[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 79 (Wednesday, June 17, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Page S6496]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. DORGAN (for himself and Mr. Bumpers):
  S. 2186. A bill to terminate all United States assistance to the 
National Endowment for Democracy, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Foreign Relations.


          END FUNDING FOR THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY

 Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, today I introduce a bill that would 
end federal funding for the National Endowment for Democracy, known as 
NED.
  Last year the Administration asked for $30 million in NED funding, 
and after a Senate debate on the program, the Congress met that 
request. This year the Administration has requested $31 million for NED 
for fiscal year 1999.
  In my view, the time has long since come for Congress to end our 
subsidy of NED. Let me take a brief moment to explain why.
  NED began back in the early 1980s, during the darkest days of the 
Cold War, when Solidarity was on the ropes in Poland and a former KGB 
chief ruled the Soviet Union. As we all know, Solidarity has given 
birth to political parties that have governed Poland, and Lech Walesa, 
the Solidarity union leader, was elected Poland's president. The Soviet 
Union and the KGB are no more, and Russia has a multi-party political 
system. There is no Warsaw Pact. In fact, the Senate has just decided 
to admit into NATO some of the countries that NED used to help.
  The historic fall of the Berlin Wall, the breakup of the Soviet 
Union, and the successes of democracy worldwide in the past 15 years 
should make us wonder whether NED is as necessary now as it was at the 
height of the Cold War. Democracy is on the march worldwide, most 
recently perhaps even in Indonesia. Yet the American taxpayer is still 
coughing up $30 million a year to foot the bill for NED.
  It's also worth noting that when NED started, back during the Cold 
War, it was supposed to be a public-private partnership. Federal money 
was supposed to ``prime the pump'' of private contributions. Private 
corporations, foundations and philanthropists were supposed to foot 
much of the bill. But it didn't happen.
  Since 1984 the American taxpayer has spent over $360 million on NED. 
And according to NED's most recent annual report, in 1996 NED's total 
revenue was $30.9 million, but its revenue from nonfederal sources was 
only $585,000. In that year, it took 53 taxpayer dollars to leverage 
one private dollar contributed to NED.
  These statistics show that NED is a very poor investment for the 
Federal Government. There is no public-private partnership funding NED. 
It's the public, the Federal Government, all the way.
  Of course, the Federal Government has some private partners when it 
comes to spending NED funds. Year after year, NED distributes taxpayer 
dollars to the same ``core grantees.'' This is despite the fact that 
everything we know about good government says that there should be 
competitive contracting for government work.
  NED isn't one sole-source contract. It isn't just one set-aside. It's 
four.
  Four private institutions got just over $4 million each in 1996 and 
1997. These private groups are: the National Democratic Institute, also 
known as the Democratic Party; the International Republican Institute, 
better known as the Republican Party; the Free Trade Union Institute, 
which is really the AFL-CIO; and the Center for International Private 
Enterprise, which we all know as the Chamber of Commerce.
  Mr. President, these four ``core grantees'' get the lion's share of 
NED funding, year after year. As our former colleague Senator Hank 
Brown of Colorado said four years ago, ``How long does it take for 
people to realize that what we are doing is not promoting democracy, 
but promoting these four organizations?''
  What do these four groups do with this money? They use it to send 
well-connected Democrats and Republicans, and business and labor 
leaders, around the world. These folks visit various countries and try 
to promote democracy.
  It sounds fine until you consider that this activity duplicates work 
done by the United States Information Agency, the Agency for 
International Development, and the Departments of State, Justice and 
Defense. In 1996 alone, AID spent $390 million, USIA spent $355 
million, and the Defense Department spent $38 million, all to promote 
democracy.
  There's no reason for another Federal program to achieve this same 
goal. The American people know that the time is past when we could 
spend money we didn't have on programs we don't need.
  Last year, I thought that my hope of ending federal funding for the 
National Endowment for Democracy had come true. The Commerce-State-
Justice appropriations bill actually zeroed out this program. Let me 
quote from the Appropriations Committee's report language on this 
issue:

       The Committee does not recommend funding for fiscal year 
     1998 for the National Endowment for Democracy. . . . The NED 
     was originally established in 1984 during the days of the 
     cold war as a public-private partnership to promote 
     democratic movements behind the Iron Curtain. Limited U.S. 
     Government funds were viewed as a way to help leverage 
     private contributions and were never envisioned as NED's sole 
     or major source of continuing funds. Since the cold war is 
     over, the Committee believes that the time has come to 
     eliminate Federal funding for this program.

  Unfortunately, the full Senate approved a floor amendment that 
restored the requested $30 million for the NED.
  So I am here today to call on Senators to accept the dictates of 
common sense this year, and to accept the recommendation of the 
Appropriations Committee. We are having great difficulty allocating 
funding among the different discretionary programs. The Senate is 
having to make difficult choices about federal spending. We need to 
determine what is a priority.
  I strongly believe that NED no longer deserves the Senate's support. 
The Cold War is over, and we have other, more effective ways to promote 
democracy abroad. I hope that the Senate will act favorably on the bill 
that I am introducing today, and that we will save the American 
taxpayer $30 million a year.

                          ____________________