to meet
the requirements of section 401(b) of Public Law 103-236
at least 15 days in advance of the proposed certification:
Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated in
this paragraph shall be available for a United States
contribution to an international organization for the
United States share of interest costs made known to the
United States Government by such organization for loans
incurred on or after October 1, 1984, through external
borrowings: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated in this paragraph, $100,000,000 may be made
available only on a semi-annual basis pursuant to a
certification by the Secretary of State on a semi-annual
basis, that the United Nations has taken no action during
the preceding six months to increase funding for any
United Nations program without identifying an offsetting
decrease during that six-month period elsewhere in the
United Nations budget and cause the United Nations to
exceed the expected reform budget for the biennium 1998-
1999 of $2,533,000,000: Provided further, That
notwithstanding section 402 of this Act, not to exceed
$4,000,000 may be transferred from the funds made
available under this heading to the ``International
Conferences and Contingencies'' account for assessed
contributions to new or provisional international
organizations: Provided further, That any transfer
pursuant to this paragraph shall be treated as a
reprogramming of funds under section 605 of this Act and
shall not be available for obligation or expenditure
except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that
section.
Amendments Offered by Mr. Bartlett of Maryland
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I offer 2 amendments,
Amendment No. 2 and Amendment No. 3.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to consideration of the amendments
en bloc?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendments.
The text of the amendments as follows:
Amendments offered by Mr. Bartlett of Maryland:
In title IV relating to ``DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED
AGENCIES'', in the item relating to ``International
Organizations and Conferences--contributions to international
organizations'' strike ``of which not to exceed $54,000,000
shall remain available until expended for payment of
arrearages'' and all that follows through the second proviso.
In title IV relating to ``DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED
AGENCIES'', in the item relating to ``International
Organizations and Conferences--contributions to international
peacekeeping activities'' strike ``of which not to exceed
$46,000,000 shall remain available until expended for payment
of arrearages'' and all that follows through the second
proviso.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Bartlett] and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Bartlett].
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I have here a report from the GAO. This report was
requested by Senator Dole, and he asked them to make an assessment of
the peacekeeping costs incurred by the United States, and let me read
the criteria for preparing this report.
It says: ``Dear Senator Dole: As requested, we are providing you
information on U.S. agencies' estimated costs for their support of U.N.
peace operations in Haiti, the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and
Somalia.''
This does not include flights over Iraq, note, and it does not
include Bosnia. This includes only fiscal years '92 through '95.
``For this report we define peace operations as actions taken in
support of U.N. resolutions.'' These only include our participation
when there was a U.N. resolution ``designed to further peace and
security, including observers; monitors; traditional peacekeeping;
preventive deployment; peace enforcement; security assistance; the
imposition of sanctions; and the provision, protection and delivery of
humanitarian relief.''
What we have done in the chart here is to summarize the findings of
this GAO report. The GAO report indicated that through years 1992 to
1995 we had spent on peacekeeping $6.6 billion. The amount credited as
U.N. dues was $1.8 billion of that, and they reimbursed to us $79.4
million of it, leaving a balance of $4,720,600,000.
Our argument relative to these 2 amendments is a very simple
argument. The argument is simply this: that if we owe any dues to the
U.N., we are not arguing whether we owe, should owe dues or not, we are
not arguing what the size of those dues are, we are simply saying that
if we owe dues to the U.N., then there should be an accounting, and
from the GAO report it would appear that we have spent $6.6 billion in
peacekeeping activities, $1.8 billion of that has been credited, $79.4
million of that has been reimbursed. That leaves $4,720,600,000. If we
owed them $1.3 billion in dues, that would still leave a balance of
$3,420,600,000.
Now the State Department says that we are not owed anything by the
United Nations. From the GAO report it would appear that we are owed by
the United Nations $3,420,600,000, because let me read again. We define
peace operations as actions taken in support of U.N. resolutions. These
were not instances in which we sent troops or supplies to support our
own national interests. These were responses we made to U.N.
resolutions.
I am not willing to let the State Department be the arbiter of
whether or not we are owed by the U.N. the $4.7 billion or, as they
say, that we do not owe them anything. All our amendment does is to say
please let us not start down this billion dollar road by giving this
$100 million to the U.N., because as soon as that train leaves the
station we are committed to about $1 billion dollars, more or less. We
want an accounting before that happens. That is all we are asking for,
and we are not the first to ask for that accounting.
I wrote to the President about this, and he wrote me a letter back
saying, ``I fully agree with you that when the United States
participates in U.N.-assessed peacekeeping operations it should be
reimbursed on the same terms that apply to all other participants.''
All we are asking is that we get that accounting.
I have here a quote from the majority leader, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Dick Armey), and this was in a speech which he gave, a
foreign policy speech in June. He said that the U.N.
[[Page H7901]]
squandered hundreds of millions of American tax dollars through
bureaucratic waste and inefficiency of almost Soviet proportions. He
goes on to say, ``I believe that an accurate accounting of our so-
called U.N. arrearages will support only a far lower figure.''
The gentleman from Georgia, Newt Gingrich, the Speaker of the House,
right here from the well of the House on March 17 enumerating the
several goals of this Congress, says our 12th goal, and listen to this,
``Our 12th goal is to reform the United Nations. We believe that the
United States should get full credit for its financial contributions to
the United Nations, including military capabilities, facilities, local
government services, and the security we provide.''
That is all we are asking for. Our amendment is really very simple
and self-explanatory.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. Chairman, there is only one true constituency for reform at the
U.N., and that is the United States Congress. For years many of us have
argued that the U.N. is a bureaucracy smothered under the weight of
inefficiency, that the United States pays too much and other countries
pay too little, that the United States does not get reimbursed for
expenditures in support of U.N. operations, that programs and offices
continue indefinitely after their mission is obsolete, and on and on.
For the past several years we have conditioned our current year
assessments to the U.N. on achievement of reforms, and we have made
progress, the establishment of an Inspector General as an example, the
enactment of a no-growth budget by the U.N., and reductions in
personnel, to name just a few. There appears to be one thing and one
thing only that captures the attention of the U.N., and that is money.
It is clear that we have captured the U.N.'s attention. The issue
that is now the focus of debate at the U.N. is reform, from the
proposals of the Secretary General to the proposals now being advocated
by the United States representative largely at the urging of this
Congress.
