[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 160 (Thursday, November 13, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12554-S12559]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONFERENCE REPORT ON COMMERCE, STATE, JUSTICE APPROPRIATIONS
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I want to discuss the report pending
that should come over from the House of Representatives in the next
while on the appropriations bill that relates to the Commerce, State,
Justice Departments. And part of what is in this report that we expect
to see relates to the importation of surplus military weapons that were
manufactured in the United States and, many years ago, were sent abroad
as part of our military assistance program.
Now, although there was initially no bill or report language on the
issue in either the House or the Senate bills before conference, the
issue has nevertheless consumed an enormous amount of time over the
past few weeks, and it has generated some significant controversy. I
have had a deep interest in this subject because I believe that when we
load this society of ours up with more guns, we ought to know why we
are doing it.
It has been the policy of three administrations--Reagan, Bush, and
now the current Clinton administration--to ban foreign governments from
exporting to our shores and selling these American-made military
weapons that we gave or sold them at sharp discounts to help us fight
common enemies, and sell these weapons to the U.S. commercial markets.
Nonetheless, the National Rifle Association and the gun importers
supported an attempt--in the dark of night, I point out--to slip a
provision into the conference agreement on this bill to overturn this
longstanding policy and allow military weapons made for military use to
flood America's streets.
The administration strongly opposed this attempt. In fact, the
President's senior advisers, at one point, said they would recommend
that the President veto the bill--this important bill--to finance our
Justice Department, our State Department, and our Commerce Department--
if it included an amendment to allow foreign governments to export
large quantities of military weapons for commercial sale in America's
cities and towns. They don't restrict whose hands these fall into.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the letter from the OMB
director, Franklin Raines, on this issue be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
Executive Office of the President, Office of Management
and Budget,
Washington, DC, November 6, 1997.
Hon. Frank Lautenberg,
Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Lautenberg: The Administration strongly
objects to the inclusion of any provision in the FY 1998
Commerce, Justice and State Appropriations Conference Report
to allow for the importation of surplus military weapons. We
have repeatedly opposed such provisions, and the President's
senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill if it
includes language that would allow large quantities of
surplus military weapons to be imported.
The Administration finds it unacceptable that--in the same
appropriations bill that funds the nation's law enforcement
priorities, such as putting more police on our streets--the
Committee is considering language that could flood our
streets with millions of military surplus weapons. These
weapons, including M-1 Garands and M-1911 .45 caliber
pistols, were designed for military purposes and provided to
foreign governments as a form of military aid. Moreover,
hundreds of these guns have already been recovered by law
enforcement officers throughout the United States. Opening
the door to more of these weapons would only serve to further
undermine public safety.
We strongly urge the Committee to reject this provision.
Sincerely,
Franklin D. Raines,
Director.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. The Washington Post and the New York Times also
editorialized against this dark-of-night assault just this past week.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of these and previous
editorials be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Washington Post, Nov. 12, 1997]
Hill Alert: A Bad Old Gun Bill
We're down to the dangerous mad-dash time in Congress when
truly bad ideas can sneak into law--and today the gun
lobbyists are poised with a flood-the-market firearms scheme
disguised as an innocent ``curios and relics'' proposal. Once
again, certain members of Congress who are semiautomatic
hawkers of the National Rifle Association's line, linked with
lobbyists for gun importers, are seeking to slip language
into an appropriations bill that would allow an arsenal of
some 2.5 million weapons from abroad to go on the U.S.
market.
This stockpile has made the rounds globally: The weapons
were originally paid for by U.S. taxpayers. Then as U.S. Army
surplus the firearms were given or sold to foreign
governments years ago. But they are more than quaint relics
for the walls of collectors; many of these firearms can be
converted easily into illegal automatic weapons for domestic
crimes such as holdups, assaults and murder. The weapons
could pile into the U.S. market from supplies in the
Philippines, Morocco, India, Turkey, Vietnam, Iran, and other
countries. Estimated value of these deadly weapons on legal
or illegal markets? Approximately $1 billion.
It has been for the safety of the public that the Reagan,
Bush and Clinton administrations all enforced a policy of
keeping such overseas stockpiles out of the country and thus
off the streets. Letting them in would
[[Page S12555]]
risk driving down the price of firearms generally and making
weapons more easily obtainable by street criminals.
Law enforcement officials around the country warn that
there has been an increased use of these weapons against
police officers. More than 1,800 M1 rifles and M1911 pistols
were traced to crime scenes in 1995-96 and in 1997, about
1,000 more have been traced. According to the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, 13 law enforcement officers
have been killed by M1 rifles or M1911 pistols since 1990.
