[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 155 (Friday, November 7, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11942-S11943]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS BILL

  Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN. Mr. President, I rise to state my objection to the 
motion to proceed on the District of Columbia appropriations bill, at 
least temporarily. I want to explain why.
  There is currently an amendment on the D.C. appropriations bill that 
will grant certain Central Americans access to the suspension of 
deportation procedure. These are refugees--people who leave their 
countries for political asylum here. And they will not be deported 
because of the amendment that is part of the D.C. appropriations bill. 
It covers some 191,000 Salvadorans, some 21,000 Nicaraguans, some 
118,000 Guatemalans, and I certainly support the suspension of 
deportation for all of those groups of asylum seekers. It does not, 
however, cover just about 18,000 Haitians. In fact, the only group of 
asylum seekers that were left out of the bill as it came out of the 
House were the Haitians.
  This is not only patently unfair but certainly suggests almost a tin 
ear on the racial implications of what came out of the House by the 
House Members who put this together that they would not understand--
that singling out the Haitians for exclusion from this relief would be 
perceived as negative in many parts of this country which is nothing 
short of stunning to me.
  I am happy to report that I had a conversation with the majority 
leader, Senator Lott. He wants to try to help us with this situation. 
Senator Graham has an actual bill to try to fix the situation with 
regard to the Haitians separate and apart from the District of Columbia 
appropriations. I support and would cosponsor Senator Graham's 
legislation. However, the catch here and the reason for my voicing my 
objection

[[Page S11943]]

right now--my temporary objection right now--is that, as Senator Lott 
pointed out in his comments, we talk about whether or not these 
Haitians would be deported in the meantime until Senator Graham's bill 
can get passed. We don't yet have an agreement from the administration, 
from the INS, from the House, from the Senate in terms of Senate 
oversight. We don't have an agreement that these Haitians won't be 
singled out--18,000 out of almost 250,000 people to be deported in the 
interim until the Graham effort is concluded.
  So I find myself in the difficult position of having to object to 
proceeding to something that might otherwise be a good thing until this 
obvious blatant error is--at least until we get some commitments that 
these people will not be harmed. That is what the number of men, women, 
and children need for their lives in behalf of and in pursuit of 
democracy. It is not fair to single them out for special treatment for 
no rational reason other than as they have brought to me that they fear 
they have been singled out because of their color, that they have been 
singled out because of their race.
  That is not right. That is not what this country stands for. I hope 
that is not the signal that we are going to send by the way this 
legislative process works out.
  So, until we get an agreement on suspension of deportation, I am 
afraid I will have to object to the motion to proceed with regard to 
the District of Columbia appropriations bill. I know there are some 
other issues. I hope these issues get worked out. I hope this issue 
gets worked out.
  I want to put the Senate on notice that this legislation in its 
current form sends the absolute wrong signal to the country and, 
indeed, to the world regarding our commitment to family.
  How are you going to suspend deportation for 191,000 people from El 
Salvador, 21,000 people from Nicaragua, 118,000 people from Guatemala 
and not allow 18,000 people from Haiti to take advantage of the same 
relief under almost identical circumstances? There is no reason for it. 
There is no rational for it. Quite frankly, I would be remiss if I 
allowed this mistake to go forward. I am confident it is going to be 
worked out.
  Again, my conversation with Senator Lott, my conversation with 
Senator Graham, with Senator Kennedy, and with Senator Mack--we have 
had conversations across the board. We just want to make certain there 
is agreement before this starts to leave here--that there is a 
agreement that these people will not be kicked out of country under 
circumstances in which almost 250,000 people similarly situated are 
allowed to stay. That is my objection. That is my problem with the bill 
at the time.
  I want to make the point that we in the Senate are not prepared to 
send that kind of negative signal to the country or to the rest of the 
world, and that we will at least resolve the deportation issue before 
the District of Columbia appropriations legislation goes forward.
  I thank the Chair.
  I yield the floor.
  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.

                          ____________________