We are at a crossroads. If we are willing to begin paying arrearages
contingent upon the kinds of reform that are pending in the Helms-
Gilman authorization bill, we stand a chance of obtaining the kinds of
reforms that many of us have been arguing for for many years. If we are
not willing to begin paying arrearages, we assure that reform will not
happen and that the most significant chance we have had in recent
history to achieve reform will go by the wayside.
One of the changes we are seeking to make is to the very problem that
the gentleman from Maryland complains about, that the United States is
not adequately reimbursed for the in-kind contributions and support
that we provide. The Helms-Gilman authorization bill, which must pass
if the money for arrearages in this bill is to be released, requires
that the United States seek credit or reimbursement for its in-kind
contributions and support.
I am not in disagreement with the gentleman from Maryland. We should
be credited for our in-kind contributions. In the last Congress
Republicans tried to enact a law to make that happen, and it was
opposed by the administration.
The language in this bill states that we will make a payment on
arrearages, but only if from this point forward we obtain
reimbursement.
{time} 2330
That is our position. We have a chance to achieve exactly what the
gentleman from Maryland desires.
Mr. Chairman, what this bill does is to provide first year funding
for payment of arrearages at the level set by Congress, not by the U.N.
or by the State Department, if and only if an authorization bill is
passed that makes payment contingent upon a series of real and
substantial reforms at the United Nations. No money, unless an
authorization is passed that contains reforms, and no release of funds
unless the administration certifies that those reforms have been
achieved.
This is our best shot at U.N. reform. I urge my colleagues to vote
against the Bartlett amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman reserve his time? The gentleman rose
in opposition. He controls 5 minutes. The gentleman still has a 1\1/2\
minutes left.
Mr. ROGERS. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIRMAN. The time is controlled under the rule by the gentleman
that offered the amendment, and he used his time. Then there is time
controlled by a Member in opposition. That time was taken by the
gentleman from Kentucky, Chairman Rogers, and he has used 3\1/2\
minutes. The gentleman has 1\1/2\ minutes left that he can yield.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding I can move to
strike the last word and get 5 minutes under the agreement.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the order of the House, that is true. The
gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. The chairman has reserved his time. The chairman can
yield his time to Mr. Gilman.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from West Virginia may proceed under his
5 minutes.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I join the gentleman from Kentucky, Chairman Rogers, in
opposition to this amendment. I think it is really ill-timed and in a
way comes out of the blue.
For a number of years now, this committee and the chairman
particularly has been at the forefront of trying to effect reforms in
the United Nations through the only way really the United States
Congress can effectively do that, through the appropriations process.
We have been extremely effective at doing that, I think, and ratcheting
up the pain on the United Nations to the point that we have seen a lot
of good responsiveness from them.
This year, the gentleman who offers the amendment cited Mr. Dole's
request for a GAO study of this. I don't know about Senator Dole's
request for a study and I have not seen the GAO study, but I do know
the Senator has been very active as a part of a working group to put
together a compromise with regard to UN arrearages, which is in place
and which the authorizing committee is considering as we speak. This
bill funds the first $100 million of that compromise that the
authorizing committee is considering.
Mr. Chairman, I would hope that this body would not favorably
consider this amendment, because, as I say, it would be very ill-timed
to take away the real incentive that we have to make the authorizing
language work, and that is the $100 million, the first down payment on
the arrearage.
It is a phased payment, this is the first down payment, and it would
be a real mistake to not fulfill that part of the obligation because
the UN is being responsive to this approach.
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MOLLOHAN. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, our amendments do not argue
whether or not we owe arrearages to the UN. All our amendments argue is
that if we owe arrearages to the UN, then, please, as the GAO report
indicates, subtract those arrearages from the monies which the UN owes
us.
We are making a different argument than the one we made. We are not
arguing whether or not we owe dues to the UN. We are simply saying if
we owe dues to the UN, then please take them from the money the UN owes
us. If it is not the $4.8 billion that one can easily deduce from the
GAO report, then what is it? I am just not willing to let the State
Department arbitrate that dispute.
There is clearly a dispute between a reasonable reading of the GAO
report and the State Department position, and I am not willing to let
the State Department arbitrate that. That is our role to arbitrate
that.
All I want to do is I want to stop this train from leaving the
station, the $1 billion train, until we have reached a resolution of
that.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Reclaiming my time, I understand the gentleman's
position, and I am getting to the point.
[[Page H7902]]
The gentleman is suggesting that somehow the UN owes us for our
contributions.
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. I am saying that is what the GAO said, we
have spent $6.8 billion.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Is the gentleman not advancing the GAO position here?
You are suggesting the UN owes us for in-kind contributions with regard
to these operations, is that correct?
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. That is correct, sir.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. If I may reclaim my time, that is a point that I just
disagree with. With respect to the issue that the UN somehow owes us
for past peacekeeping operations, the gentleman is well aware of the
facts of how UN peacekeeping is paid for.
We pay our share of the assessed operations, and when it is in the
national security interests of the United States, we support and pay
for voluntary peacekeeping activities.
Now, these operations are undertaken because of our national security
interests, and other countries undertake under similar missions for
which they are not reimbursed.
If we disrupt this arrangement, you are going to bankrupt the United
Nations, number one, I would point out, and, second, if that were to
happen, I would submit that we would be undertaking incredible
obligations on, because we would have to end up assuming all of this
responsibility for which now we are contributing our part, along with
other contributors to the United Nations peacekeeping operations.
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. If the gentleman would yield further our
share, I think is too high.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, just on that, this
committee and the chairman and the whole committee worked very hard to
make sure that our share is being reduced. That, again, is a part of
all of this negotiation, and also part of the authorizing bill that we
passed several years ago.
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would
continue to yield, the GAO used only monies, referenced only monies,
that we spent in response to a UN resolution.
One cannot make arguments that sending troops to Rwanda and Somalia
advanced our vital national interests to the point that we should bear
the full cost of that. That is what we are now doing.
Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, if I may reclaim my time, the fact that
it is in response to a UN resolution does not mean we cannot
voluntarily look at a situation and say it is in our best interest, our
own national security interest, to make this contribution. That is what
we have done. I do not think you can go around after making that
voluntary contribution and say the UN owes us for it, particularly when
it is obviously in our own national security interests.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from New York [Mr. Gilman], the Chairman of the Committee on
International Relations.
(Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment being
offered by the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Bartlett] which strikes the
proposed $54 million from fiscal year 1998 requested by the
administration to repay our UN international organization arrearages,
and which would strike the proposed $46 million to pay UN peacekeeping
arrearages.