Clinton administration officials have advised Sen. Frank
Lautenberg and others seeking to block the gun-lobby scheme
that senior advisers would recommend a veto if this proposal
comes to the president's desk. But it shouldn't come to that,
just as it shouldn't be slipped into any appropriations bill
at the eleventh hour of a congressional session. The
provision should be removed and if not, rejected.
____
[From the New York Times, Nov. 12, 1997]
Avoiding Adjournment Blunders
The final hours before Congress takes a long recess are
usually dangerous. It is a time when bad riders are attached
to blameless appropriations bills, and complex legislation is
denied the measured debate it deserves. With these cautionary
notes, we urge Congress to avoid the following pitfalls as it
stumbles toward the door.
National Forests. The so-called ``Quincy Library Group''
bill passed the House with only one dissenting vote and now
awaits action on the Senate floor. The Senate should delay
and use its vacation to rethink a measure that was marketed
to the House under false pretenses.
The bill would require at least 40,000 acres of logging
each year in a 2.5-million-acre stretch of national forest in
California's Sierra Nevada. It was advertised as an
experimental fire-control program and touted as a consensus
measure devised by local and timber industry officials who
met at the Quincy, Calif., town library in 1993. Yet this is
not a pilot program--it would double logging in the area and
threaten valuable watersheds. Further, the Forest Service, by
law the custodian of the national forests, had no real input.
This bill sets bad precedents and requires major revisions.
Family Planning. Both the House and Senate have attached to
their foreign aid appropriations bill a provision that would
deny Federal funds to any overseas family planning
organization that performs abortions or lobbies to change
foreign abortion laws--even though the groups in question use
their own money to further objectives. President Clinton does
not like this provision. Congress could avoid a nasty veto
fight by removing the objectionable language in conference.
Gun Control. Some House members want to attach to an
appropriations bill a dangerous amendment that would allow
the importation of some two million surplus military rifles
and handguns from countries that originally got them as a
form of military assistance. The N.R.A. and its supporters--
including dealers who would buy and re-sell the weapons--say
they are merely relics. But they can still kill people. This
attempt to overturn current law, which bans such imports,
deserves a crushing defeat.
Congress could more profitably use its final hours to
rectify an oversight. It granted itself a modest 2.3 percent
pay raise last month but failed to award the same increase to
Federal judges, whose pay is linked to Congressional pay. The
remedy is to attach an amendment to one of the appropriations
bills granting the raise. That is one last-minute rider we
would applaud.
____
[From the New York Times, Sept. 9, 1997]
The Surplus Gun Invasion
Gun dealers, with the enthusiastic support of the National
Rifle Association, are once again trying to sneak through
Congress a measure that could put 2.5 million more rifles and
pistols onto American streets and provide a handsome subsidy
for weapons importers and a few foreign governments. This
bill, introduced with disgraceful stealth, should be pounced
on by the Clinton Administration and all in Congress who are
concerned about crime.
The bill is an amendment to the Treasury Department's
appropriation, which may come to a vote in the House this
week. It would allow countries that received American
military surplus M-1 rifles, M-1 carbines and M1911 pistols
to sell them to weapons dealers in the United States. The
countries--allies and former allies such as the Philippines,
South Korea, Iran and Turkey--got the guns free or at a
discount or simply kept them after World War II, or the
Korean and Vietnam wars. Current law requires them to pay the
Pentagon if they sell the guns and bars Americans from
importing them. The new bill would change both provisions.
The N.R.A. argues that the guns are merely relics. But they
are not too old to kill. In 1995 and 1996 the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms traced these models to more
than 1,800 crime sites. Senator Frank Lautenberg, the bill's
main opponent, says these guns have killed at least 10 police
officers since 1990. M-1 carbines can be converted to
automatic firing, and all the M-1's are easily converted into
illegal assault weapons.
Republicans attached a similar bill to an emergency
spending measure last year but took it out under pressure
from the White House. President Clinton should threaten to
veto the Treasury appropriation if the measure remains.
____
[From the Washington Post, Aug. 4, 1997]
Surplus Weapons, Surplus Danger
Gun sales are flat, so the nation's gun importers are
looking to shake up the market. Once again they want
permission to bring into the country an arsenal of as many as
2.5 million U.S. Army surplus weapons that were given or sold
to foreign governments decades ago.
