[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 33 (Monday, March 23, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E440]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER EDITORIAL CRITICIZES H.R. 1757--FOREIGN AFFAIRS 
          AUTHORIZATION LEGISLATION IS BAD LAW AND BAD POLICY

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. TOM LANTOS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, March 23, 1998

  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, for the past two weeks, H.R. 1757, the 
foreign affairs authorization legislation has been on the schedule for 
House consideration and both weeks, the bill was pulled because the 
Republican leadership was not able to get the necessary votes to pass 
the bill. Mr. Speaker, that is fortunate for the American people and 
for the foreign policy of the United States.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation has been foisted on the House through a 
flawed and blatantly partisan procedure. It is a preposterous process 
that was perpetrated in public. It is calculated to appeal to a narrow 
but noisy special interest group, and it is clearly not in the best 
interests of the American people and our nation's foreign policy.
  American foreign policy is best, strongest, and most effective when 
it is a bipartisan foreign policy. As many of our colleagues have 
observed throughout the years, ``Politics should stop at the water's 
edge.'' Unfortunately, what we have here is domestic politics being 
injected into foreign policy. All Americans are the losers in this 
process, Mr. Speaker.
  I call the attention of my colleagues in the House to an excellent 
editorial that appeared on March 13 in the San Francisco Examiner which 
discusses H.R. 1757. I ask that the full text of that editorial be 
placed in the Record, and I urge my colleagues to read it carefully and 
thoughtfully. Who knows? We may actually find ourselves having to cast 
a vote on this outrageous bill some day in the near future.

GOP Shortsightedness: Republicans in Congress Should Rethink Tying IMF 
 and U.N. Funds to an Anti-abortion Provision That Does More Harm Than 
                                  Good

       The annual blackmail of the administration by some 
     Republican members of Congress has begun. They insist that 
     $18 billion in U.S. funding for the International Monetary 
     Fund, as well as payment of past dues to the United Nations, 
     be held hostage to an anti-abortion provision.
       ``Killing babies is a very serious matter,'' Rep. 
     Christopher Smith, R-N.J., told a New York Times reporter. 
     ``The administration is promoting abortion overseas.''
       Smith wants to deny U.S. funds to any overseas organization 
     that provides or promotes abortions. Under existing law, no 
     U.S. money can be used for those activities. Smith argues 
     that other activities, such as family planning services, 
     allows organizations to shift money abortion-related 
     programs.
       But it's much more reasonable to assume that supporting 
     birth control in other countries actually reduces the number 
     of unplanned pregnancies and, hence, diminishes the need for 
     abortions.
       The GOP position is offensive to some traditional political 
     allies.
       Thomas Donohue, president of the United States Chamber of 
     Commerce, says failing to fund the IMF during its financial 
     bailout of Asian nations would ``come under the heading of 
     stupid.''
       Many conservatives and environmentalists concerned about 
     the escalation of world population believe global education 
     about family planning is essential to humankind's future 
     welfare and even its survival.
       The U.S. debt to the United Nations, now almost $1 billion, 
     has been a source of embarrassment to Americans who believe 
     in the worldwide organization. The image of the United States 
     as a deadbeat is especially alarming when this country needs 
     to persuade other nations to go along with its policy 
     initiatives, as in the recent confrontation over arms 
     inspections in Iraq.
       In any case, U.S. funding for international financial and 
     political organizations ought to be separate from the 
     question of whether this country should back family planning 
     groups that also provide abortion services. Combining the two 
     issues hurts causes that even the most anti-abortion members 
     of the GOP cares about--or ought to care about.
       Last year's hostage was the $12 billion foreign operations 
     bill. After a threatened veto, the GOP finally relented.
       The annual exercise is, unfortunately, even more harmful 
     this year when resurrecting the economies of a half dozen 
     Asian allies depends on our financial goodwill. Their pain, 
     of course, soon can become our own as American exports fall 
     and U.S. investments in those countries teeter.
       Let's instill some good sense in the IMF/U.N. funding 
     debate--and turn down the volume of political rhetoric.



     

                          ____________________