However well-intentioned the gentleman from Maryland's amendments
are, it would actually cost the American taxpayer much more in the long
run than it would save over the course of the next fiscal year.
If adopted, the amendments would prevent the administration from
achieving management reforms and capping overall UN spending. As the
distinguished subcommittee chairman stated, the $54 million requested
by the administration for international organization arrearages is
subject to enactment of an authorization bill, a bill that conditions
payment of arrearages on the achievement of substantial reforms at the
United Nations and other international organizations.
It will fully repay all arrearages that the administration states
that our Nation owes to the U.N. regular budget, which began to
accumulate in fiscal year 1989.
Pennywise and pound-foolish, the amendments would sacrifice our long-
term objectives of saving more than one-half billion dollars over the
next 5 years for the short-term goal of cutting less than $60 million
for the upcoming fiscal year. Its passage would only ensure that our
Nation has no influence or role in the ongoing effort to downsize and
streamline the oversized U.N. bureaucracy. Stripping the arrearage
funding requests from this appropriation bill simply undermines the
ongoing bipartisan and bicameral effort to complete action complete
action of the U.N. funding package this year.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman].
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, the reforms in this package include
substantial reductions in our regular budget and peacekeeping
assessments from the U.N., caps our overall spending on U.N. agencies
and programs, and certifications from the administration assuring that
the U.N. implements a code of conduct, a personal evaluation system,
access to U.N. financial data by the GAO, and greater consultations
with the Congress.
I would like to stress to my colleagues that it is our firm intention
that none of the fU.N.ds in this bill appropriated for U.N. arrearages
will be spent without giving Members an opportunity to consider an
authorization measure now in conference between our two international
relations committees that contain all the reforms I have described.
Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to defeat the amendment.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. Smith].
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman cannot yield blocks of time under the 5-
minute rule, but the gentleman can yield time. By saying that, the
gentleman is telling the gentleman that he is going to speak for only 2
minutes, but we are not going to remind him from the Chair that those 2
minutes are up.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend for
yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the amendment of my
good friend from Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the goals
of the Bartlett amendment. I believe the United Nations has strayed too
far and too often from its original purposes. It is too big, it spends
too much, and many of its programs and specialized agencies truly are
out of control. And, yes, we Americans have been paying far more than
our fair share of U.N. expenses. This situation clearly needs to be
fixed, and it needs to be fixed now.
Mr. Chairman, the way to fix this program is to guarantee that not a
penny will be spent to settle the dispute over U.N. arrearages until
and unless the problems are fixed to the satisfaction of Congress.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the amendment by my
good friend from Maryland.
Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the goals of the Bartlett amendment.
I believe the United Nations has strayed too far and too often from its
original purposes. It is too big. It spends too much. Many of its
programs and specialized agencies are out of control. Some of these
programs do far more harm than good--such as the United Nations
Population Fund [UNFPA] activities in support of the Chinese
Government's coercive population control system, and other programs
that come down against innocent human life, against the traditional
family, against the values of most Americans and against the values of
the moderate and conservative majorities in almost every country in the
world. And, yes, we Americans have been paying far more than our fair
share of U.N. expenses. This situation needs to be fixed, and it needs
to be fixed now.
Mr. Chairman, the way to fix this problem is to guarantee that not a
penny will be spent to settle the dispute over U.N. arrearages until
and unless the problems are fixed to the satisfaction of Congress.
Unfortunately, the pending amendment provides no such guarantee. The
bill as written, however, goes a long way toward doing so. It provides
that none of the U.N. money can be spent without authorization by
Congress. And when we bring back a conference report on the Foreign
Relations authorization bill, it will condition any resolution of the
arrearages issue not only on reimbursement of future U.S. expenses in
support
[[Page H7903]]
of peacekeeping, but also on a reduction in U.S. dues--which are
currently at an outrageous 25 percent--on reduction in the size of the
U.N. bureaucracy, and on getting both the United Nations and the United
States out of international programs that threaten traditional values
and innocent human life.
If we can't get those conditions, we will not bring back a conference
report, and not a penny will be spent on these arrearages. If the
conference report on the authorization bill does not contain these
strict conditions--if it does not genuinely reform the United Nations,
save billions of dollars for U.S. taxpayers by solving the
reimbursement problem and requiring other nations to pay their fair
share, and get the United Nations and the United States out of programs
that are destructive of traditional values and innocent human life--
then I will urge my colleagues to vote against it.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage briefly in a colloquy with the
gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers].
The bill, as currently written, would not authorize a single penny to
be spent for U.N. arrearages unless Congress passes an authorization
bill. I would like to ask the gentleman whether it is his firm
intention to insist that the House and Senate conference on this bill
not waive the authorization requirement for U.N. arrearages?
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, the bill currently states that payment of
U.N. arrearages is subject to passage of an authorization. If the
Bartlett amendment fails, that will be the position of the House going
into conference. It is my intention to press for the House position in
conference.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank the gentleman for those assurances.
Based on those, I would oppose the pending amendment, because I know
the gentleman will stand firm in his determination not to waive the
authorization requirement, and then we can bring back a genuine reform
package that addresses not only the problems addressed by the Bartlett
amendment, but a whole range of systemic problems with the U.N. and
other international programs whose cost that are not only measured in
millions of dollars, but millions of human lives.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Maryland
[Mrs. Morella].
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the amendment offered
by my good friend and colleague the gentleman from Maryland [Mr.
Bartlett]. None of us dispute the fact that the United Nations has
problems, and this is why Congress has withheld part of our dues and
peacekeeping assessment to the UN during the past several years.
But a compromise has been reached. The administration and the
Congressional leadership on both sides of the aisle have reached this
compromise to allow us to begin repaying our dues, spreading out the
funds over three years in order to provide the necessary leverage to
assure that the General Assembly adopts the reforms.
It is highly unlikely that the nations of the General Assembly are
going to allow us to impose reforms when we are not paying our share,
and even our allies, Britain, Germany and Japan, have indicated they
will not support our reforms if we are not paying our arrears.
My friend and neighbor, the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Bartlett],
argues that it is actually the UN that owes us money, but nothing could
be further from the truth. The figures the gentleman cites from the GAO
include costs of non-UN peacekeeping operations undertaken by the
United States in our own national interests, such as the Gulf War and
our operations in Bosnia and Haiti.
Every living former Secretary of State opposes the Bartlett
amendment, including Baker, Haig, Shultz and Kissinger. It is a bad
amendment. It does not serve our national interests.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I yield to the
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Bartlett].