The industry classifies the guns as obsolete ``curios and
relics'' of interest mostly to collectors and sports
shooters. But they're not talking about a gentleman officer's
pearl-handled revolvers. These are soldiers' M1 Garand
rifles, M1 carbines and .45-caliber M1911 pistols; some can
be converted to automatic or illegal assault weapons with
parts that cost as little as $100. For public safety reasons,
the Pentagon declines to transfer such surplus to commercial
gun vendors, which is why the Clinton, Bush and Reagan
administrations have enforced a policy of keeping the
overseas weapons out.
This week, the gun importers, cheered on by the National
Rifle Association, quietly persuaded a House appropriations
panel to approve language to prevent the State, Justice and
Treasury departments from denying the importers'
applications. It's a slap at the country's efforts to reduce
gun violence.
To introduce a flood of these historical weapons is to risk
driving down the price of firearms and putting more within
the reach of street criminals. It isn't simply gun-control
groups but the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms that
warns of an increased use of these kinds of weapons against
police around the country. In 1995-96 alone, 304 U.S.
military surplus M1 rifles and 99 surplus pistols were traced
to crime scenes. At least nine law enforcement officers have
been killed by M1 rifles or M1911 pistols since 1990,
according to Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who has
introduced legislation to cement the import ban in law by
reconciling some contradictory statutes.
The State Department says that weapons transfers--even for
outdated guns--should remain an executive branch prerogative
to be handled country by country. Why should the governments
of Turkey, Italy or Pakistan collect a windfall from U.S. gun
importers when the products they are trading originally were
supplied by the U.S. government? Why should Vietnam and Iran
be allowed to earn currency from U.S.-made weaponry they took
as ``spoils of war.'' President Clinton last year headed off
a similar effort to allow in the surplus weapons and should
be counted on to do so again.
____
Guns--and the M-1 Boomerang
The people who bring you America's Gross National Arsenal--
the weapons-pushers who keep the firearms flowing to the
streets of neighborhoods near you--are poised to go global
with sales of weapons that you already bought with your taxes
years ago. The U.S. gun industry hopes to make a fortune by
importing millions of M-1 Garand rifles, M-1 carbines and
.45-caliber M1911 pistols--surplus American military firearms
that the Pentagon originally gave away or sold at a discount
to various countries over the years. Many of these weapons
are especially handy because they can be converted easily
into (illegal) automatic weapons for domestic uses such as
committing crimes and killing people.
That's not how this deadly deal is characterized by the
industry, of course, or by John Sununu, former chief of staff
under President Bush, or others working with the gun industry
who are pushing the import plan in Congress. These groups
prefer to talk about the weapons that would go to collectors
and describe the legislation they keep trying to slip quietly
through Congress as a harmless move to offer a new supply of
``curio and relic'' guns for collectors and other souvenir-
seekers.
But as reported by Post staff writer John Mintz this week,
the firearms would be coming back to the United States from
supplies in the Philippines, Morocco, India, Turkey and other
countries. Gun industry lobbyists helped persuade Sen. Ted
Stevens of Alaska to introduce measure allowing the weapons
into the country--and specifically forbidding federal
officials from blocking their entry. In July, with no debate,
Sen. Stevens got the provisions slipped into the
appropriations continuing resolution; it wasn't until the
White House objected that the provision was removed. Now, the
senator's office and industry representative say they hope to
get the provision enacted soon.
Backers of the plan argue that the weapons at issue are
obsolete and pose no threat to anyone. It's true that the M-1
rifle is bulky and not a great item for street crimes. But
the M-1 carbine and the pistols are another lethal matter.
The carbine can be converted easily to automatic fire. The
concern is not with single sales to individual collectors but
with supplies getting into the wrong hands. Legislation to
allow imports only of rifles that are, say, World War II
vintage or earlier could serve the collector market. But
Congress should consider any such proposal carefully--and
openly, with hearings--instead of blessing a new domestic
flood of weapons designed for war.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Finally, a coalition of 50 organizations including
Handgun Control, the Violence Policy Center, and the Coalition to Stop
Gun
[[Page S12556]]
Violence, opposed this effort to overturn the policy of three
administrations on this issue.
I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a copy of their
letter on the issue.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
September 8, 1997.
Dear Representative: In late-July, during mark-up of the
Fiscal Year 1998 Treasury-Postal Service-General Government
Appropriations bill, the Appropriations Committee accepted an
amendment that would allow foreign governments to export to
the United States for commercial sale, millions of military
weapons the United States previously made available to
foreign countries through military assistance programs.