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, the Gulf War and the flights
over Iraq are not included in this. You know, if you do not pass my
amendments, a year from now we are going to be back here asking where
the $100 million went. We are trying to bribe the UN into making
reforms.
If we reward them for reforms that might happen, bribing them is not
going to happen. You have to do some really creative accounting to
conclude anything other than we concluded from the GAO report.
Mr. SNOWBARGER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Maryland. Providing arrearage payments to
the United Nations now would be a grave mistake by this House. I
strongly believe that the United States must get at least some credit
for its in-kind contributions to United Nations peacekeeping missions,
Furthermore, Congress should not appropriate any money for arrearages
until real reforms at the United Nations are agreed to and begin to be
implemented.
Mr. Chairman, the United States is not a freeloader or a deadbeat
when it comes to our relationship with the United Nations. Our
contributions to the UN--particularly peacekeeping missions--have been
far more than we are ever given credit for.
This amendment does not ask for reimbursement for the Korean or gulf
wars. Neither are we asking for recompense for the costs of enforcing
the embargoes on Iraq or Yugoslavia. We do request compensation for the
contributions necessary to support official United Nations peacekeeping
undertakings. In the 4 years from 1992 through 1995, America
contributed $4.8 billion in support of peacekeeping missions over and
above our assessments. These costs included training other nations'
troops in Haiti, humanitarian airdrops in Bosnia, airlifting troops to
Rwanda, and building ports in Somalia.
Opponents of giving credit to America for these in-kind expenditures
claim that if America were to be reimbursed we--and some other
countries such as France--would end up paying no cash to fund UN
peacekeeping missions. If this is indeed true, then the UN's budget
process for peacekeeping missions is fundamentally dishonest and the
United States is, in truth, paying a far higher percentage of the costs
than even the inflated 31 percent assessment that we are charged. It is
true that the administration did not contract with the United Nations
to undertake these activities. On the other hand, these activities are
real and vital costs of the peacekeeping missions and must be taken
into account when figuring the real cost of the missions. After all,
the Haiti mission could not proceed if the incoming troops were not
trained--the costs of that training should be considered part of that
mission.
Let me elaborate on some of this in-kind support. Our troops and
private consultants trained Haitians in proper police procedure in an
attempt to give that country some internal security force that doesn't
rely solely on fear and terror. American forces conducted
reconnaissance missions to establish the supply lines for aid shipments
through Rwanda and Zaire. Our troops also reconnoitered the proposed
airstrike targets in Bosnia.
Another significant use of American resources--if not in money then
in a use of highly trained and scarce manpower--is the use of our
Special Forces personnel as escorts for UN VIP's as they visit the
locations of these peacekeeping missions. The Americans who died in
Bosnia earlier this month were doing just that.
But even if the House should decide that the United States should pay
the arrearages, for diplomatic reasons or because the administration
unilaterally incurred these costs with no request or expectation of
repayment, we still should not appropriate the money just yet. We must
remember why the United States assumed this debt in the first place.
Under the Kassebaum-Solomon amendment of 1985, Congress directed the
administration to withhold this money in order to get the United
Nations to adopt some desperately needed reforms. There have been some
reforms promised, significantly fewer actually made. Past
administrations have certified that the UN was making acceptable
progress toward the reforms and released some of the withheld funds.
But once the administration made its certification, the UN promptly
ceased its progress, and did its best to undermine efforts at reform.
The Clinton administration and the U.N.'s allies say the American
taxpayer should pay the arrearages now and wait for reforms later
because the dues are legal obligations of our government. But the
obligations go both ways, and part of the bargain with the United
Nations should be that the institution be efficient, responsible, and
accountable. As anyone who has dealt with a nonperforming contractor
knows, withholding payment is often the only way to get him to respond
to your concerns.
There is a provision in the bill that withholds the money until UN
reforms are enacted. The report says that the reforms should include
those contained in S. 903 which is pending in conference. These are
fairly good reforms, and they make a good start on fixing the United
Nations. There's only one problem. They have not yet been enacted into
law. We have no way of knowing which reforms will actually
[[Page H7904]]
be in the legislation. Neither do we know if the United Nations will
agree to implement these reforms. We should not put the cart before the
horse by providing the money before the reform package is fully in
place.
The United Nations is a group of sovereign states; it is not
sovereign itself. The people who work there must be made to understand
that. We must put the officials at the UN on notice that much of what
they call reform is not seen as such by America. Moves designed to
eventually eliminate the United States' veto in the Security Council or
provide an independent source of revenue for the organization should be
utterly unacceptable to this Congress. What is needed is an end to the
arrogance, corruption, and waste.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I again urge the House to support Mr.
Bartlett's amendment. There may be a time in the future when it is
appropriate to pay back dues to the United Nations. That time will be
when the United States finally gets what it's paying for.
{time} 2345
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendments offered by the
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Bartlett].
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 239, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Bartlett]
will be postponed.
Are there further amendments to this portion of the bill?
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
contributions for international peacekeeping activities
For necessary expenses to pay assessed and other expenses
of international peacekeeping activities directed to the
maintenance or restoration of international peace and
security $261,000,000, of which not to exceed $46,000,000
shall remain available until expended for payment of
arrearages: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated or
otherwise made available by this Act for payment of
arrearages may be obligated or expended unless such
obligation or expenditure is expressly authorized by the
enactment of a subsequent Act described in the first proviso
under the heading ``Contributions to International
Organizations'' in this title: Provided further, That none of
the funds made available under this Act shall be obligated or
expended for any new or expanded United Nations peacekeeping
mission unless, at least fifteen days in advance of voting
for the new or expanded mission in the United Nations
Security Council (or in an emergency, as far in advance as is
practicable), (1) the Committees on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives and the Senate and other appropriate
Committees of the Congress are notified of the estimated cost
and length of the mission, the vital national interest that
will be served, and the planned exit strategy; and (2) a
reprogramming of funds pursuant to section 605 of this Act is
submitted, and the procedures therein followed, setting forth
the source of funds that will be used to pay for the cost of
the new or expanded mission: Provided further, That funds
shall be available for peacekeeping expenses only upon a
certification by the Secretary of State to the appropriate
committees of the Congress that American manufacturers and
suppliers are being given opportunities to provide equipment,
services, and material for United Nations peacekeeping
activities equal to those being given to foreign
manufacturers and suppliers.
international conferences and contingencies
For necessary expenses authorized by section 5 of the State
Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, in addition to
funds otherwise available for these purposes, contributions
for the United States share of general expenses of
international organizations and conferences and
representation to such organizations and conferences, as
provided for by 22 U.S.C. 2656 and 2672, and personal
services notwithstanding 5 U.S.C. 5102, $1,500,000, to remain
available until expended as authorized by 22 U.S.C. 2696(c),
of which not to exceed $200,000 may be expended for
representation as authorized by 22 U.S.C. 4085: Provided,
That these funds shall be available for obligation or
expenditure only after submission of a plan for the
expenditure of these funds in accordance with the procedures
set forth in section 605 of this Act.