For a range of public health and safety, national security,
and taxpayer reasons, we strongly urge you vote to delete
this provision from the Fiscal Year 1998 Treasury-Postal
Service-General Government Appropriations bill.
Supporters of this amendment describe it as an innocuous
measure which simply allows the importation of some obsolete
``curios and relics.'' In reality, the amendment would allow
the import of an estimated 2.5 million weapons of war,
including 1.2 million M1 carbines. The M1 carbine is a semi-
automatic weapon that can be easily converted into automatic
fire equipped with a 15-30 round detachable magazine.
This is a Public Safety Issue: Although the backers of the
provision claim that these World War II era weapons are now
harmless ``curios and relics'', in reality they remain deadly
assault weapons. According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms, the M1 Carbine can be easily converted into a
fully-automatic assault rifle. For this reason, the
Department of Defense has refused to sell its surplus stocks
of these weapons to civilian gun dealers and collectors in
the United States.
According to Raymond W. Kelley, the Treasury Department's
Under-Secretary for Enforcement, the inflow of these weapons
will drive down the price of similar weapons, making them
more accessible to criminals. Already, during 1995-1996, ATF
has traced 1,172 M1911 pistols and 639 M1 rifles to crimes
committed in the United States.
This is a Government Oversight Concern: Nearly 2.5 million
of these weapons were given or sold as ``security
assistance'' to allied governments. Under United States law,
recipients of American arms and military aid must obtain
permission from the United States government before re-
transferring those arms to third parties. Setting a dangerous
precedent, this amendment fundamentally undercuts the ability
of the United States government to exercise its right of
refusal on retransfer of United States arms.
The Reagan, Bush, and Clinton Administrations have all
barred imports of these military weapons by the American
public. The Appropriations bill explicitly overrides this
policy, prohibiting the government from denying applications
for the importation of ``U.S. origin ammunition and curio or
relic firearms and parts.'' In effect, the provision would
force the Administration to allow thousands of M1 assault
rifles and M1911 pistols into circulation with the civilian
population, thereby not only threatening public safety but
also undermining governmental oversight and taxpayer
accountability.
STOP THE IMPORT OF MILITARY WEAPONS
This is Also a Taxpayer Concern: The amendment also
presents a windfall of millions of dollars to foreign
governments and United States gun dealers. The amendment
effectively terminates a requirement that allies reimburse
the United States treasury if they sell United States-
supplied weapons. According to ATF, each M1 Carbine, M1
Garand rifle, and M1911 pistol currently sells for about
$300-500 in the United States market. The South Korean,
Turkish, and Pakistani governments and militaries stand to
make millions from the resale of these weapons. South Korea
has 1.3 million M1 Garands and Carbines, while the Turkish
military and police have 136,000 M1 Garands and 50,000 M1911
pistols. These weapons were originally given free, or sold at
highly subsidized rates, or retrieved as ``spoils of war.''
The United States Department of Defense does not sell these
lethal weapons on the commercial market for profit. Why
should we allow foreign governments to do so?
Again, we strongly urge you vote to delete this provision
from the Fiscal Year 1998 Treasury-Postal Service-General
Government Appropriations bill.
Thank you.
American College of Physicians, American Friends Service
Committee, James Matlack, Director, Washington Office;
American Jewish Congress, David A. Harris, Director,
Washington Office; American Public Health Association,
Mohammad Akhter, M.D., Executive Director; Americans
for Democratic Action, Amy Isaacs, National Director;
British American Security Information Council, Dan
Plesch, Director; Ceasefire New Jersey, Bryan Miller,
Executive Director; Children's Defense Fund; Church of
the Brethren, Washington Office, Heather Nolen,
Coordinator; Church Women United, Ann Delorey,
Legislative Director.
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Michael K. Beard,
President; Community Healthcare Association of New York
State, Ina Labiner, Executive Director; Concerned
Citizens of Bensonhurst, Inc., Adeline Michaels,
President; Connecticut Coalition Against Gun Violence,
Sue McCalley, Executive Director; Demilitarization for
Democracy; Episcopal Peace Fellowship, Mary H. Miller,
Executive Secretary; Federation of American Scientists,
Jeremy J. Stone, President; Friends Committee on
National Legislation, Edward (Ned) W. Stowe,
Legislative Secretary; General Federation of Women's
Clubs, Laurie Cooper, GFWC Legislative Director;
Handgun Control, Inc., Sarah Brady, Chair; Independent
Action, Ralph Santora, Political Director; Iowans for
the Prevention of Gun Violence, John Johnson, State
Coordinator; Legal Community Against Violence, Barrie
Becker, Executive Director; Lutheran Office for
Government Affairs, ELCA, The Rev. Russ Siler;
Mennonite Central Committee, Washington Office, J.
Daryl Byler, Director; National Association of
Children's Hospitals and Related Institutions, Stacy
Collins, Associate Director, Child Health Improvement;
National Association of Secondary School Principals,
Stephen R. Yurek, General Counsel.
National Black Police Association, Ronald E. Hampton,
Executive Director; National Coalition Against Domestic
Violence, Rita Smith, Executive Director; National
Commission for Economic Conversion and Disarmament,
Miriam Pemberton, Director; National Council of the
Churches of Christ in the U.S., Albert M. Pennybacker,
Director, Washington Office; National League of Cities;
New Hampshire Ceasefire, Alex Herlihy, Co-Chair; New
Yorkers Against Gun Violence, Barbara Hohlt, Chair;
Orange County Citizens for the Prevention of Gun
Violence, Mary Leigh Blek, Chair; Peace Action, Gordon
S. Clark, Executive Director; Pennyslvanians Against
Handgun Violence, Daniel J. Siegel, President;
Physicians for Social Responsibility, Robert K. Musil,
PhD., Executive Director; Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.),
Washington Office, Elenora Giddings Ivory, Director;
Project on Government Oversight, Danielle Brian,
Executive Director; Saferworld, Peter J. Davies, U.S.
Representative; Texans Against Gun Violence--Houston,
Dave Smith, President; Unitarian Universalist
Association of Congregations, The Rev. Meg A. Riley,
Director, Washington Office for Faith in Action; U.S.
Conference of Mayors; Unitarian Universalist Service
Committee, Richard S. Scobie, Executive Director;
Virginians Against Hangun Violence, Alice Mountjoy,
President; WAND (Women's Action for New Directions),
Susan Shaer, Executive Director; Westside Crime
Prevention Program, Marjorie Cohen, Executive Director;
YWCA of the U.S.A., Prema Mathai-Davis, Chief Executive
Officer; 20/20 Vision, Robin Caiola, Executive
Director.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Fortunately, Mr. President, the provision was not
included in the conference agreement that the Senate will consider
later this evening and these dangerous military weapons will not flood
our streets. This is a huge victory for the American people.
Mr. President, the weapons at issue were granted or sold to foreign
governments, often at a discount, through military assistance programs,
and some were given to or left in foreign countries during wars. They
are called curios or relics because they are considered by some to have
historic value or are more than 50 years old.
One of them I carried in World War II when I was a soldier in Europe.
It was an M-1 carbine. It may be a curiosity now or a relic. But I can
tell you it was there to be used for my protecting myself or to kill
the enemy. Fortunately, neither happened. But I carried it by my side
when I served on the European Continent.
But they are not innocuous antiques or museum pieces. They remain
deadly weapons.
Proponents of allowing the importation of these weapons argue that
they are historic firearms that are not dangerous. In fact, the
amendment would have flooded the market with millions of lethal killing
weapons.
Under the amendment that was rejected, 2.5 million, semiautomatic
military weapons--including the M-1 carbine, M-1 Garand, and M-1911
pistol--would have flooded the streets. The M-1 carbine can easily be
converted into an illegal, fully automatic weapon.
These semiautomatic military weapons may be old, but they are lethal.
Thirteen American police officers have recently been murdered with M-
1's and M-1911's.
In New Jersey in 1995, Franklin Township Sgt. Lee Gonzalez was killed
[[Page S12557]]
by Robert ``Mudman'' Simon during a routine stop. Simon was a Warlocks
motorcycle gang member. Simon, who had just committed a robbery, shot
Gonzalez twice, once in the head and once in the neck, using an M-1911
semiautomatic pistol. That's the same weapon that would be imported
under the rejected amendment.
In Texas in 1991, Pasadena police officer Jeff Ginn was killed with
an M-1 carbine. He was responding to a call about smoke coming from a
house in the neighborhood he was patrolling. Ginn found Marvin Harris
holding a woman hostage in her own home. When he saw police officer
Ginn, Harris shot him in the leg. Ginn hobbled to the front of the
house, where he leaned up against a tree, begging not to be shot again.
Harris murdered officer Ginn by shooting him in the temple and the
abdomen with the M-1 carbine.
In New Hampshire--the home State of the distinguished chairman of the
subcommittee, Senator Judd Gregg, who knows only too well of the impact
of the use of that weapon--Sgt. James Noyes of the New Hampshire State
Police was killed in the line of duty with an M-1 carbine in 1994.