International Commissions
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, to meet
obligations of the United States arising under treaties, or
specific Acts of Congress, as follows:
international boundary and water commission, united states and mexico
For necessary expenses for the United States Section of the
International Boundary and Water Commission, United States
and Mexico, and to comply with laws applicable to the United
States Section, including not to exceed $6,000 for
representation; as follows:
salaries and expenses
For salaries and expenses, not otherwise provided for,
$17,490,000.
construction
For detailed plan preparation and construction of
authorized projects, $6,463,000, to remain available until
expended, as authorized by section 24(c) of the State
Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2696(c)).
american sections, international commissions
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for the
International Joint Commission and the International Boundary
Commission, United States and Canada, as authorized by
treaties between the United States and Canada or Great
Britain, and for the Border Environment Cooperation
Commission as authorized by Public Law 103-182; $5,490,000,
of which not to exceed $9,000 shall be available for
representation expenses incurred by the International Joint
Commission.
international fisheries commissions
For necessary expenses for international fisheries
commissions, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by
law, $14,490,000: Provided, That the United States' share of
such expenses may be advanced to the respective commissions,
pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3324.
Other
payment to the asia foundation
For a grant to the Asia Foundation, as authorized by
section 501 of Public Law 101-246, $8,000,000, to remain
available until expended, as authorized by section 24(c) of
the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C.
2696(c)).
RELATED AGENCIES
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
arms control and disarmament activities
For necessary expenses not otherwise provided, for arms
control, nonproliferation, and disarmament activities,
$41,500,000, of which not to exceed $50,000 shall be for
official reception and representation expenses as authorized
by the Act of September 26, 1961, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2551
et seq.).
United States Information Agency
international information programs
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary to
enable the United States Information Agency, as authorized by
the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, as
amended (22 U.S.C. 2451 et seq.), the United States
Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948, as amended
(22 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.), and Reorganization Plan No. 2 of
1977 (91 Stat. 1636), to carry out international
communication, educational and cultural activities; and to
carry out related activities authorized by law, including
employment, without regard to civil service and
classification laws, of persons on a temporary basis (not to
exceed $700,000 of this appropriation), as authorized by
section 801 of such Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1471), and
entertainment, including official receptions, within the
United States, not to exceed $25,000 as authorized by section
804(3) of such Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1474(3)); $430,597,000:
Provided, That not to exceed $1,400,000 may be used for
representation abroad as authorized by section 302 of such
Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1452) and section 905 of the Foreign
Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4085): Provided further, That
not to exceed $6,000,000, to remain available until expended,
may be credited to this appropriation from fees or other
payments received from or in connection with English
teaching, library, motion pictures, educational advising and
counseling, exchange visitor program services, and
publication programs as authorized by section 810 of such Act
of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1475e): Provided further, That not to
exceed $920,000 to remain available until expended may be
used to carry out projects involving security construction
and related improvements for agency facilities not physically
located together with Department of State facilities abroad.
technology fund
For expenses necessary to enable the United States
Information Agency to provide for the procurement of
information technology improvements, as authorized by the
United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of
1948, as amended (22 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.), the Mutual
Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, as amended (22
U.S.C. 2451 et seq.), and Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977
(91 Stat. 1636), $5,050,000, to remain available until
expended.
educational and cultural exchange programs
For expenses of educational and cultural exchange programs,
as authorized by the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange
Act of 1961, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2451 et seq.), and
Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977 (91 Stat. 1636),
$193,731,000, to remain available until expended as
authorized by section 105 of such Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.
2455): Provided, That not to exceed $800,000, to remain
available until expended, may be credited to this
appropriation from fees or other payments received from or in
connection with English teaching and publication programs and
educational advising and counseling as authorized by section
810 of the United States Information and Educational Exchange
Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1475e).
[[Page H7905]]
eisenhower exchange fellowship program trust fund
For necessary expenses of Eisenhower Exchange Fellowships,
Incorporated, as authorized by sections 4 and 5 of the
Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Act of 1990 (20 U.S.C. 5204-
5205), all interest and earnings accruing to the Eisenhower
Exchange Fellowship Program Trust Fund on or before September
30, 1998, to remain available until expended: Provided, That
none of the funds appropriated herein shall be used to pay
any salary or other compensation, or to enter into any
contract providing for the payment thereof, in excess of the
rate authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5376; or for purposes which are
not in accordance with OMB Circulars A-110 (Uniform
Administrative Requirements) and A-122 (Cost Principles for
Non-profit Organizations), including the restrictions on
compensation for personal services.
israeli arab scholarship program
For necessary expenses of the Israeli Arab Scholarship
Program as authorized by section 214 of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (22 U.S.C.
2452), all interest and earnings accruing to the Israeli Arab
Scholarship Fund on or before September 30, 1998, to remain
available until expended.
international broadcasting operations
For expenses necessary to enable the United States
Information Agency, as authorized by the United States
Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948, as amended,
the Radio Broadcasting to Cuba Act, as amended, the
Television Broadcasting to Cuba Act, the United States
International Broadcasting Act of 1994, as amended, and
Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977, to carry out international
communication activities, including the purchase,
installation, rent, construction, and improvement of
facilities and equipment for radio and television
transmission and reception to Cuba, $391,550,000, of which
$30,000,000 shall remain available until expended, not to
exceed $16,000 may be used for official receptions within the
United States as authorized by section 804(3) of such Act of
1948 (22 U.S.C. 1747(3)), not to exceed $35,000 may be used
for representation abroad as authorized by section 302 of
such Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1452) and section 905 of the
Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4085), and not to
exceed $39,000 may be used for official reception and
representation expenses of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty;
and in addition, not to exceed $2,000,000 in receipts from
advertising and revenue from business ventures, not to exceed
$500,000 in receipts from cooperating international
organizations, and not to exceed $1,000,000 in receipts from
privatization efforts of the Voice of America and the
International Broadcasting Bureau, as authorized by section
810 of such Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1475e), to remain
available until expended for carrying out authorized
purposes: Provided, That no funds shall be used for
television broadcasting to Cuba after October 1, 1997, if the
President certifies that continued funding is not in the
national interest of the United States.
radio construction
For the purchase, rent, construction, and improvement of
facilities for radio transmission and reception, and purchase
and installation of necessary equipment for radio and
television transmission and reception as authorized by
section 801 of the United States Information and Educational
Exchange Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1471), $40,000,000, to remain
available until expended, as authorized by section 704(a) of
such Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1477b(a)).
national endowment for democracy
For grants made by the United States Information Agency to
the National Endowment for Democracy as authorized by the
National Endowment for Democacy Act, $30,000,000, to remain
available until expended.
General Provisions--Department of State and Related Agencies
Sec. 401. Funds appropriated under this title shall be
available, except as otherwise provided, for allowances and
differentials as authorized by subchapter 59 of 5 U.S.C.; for
services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and hire of
passenger transportation pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1343(b).
Sec. 402. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made
available for the current fiscal year for the Department of
State in this Act may be transferred between such
appropriations, but no such appropriation, except as
otherwise specifically provided, shall be increased by more
than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That not to
exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made available for the
current fiscal year for the United States Information Agency
in this Act may be transferred between such appropriations,
but no such appropriation, except as otherwise specifically
provided, shall be increased by more than 10 percent by any
such transfers: Provided further, That any transfer pursuant
to this section shall be treated as a reprogramming of funds
under section 605 of this Act and shall not be available for
obligation or expenditure except in compliance with the
procedures set forth in that section.
Sec. 403. (1) For purposes of implementing the
International Cooperative Administrative Support Services
program in fiscal year 1998, the amounts referred to in
paragraph (2) shall be transferred in accordance with the
provisions of section 404.
(2) Paragraph (1) applies to amounts made available by
title IV of this Act under the heading ``Administration of
Foreign Affairs'' as follows:
(A) $108,932,000 of the amount made available under the
paragraph ``diplomatic and consular programs''.
(B) $3,530,000 of the amount made available under the
paragraph ``security and maintenance of u.s. missions''.
Sec. 404. Funds transferred pursuant to section 403 shall
be transferred to the specified appropriation, allocated to
the specified account or accounts in the specified amount, be
merged with funds in such account or accounts that are
available for administrative support expenses of overseas
activities, and be available for the same purposes, and
subject to the same terms and conditions, as the funds with
which merged, as follows:
(1) Appropriations for the Legislative Branch--
(A) for the Library of Congress, for salaries and expenses,
$500,000; and
(B) for the General Accounting Office, for salaries and
expenses, $12,000.
(2) Appropriations for the Office of the United States
Trade Representative, for salaries and expenses, $302,000.
(3) Appropriations for the Department of Commerce, for the
International Trade Administration, for operations and
administration, $7,055,000;
(4) Appropriations for the Department of Justice--
(A) for legal activities--
(i) for general legal activities, for salaries and
expenses, $194,000; and
(ii) for the United States Marshals Service, for salaries
and expenses, $2,000;
(B) for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, for salaries
and expenses, $2,477,000;
(C) for the Drug Enforcement Administration, for salaries
and expenses, $6,356,000; and
(D) for the Immigration and Naturalization Service, for
salaries and expenses, $1,313,000.
(5) Appropriations for the United States Information
Agency, for international information programs, $25,047,000.
(6) Appropriations for the Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency, for arms control and disarmament activities,
$1,247,000.
(7) Appropriations to the President--
(A) for the Foreign Military Financing Program, for
administrative costs, $6,660,000;
(B) for the Economic Support Fund, $336,000;
(C) for the Agency for International Development--
(i) for operating expenses, $6,008,000;
(ii) for the Urban and Environmental Credit Program,
$54,000;
(iii) for the Development Assistance Fund, $124,000;
(iv) for the Development Fund for Africa, $526,000;
(v) for assistance for the new independent states of the
former Soviet Union, $818,000;
(vi) for assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic
States, $283,000; and
(vii) for international disaster assistance, $306,000;
(D) for the Peace Corps, $3,672,000; and
(E) for the Department of State--
(i) for international narcotics control $1,117,000; and
(ii) for migration and refugee assistance, $394,000.
(8) Appropriations for the Department of Defense--
(A) for operation and maintenance--
(i) for operation and maintenance, Army, $4,394,000;
(ii) for operation and maintenance, Navy, $1,824,000;
(iii) for operation and maintenance, Air Force, $1,603,000;
and
(iv) for operation and maintenance, Defense-Wide,
$21,993,000; and
(B) for procurement, for other procurement, Air Force,
$4,211,000.
(9) Appropriations for the American Battle Monuments
Commission, for salaries and expenses, $210,000.
(10) Appropriations for the Department of Agriculture--
(A) for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, for
salaries and expenses, $932,000;
(B) for the Foreign Agricultural Service and General Sales
Manager, $4,521,000; and
(C) for the Agricultural Research Service, $16,000.
(11) Appropriations for the Department of Treasury--
(A) for the United States Customs Service, for salaries and
expenses, $2,002,000;
(B) for departmental offices, for salaries and expenses,
$804,000;
(C) for the Internal Revenue Service, for tax law
enforcement, $662,000;
(D) for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, for
salaries and expenses, $17,000;
(E) for the United States Secret Service, for salaries and
expenses, $617,000; and
(F) for the Comptroller of the Currency, for assessment
funds, $29,000.
(12) Appropriations for the Department of Transportation--
(A) for the Federal Aviation Administration, for
operations, $1,594,000; and
(B) for the Coast Guard, for operating expenses, $65,000.
(13) Appropriations for the Department of Labor, for
departmental management, for salaries and expenses, $58,000.
(14) Appropriations for the Department of Health and Human
Services--
(A) for the National Institutes of Health, for the National
Cancer Institute, $42,000;
(B) for the Office of the Secretary, for general
departmental management, $71,000;
[[Page H7906]]
(C) for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for
disease control, research, and training, $522,000; and
(15) Appropriations for the Social Security Administration,
for administrative expenses, $370,000.
(16) Appropriations for the Department of the Interior--
(A) for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, for
resource management, $12,000;
(B) for the United States Geological Survey, for surveys,
investigations, and research, $80,000; and
(C) for the Bureau of Reclamation, for water and related
resources, $101,000.
(17) Appropriations for the Department of Veterans Affairs,
for departmental administration, for general operating
expenses, $453,000.