And there are many innocent civilians who have been threatened and
murdered with these weapons as well. In 1995 and 1996, M-1's and M-1911
weapons were traced to more than 1,800 crimes nationwide. Already,
nearly 1,000 crimes have been traced to these weapons in 1997.
Allowing the importation of large numbers of these killer weapons
would undermine efforts to reduce gun violence in this country. And
everybody would like to have that done. I can tell you. It doesn't
matter what State or what kind of community--rural or urban. That is
the biggest fear that people have; that is, that they will lose a loved
one to a violent act, or someone will pick up a gun, or either randomly
or directly shoot one of their children, brother, sister, mother or
father.
This would also reduce the cost of weapons, because there would be a
marketplace filled with 2.5 million--the maximum capacity for
exportation--making them more accessible to criminals.
It would also provide a windfall for foreign governments at the
expense of the U.S. taxpayer. The weapons were paid for by the American
taxpayer and were provided to foreign governments through our
assistance program. The market value of the 2.5 million that can be
traced to foreign governments exceeds $1 billion.
That adds insult to injury.
Allowing millions of U.S.-origin military weapons to enter the United
States would profit a limited number of arms importers and would not be
in the overall interest of the American people. These weapons are not
designed for hunting or for shooting competitions; they are designed
for war. Foreign countries should not be permitted to sell these
weapons on the commercial market for profit.
There is no doubt foreign governments would make a handsome profit
from their sale in the commercial market. Consequently, countries that
the United States assisted in times of need, such as South Korea and
the Philippines, and even a country like Iran could make a profit out
of these sales. Imagine permitting weapons to be imported into this
country that would send dollars back to Iran. It is an outrage.
In lieu of approval of an amendment to import these weapons, the
administration is being asked to provide a report on the curios or
relics issue. The report will provide information about the quantity of
applications and articles that have been approved for importation as
well as an estimate of the number of firearms available for importation
from overseas. It will also explain how an M-1 carbine can be converted
into an illegal machinegun or assault weapon.
I have no problem asking the Government to prepare a report for the
use of the House or the Senate. But I would like to make sure that this
is a balanced report, that it doesn't simply list statistics. But I
want to explain why it is important for the President and Secretary of
State to retain their authority to retain control over firearms granted
or sold by the Government exclusively for foreign military use and
never intended for private use.
I would also encourage the administration when it submits a report to
include information about applications in the Bush and Reagan
administration as well. After all, this administration is upholding a
policy that was first established by President Reagan and upheld by the
Bush administration.
I believe the administration should include in the report a
description of any law enforcement or grand jury investigations of
alleged illegal conduct related to the importation of M-1 or M1911
firearms. A grand jury previously investigated one attempt to import
these weapons by a company with a peculiar name called Blue Sky. There
were serious allegations that the law was manipulated for personal
gain, and the investigation ended when the lead witness mysteriously
died in a plane crash. The American people have the right to understand
what happened in this inquiry.
The report I believe also--this is an expansion on what is in the
report requested of the administration. It is something I didn't agree
with. But we are at a very late point in time when these bills have to
be considered. So we have accepted this report against, frankly, my
best judgment.
The report also should provide an analysis of the number and types of
weapons that have been added to the curios or relics list since 1980,
the process by which those weapons are added to the list, and the
entities that have petitioned to have weapons added to the list. The
American people have the right to understand more about the way
military weapons are designated as curios and relics.
Finally, I believe it should include a comprehensive overview of the
number of homicides and violent crimes committed against police
officers and against civilians with M1's or M1911's, regardless of the
manufacturer, or any other firearm on the curios or relics list. Though
curios and relics may have some historical interest for collectors,
many of these firearms remain of concern due to crime.
Mr. President, I am delighted that this effort to overturn U.S.
policy behind closed doors in the dark of night was defeated. And just
to clarify, for the information of those who might not understand our
arcane way of operation, there is a bill, and in the bill there is a
mandate that certain things be done. Report language is suggested on
top of that bill but does not have the effect of law. That is what I am
talking about here--this report language, not the bill itself.
I am delighted, again, that this effort to overturn U.S. policy
behind closed doors was defeated. It would have been an insult to the
American people to overturn a longstanding policy behind the closed
doors of the Appropriations Committee.
I have introduced legislation, S. 723, to repeal a loophole in the
Arms Export Control Act that could enable these weapons to enter the
country under a future administration. I hope that my colleagues will
support this bill.