(18) Appropriations for the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, for mission support, $183,000.
(19) Appropriations for the National Science Foundation,
for research and related activities, $39,000.
(20) Appropriations for the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, for salaries and expenses, $4,000.
(21) Appropriations for the Department of Energy--
(A) for departmental administration, $150,000; and
(B) for atomic energy defense activities, for other defense
activities, $54,000.
(22) Appropriations for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
for salaries and expenses, $26,000.
Mr. ROGERS (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the remainder of title IV be considered as read, printed
in the Record and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Kentucky?
There was no objection.
Are there amendments to this portion of the bill?
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
TITLE V--RELATED AGENCIES
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Maritime Administration
operating-differential subsidies
(liquidation of contract authority)
For the payment of obligations incurred for operating-
differential subsidies, as authorized by the Merchant Marine
Act, 1936, as amended, $51,030,000, to remain available until
expended.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Miller
language adopted into H.R. 2267, the Departments of Commerce, Justice
and State Appropriations Bill. These instructions will set aside a
small amount of funding for the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys to
provide assistance to the victims of human rights abuses in the
Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands.
Since at least 1984, Federal officials have expressed concern about
the CNMI alien labor system. Worker complaints over wages and working
conditions are continuing undiminished according to the third annual
report of the ``Federal-CNMI Initiative''. The governments of the
Philippines and China have expressed concern about the treatment of
their citizens in this U.S. Commonwealth and allegations persist
regarding the CNMI's inability to protect workers against crimes such
as illegal recruitment, battery, rape, child labor, and forced
prostitution.
Without Rep. Miller's language in H.R. 2267, individuals who have
been the subject of human rights abuses--right here in the United
States--have only the charity of private relief organizations to rely
upon for help. In Hawaii, the Filipino Solidarity Coalition is
currently providing sanctuary to a young girl named ``Katrina'' who
came to Hawaii as a government witness. When Katrina was 14 she was
brought to the CNMI by an employer who promised her a good job and fair
wages in the restaurant industry. When she arrived in the CNMI her
hopes for a better life were destroyed. She discovered that the
employer had lured her to the CNMI under false pretenses. Not only was
she confined to her assigned living quarters but she was also forced
into service as a prostitute. Katrina had few options and even less
money but she escaped her confines and filed suit against her employer
with the help of the local Philippine consulate. When Katrina's actions
were revealed to her employer, her life was threatened. To escape the
abusive situation, the consulate helped her to find refuge in Guam.
However, Guam's close proximity to her former employer still put
Katrina in a dangerous situation.
Through the help of the Filipino Solidarity Coalition, Katrina
managed to escape to Hawaii where local donations and a small grant
from the Department of Labor helped to provide her shelter, food, and
further legal assistance. However, there are many others who remain in
the CNMI still suffering the abuse and indignity that Katrina managed
to escape. I appreciate the Chairman's support of the Miller language
which will help those like Katrina who are victims of human rights
abuse, not far away in a foreign country, but right here in the United
States of America.
Ms. FURSE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of Congresswoman Norton's
amendment to remove the ban on use of federal funds for abortion
services for women in federal prisons.
The United States has more people behind bars than any other country
in the world. Every week in America, more than 1,000 become inmates and
the largest rate of increase is among women.
Many of these women prisoners are victims of physical or sexual abuse
and 6% of them are pregnant when they enter prison. These women are
isolated from family and friends and almost certainly lose custody of
their infants upon birth. Are these conditions under which we want to
force women to bear children?
Abortion is a legal health care option for American women, and has
been for over 20 years. Federal prisoners are totally dependent on
health care services provided by the Bureau of Prisons. The ban on
abortion services contained in this bill effectively prevents these
women from seeking their Constitutionally-guaranteed right to choose.
The experience of women who are pregnant, behind bars, with no money
or support from the outside and who are denied the right to terminate
their pregnancy, is nothing short of cruel and unusual punishment. The
anti-choice provision in this bill amounts to inherent coercion to
force these women to take their pregnancies to term and, in the
process, inflicts extreme emotional damage, pain and suffering.
This ban is another direct assault on women's rights. It is one more
step in the long line of rollbacks on women's reproductive freedoms.
I urge you to support Congresswoman Norton's amendment. We must do
everything in our power to treat these women fairly and allow them to
access their legally protected right to choose.
Mr. POSHARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to register my strong support
of the funding in this bill for juvenile justice programs. H.R. 2267
provides almost $238 million for these critical programs, an amount
which represents a significant increase over last year's funding level.
It saddens me to say so, but such an increase is necessary merely to
keep pace with the ever-increasing level of juvenile crime in this
country. I find it deeply disturbing that 20 percent of the individuals
arrested for violent crimes are below the age of 18, and I applaud my
colleagues for recognizing the critical need for funds and programs to
combat this staggering statistic.
We must recognize that any effective strategy for reducing juvenile
crime should include several components. Law enforcement resources need
to target violent and dangerous juvenile offenders, and these youth
must know that criminal actions will be punished swiftly and severely.
In addition, it has to be instilled in juveniles that they will be held
responsible for their actions, whether that involves victim
restitution, community service or other sanctions. Perhaps most
importantly, local communities and federal and state governments must
adopt creative and effective prevention and intervention programs. It
is crucial to identify at-risk youth and devote significant resources
to minimizing or counteracting the potential for those individuals to
become juvenile offenders.
I would also like to commend the Committee on its inclusion of
funding for drug prevention programs. Drug abuse proves all too often
to be a precursor to further criminal activity, and more teenagers than
ever before are experimenting with drugs. We must step up our efforts
to demonstrate to America's youth that drug use is harmful, dangerous,
and unattractive, not to mention illegal. I believe the $5 million
provided in this bill for the development of drug prevention programs
represents a meaningful and important step towards this goal.
Again, I wish to thank the members of the Committee for their close
attention to juvenile justice, and for making these programs a
priority. We are moving in the right direction, and I urge my
colleagues to fully support the juvenile justice funding levels in this
bill.
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of
the Norton amendment. The ban on Federal funds for abortions for women
in prison is one more step in a long line of rollbacks on women's
reproductive freedoms. The Norton amendment seeks to correct one of the
more shameful attacks on American women.
Despite clear legal authority establishing the right of American
women to choose abortion as a viable health option, many women
prisoners are denied equal access to choose whether or not to terminate
their pregnancies. Federal prisoners must rely on the Bureau of Prisons
for all of their health care, yet without this amendment women will be
prevented from seeking needed reproductive health care.
Prisoners have a constitutional right to health care. Congress should
not interfere with this right. It is too easy to attack women inmates,
women who are often poor, uneducated, isolated, and beaten down; women
who are often victims of physical or sexual abuse.
[[Page H7907]]
Most women prisoners are poor when they enter prison, and therefore
cannot rely on anyone else for financial assistance. These women
already face limited prenatal care, isolation from family and friends,
a bleak future, and the certain loss of custody of the infant.
The ban on reproductive health services for women in prison cuts off
their only opportunity to receive much needed care, it denies them
their constitutional rights, but most importantly, it denies them their
dignity. Mr. Chairman, we must stop this assault on women's right to
choose. I urge my colleagues to support the Norton amendment.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to myriad
amendments to the Commerce, Justice, State and the judiciary
appropriation bill to either dramatically reduce or eliminate funding
for the Advanced Technology Program [ATP] at the Department of
Commerce. High technology companies play a key role in preparing our
communities for the 21st century, and the ATP is critical to those
efforts.
The ATP program is one of the strongest links in the Government-
industry partnership to enhance U.S. competitiveness in a global
marketplace. The Government support provided through the ATP is
especially critical for long-term, high-risk, pre-competitive
initiatives where the initial investment will not be recovered for
several or even decades. Without these essential technology programs,
U.S. industries will be at a disadvantage to the rest of the world. The
ATP provides the high technology industry with the ability to develop
breakthrough technologies by allowing companies to close the gap
between technology development and commercialization.
I find it ironic that the $185 million designated for the ATP is
being characterized as corporate pork, particularly since the House
recently voted to order $5 billion worth of new B-2 bombers from
defense contractors--bombers that the Air Force, Joint Chiefs of Staff,
and Commander in Chief all argued were unnecessary. If ordering five
billion dollar's worth of unnecessary military equipment from defense
contractors isn't corporate pork, I don't know what is. This is
especially true given the fact that defense contractors don't kick any
of their own money into the construction of a B-2, unlike those
companies that participate in the ATP.
Mr. Chairman, high technology companies: are the engine of job
creation in the United States and contribute to the overall well-being
of the United States economy. Nationally, the number of high tech jobs
increased 6 percent from 1993 to 1995. In Oregon alone over 10,000 new
jobs were created from 1990 to 1995; provide the greatest number of
high-paying and high-skilled jobs to Americans, Nationally, high
technology companies provide over 4 million jobs and provide an average
wage of about $47,000, well above the national median. In Oregon high
technology workers were paid an average of $46,319 in 1995, 84 percent
more than the average wage of all private sector workers in the State;
and contribute to improving the balance of trade in relation to our
major competitors. Nationally, U.S. exports exceeded $140 billion--
about one-fourth of all U.S. exports, in 1995. In Oregon, high
technology companies account for 46 percent of all State exports, for a
total of $4.3 billion in sales.
The Federal Government should be doing all it can to improve our
Nation's competitive outlook, and a strong high technology sector in
the economy is critical to meeting that goal. By cutting or eliminating
the ATP, we would remove an important tool that high technology
companies use in partnership with the Federal Government to hasten the
speed of technological progress and bring new products to the
marketplace. It's these type of partnerships that drive economic
success in communities across the country.
I urge my colleagues to oppose any attempts to reduce funds for the
Advanced Technology Program.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment
offered by the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan] and the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fox]. This amendment would increase
funding for the Legal Services Corporation from $141 million to $250
million. I applaud both of my colleagues for their leadership on this
issue.
Mr. Chairman, one of the cornerstones of our constitutional democracy
is the premise that all citizens should have competent legal counsel in
a criminal or civil justice matter. Nevertheless, the reduction in
funding for the Legal Services Corporation in this bill undermines that
premise.
Mr. Chairman, the Legal Services Corporation is a modest but vitally
important and effective program that assists millions of needy families
in gaining access to the civil justice system in cases relating to
domestic violence, landlord-tenant disputes, consumer fraud, child
support, and other legal matters.
This program is the only means of assuring that poor children,
battered and abused spouses, the elderly, the disabled, migrant
workers, and other low-income individuals have access to legal
representation in civil cases.
Mr. Chairman, the Legal Services Corporation has provided affordable
legal assistance to 5 million Americans in 1995 alone. Legal Services
clients are as diverse as our Nation, encompassing all races and ethnic
groups and ages. Older Americans represent 11 percent of the clients
serviced by legal services programs. Over two-thirds of legal services
clients are women, most of whom are mothers with children. For children
living in poverty, a parent's access to legal services can prove to be
the difference in securing support fro an absent parent, obtaining a
decent home in which to live, or receiving equal and fair access to
educational opportunities.
Mr. Chairman, the representation of women and children who are
victims of domestic violence has always been a high priority for the
Legal Services Corporation and its grantees. In 1996, local programs
closed 50,000 cases in which the primary legal issue was the
representation of women seeking protection from abuse.
In my home State of Maryland, while costs and demands on the law have
augmented, funding for general civil legal services has fallen by over
30 percent. In 1996, because of reduced funding levels, legal aid
offices in the State of Maryland have closed. Currently, the Legal
Services Corporation only has the capacity to serve less than 25
percent of the eligible population.
Mr. Chairman, by reducing funding, the Congress will continue to tell
battered women in our Nation that they have no legal refuge against
abuse, the elderly that their right to legal resources has been
eliminated, and defrauded consumers that no legal protections exist.
The words, as emblazoned on the Supreme Court Building, ``equal justice
under law,'' would not apply to all if funding were to be cut for this
program.
Mr. Chairman, I practiced law for 20 years. As a lawyer, I was one of
130,000 volunteer lawyers registered to participate in pro bono legal
services, encouraged by the Legal Services Corporation. During my
service, I discovered that our civil justice system does belong to the
rich and powerful in our Nation. Rare is the day when poor Americans
receive equitable treatment.
Mr. Chairman, by increasing funding for the Legal Services
Corporation, we will send a powerful message to the American people
that our civil justice system does not belong just to the wealthy and
privileged in our Nation; it belongs to all citizens. I, therefore,
urge my colleagues to vote in support of this amendment.
To conclude, I thank the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan]
and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fox], for their leadership on
this issue.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Smith of New Jersey) having assumed the chair, Mr. Hastings, Chairman
of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R.
2267), making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice,
and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes, had come to no
resolution thereon.
____________________