In the meantime, Mr. President, this is a victory for the American
taxpayer and a victory for all concerned about safety.
I hope we reject the notion that we ought to take back and pay for
things that we gave away, or that we sold at sharp discounts.
I yield the floor.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I would like to respond to remarks made by
the Senator from New Jersey, Senator Lautenberg, concerning the ``curio
or relics'' U.S. origin historic firearms issue. I believe it's
important for the Senate to be aware of this information in evaluating
the actions taken today on the Commerce, Justice, State and Judiciary
appropriations bill.
The amendment that the Senator from New Jersey refers to, which has
been under consideration in both the fiscal year 1997 and fiscal year
1998 appropriations processes, is intended to correct a serious
injustice in the way that our nation's firearms import laws are being
administered. The amendment stops the Administration from ignoring
Congress' intent that historic firearms be allowed to return to U.S.
soil. Despite the fact the amendment was not added to the Commerce,
Justice, and State spending bill, I am confident, based on the
bipartisan support enjoyed by the amendment, that it will be passed in
this Congress. A brief review of the history behind this issue is
[[Page S12558]]
in order. In 1984, Congress first enacted a statute, 18 U.S.C. 925(e),
specifically permitting the importation of military surplus curio or
relic imports. At the time of enactment, however, the statute only
benefited foreign collectibles, since other acts interfered with U.S.
origin curio or relics from returning to the United States.
In 1987, Congress remedied the inconsistency by enacting a provision
for the importation of certain U.S. origin ammunition and curio or
relic firearms and parts into the United States at 22 U.S.C.
2778(b)(1)(B). The Treasury Department issued implementation
regulations after the passage of both laws. The Department of State,
which in certain cases consults with the Treasury Department on
firearms imports, frustrated the purpose of the 1988 law by refusing to
consent to U.S. origin applications, ostensibly on the basis of foreign
policy interests. The Department of State for years has frustrated the
efforts of importers to bring historic curio or relic firearms into the
United States.
In addition to fully assembled U.S. origin curio and relic firearms
being denied entry into the United States, curio or relic U.S. origin
military surplus parts and U.S. origin military surplus ammunition
applications that used to be approved by ATF directly, are now being
denied. Many hobbyists and collectors are being denied access to these
historic arms. Many millions of dollars in business will now be lost on
rifle parts sales and rifle ammunition, severely hurting an import
industry that has already been very adversely affected by President
Clinton's policies.
With regard to the criticism that has been leveled against the
amendment, and these arms, several important facts are in order. First
of all, this amendment was not inserted in any bill ``in the dark of
night'', it was part of an open mark-up over a year ago in the
Commerce, Justice, State Subcommittee in the Senate for the
appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997, and this year, for fiscal
year 1998, it was added on the House side in an open full committee
mark-up on the Treasury, Postal Service appropriations bill. This is a
well-known issue and one that has been widely publicized; in fact,
Senator Lautenberg and other opponents of this provision have certainly
ensured that it has been given attention.
I realize that opponents of this amendment have been using the media
to sensationalize the subject and to scare the general public into
believing that there is something nefarious about these fine old arms.
However, allegations concerning or implying a special crime threat that
``curio or relic'' M1 Garands, M-1 Carbines and M-1911A1 pistols pose
to police officers or innocent civilians is simply false. Similarly,
allegations that Iran will profit from the sale of these firearms is
also wrong. In addition, the characterization of what the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms trace data indicates is misleading at
best, as even ATF acknowledges that ATF gun trace data may not be used
to make statistical assumptions about the use of firearms.
Here are just some of the basic facts about this matter:
First, ``curio or relics'' are defined as firearms which are of
special interest to collectors, and are at least fifty years old, or
are certified by a curator of a municipal, State or Federal museum to
be curios or relics of museum interest, or have some rare, novel or
bizarre characteristic because of their association with some
historical figure, period or event. They are not the crime gun of
choice for criminals.
Second, corrective language is needed to enforce existing import laws
and regulations that already permit the importation of U.S. origin
curio or relic firearms, parts and ammunition from non-proscribed
nations (the Arms Export Control Act, Section 38, 22 U.S.C. 2778 and
the Gun Control Act of 1968).
Third, the purpose of the Gun Control Act was to provide ``support to
Federal, State and local law enforcement officials in their fight
against crime and violence,'' but not to ``place any undue or
unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens
with respect to the acquisition, possession, or use of firearms
appropriate to the purpose of hunting, trapshooting, target shooting,
personal protection, or any other lawful activity.'' Additionally, the
enactment of the Gun Control Act was ``not intended to discourage or
eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms by law-abiding
citizens for lawful purposes'' (i.e., such as gun collecting). The
Administration's actions are completely contrary to legitimate
collecting and hobby pursuits.
Fourth, these firearms and ammunition were initially supplied to
friendly foreign governments by sale or gift to promote the foreign
policy interests of the United States. The U.S., under the Foreign
Assistance Act, can waive receipt of any proceeds derived from such a
sale and request that the proceeds be set aside in a special account.
In most cases, the U.S. does so for the purposes of letting the ally
nation modernize its military equipment. Since the U.S. usually would
have assisted such a nation anyway in some manner with the
modernization of their military equipment, the allowance of keeping the
sale proceeds actually represents a potential cost savings to the U.S.
taxpayer.
Fifth, rifles, which constitute the vast majority of these guns, are
not the alleged crime threat that opponents of this provision would
like the American people to believe. In ATF's July, 1997 report
entitled ``ATF, The Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative, Crime Gun
Trace Analysis Reports'' 8 out of 10 crime guns traced within a 10
month period in 1996/97 were handguns. Out of an average of the trace
data that ATF compiled from 17 major cities across the United States,
from July 1, 1997 through April 30, 1997, all rifles comprised only
7.98 percent of the total firearms traced to crimes. In fact, according
to ATF's latest data concerning firearms traced to a crime scene'' in
1995, out of the 70,000 firearms traced to a crime scene, only .331
percent were U.S. origin firearms. In 1996, the percentage decreased:
out of the 140,000 firearms traced to a crime scene, only .275 percent
were U.S. origin firearms. In 1997, U.S. origin firearms constitute
only .303 percent out of the total 200,000 firearms traced. In summary,
these firearms are generally not attractive to criminals. They are
expensive, heavy, cumbersome and not easily concealable.
Sixth, Senator Lautenberg's figure of 2.5 million U.S. origin ``curio
or relic'' firearms that would be imported is incorrect. First of all,
we do not import ``millions'' of guns into this country on an annual
basis. Currently, the rough total number of all firearms that are
annually imported into this country is in the 800,000 to 900,000 range.
Only a relatively modest number of U.S. origin curio or relic firearms
are available for importation into the United States in commercially
acceptable and safe-to-shoot condition--these will not number in the
millions.
Finally, current law--the International Traffic in Arms Regulations,
the Arms Export Control Act, the Foreign Assistance Act and the Gun
Control Act of 1968--already prohibits U.S. importers from trading with
proscribed countries, such as Iran, whose foreign policy threatens
world peace and the national security of the U.S. and supports acts of
terrorism. The proposed appropriations language made it very clear that
importation would only be permitted from non-proscribed nations.
Regarding the report language that has been added to the bill. I
would like to point out that Senator Lautenberg's statement suggested
expansion of the conference report language is contrary to what was
accepted in the bill. It is clear that the items Senator Lautenberg
offered on the floor were specifically rejected by the Conferees, which
are as follows:
First, the Conferees did not accept the Administration providing a
description of any law enforcement or grand jury investigations of
alleged illegal conduct related to the importation of M-1 or M19911
firearms.
Second, the Conferees did not accept the Administration reporting on
the number and types of weapons that have been added to the ``curios or
relics'' list since 1980, the process by which those weapons are added
to the list, and the entities that have petitioned to add weapons added
to the list.
Third, the Conferees did not accept the Administration providing a
comprehensive overview of the number of homicides and violent crimes
committed against police officers and against civilians with M1s or
M19911s.
[[Page S12559]]
In addition, Mr. President, Senator Lautenberg suggested by the use
of term ``simple'' that the Administration should report on how
``simple'' the conversion of M-1 carbine is from semi-automatic to an
illegal fully automatic gun. That is not what the report language calls
for--it calls for an explanation of the facts. Converting the M-1
Carbine requires an M2 parts conversion kit; however, that is not
readily or easily accomplished, since it is strictly controlled under
the National Firearms Act of 1934.
In summary, this amendment is needed, and I regret we could not
achieve it this year. With the additional information from the
Administration, and an early start on the matter, I believe we will be
able to right what has been a wrong to the gun collecting and importing
community for many years.
Mr. HATCH addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah is recognized.
Mr. HATCH. I thank the Chair.
(The remarks of Mr. Hatch pertaining to the introduction of S. 1530
are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills
and Joint Resolutions.'')
____________________