[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 96 (Friday, July 17, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Page S8466]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           IMF REPLENISHMENT

  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, yesterday, as we were debating the best way 
to help our farmers overcome low prices in the Upper Midwest, the 
Minority Leader appropriately called the IMF ``the single best tool 
available to provide economic stability in Asia, Russia and around the 
world.'' Unfortunately, he then went on to blame Republicans for 
opposition to IMF replenishment.
  As one who joined many of my Republican colleagues here in the Senate 
to actively promote the IMF replenishment and pass the full $18 billion 
here as part of the Supplemental, I would take issue with that 
statement. It was the Republican leadership in the Senate who worked 
with the Administration to pass the $18 billion along with a balanced 
reform package designed to make the IMF work more effectively.
  Yes, I have been disappointed that the House has still not acted on 
this matter. However, just yesterday, $3.4 billion was reported out of 
the Appropriations Committee's Foreign Operations Subcommittee, and 
there are positive statements that the full $18 billion may be included 
in the final Foreign Ops bill reported out of the full Committee next 
week. That was welcome news to those of us who strongly believe the IMF 
can play a positive role in addressing financial crises all over the 
world and restore important markets for US products. Now that new loans 
have been negotiated for Russia, the IMF's reserves are close to 
depletion. For the first time in many years, it has had to tap into its 
emergency fund. While I would have preferred the replenishment had been 
dealt with months ago, the logjam appears to have been broken.
  Of course, there is one complicating factor. The funds are attached 
to the Foreign Operations bill--the appropriations bill that has been 
stymied by an inability of the House and the White House to work out 
the Mexico City abortion language which is annually attached to this 
appropriations bill.
  While some may prefer not to have to fight controversial battles on 
appropriations bills, this is an issue that will not just go away. The 
sponsor is committed to bringing it up until it can be resolved to his 
satisfaction. Last year, a revised version, a substantial compromise, 
was attached to the State Department Reauthorization Conference Report 
and held up that report because of the veto threat of the President. 
That effort included a reorganization plan supported by the 
Administration that had been pursued for several years.
  That is still being held up, and the IMF funding will likely be held 
up as well until the Mexico City issue is settled. The latest Mexico 
City compromise was a good attempt at solving this dispute. If the 
President really wants the IMF replenishment, he should exercise the 
needed leadership to work out the Mexico City language with the House 
as soon as possible. My colleagues in the minority can do more to help 
us achieve the replenishment by urging the President to pursue a 
resolution of Mexico City before any other alternative. I ask the 
Minority Leader for this assistance.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I would ask unanimous consent that Senators Hatch, 
Daschle, Levin and Murkowski be recognized as if in morning business in 
that order.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, we were 
under the unanimous consent agreement that I was to receive recognition 
after my colleague from Minnesota. I am willing to go along with this 
if we have unanimous consent that I receive recognition after these 
colleagues conduct morning business.
  Mr. DASCHLE. My apologies to the Senator from Kansas. I had meant to 
include that we also go back to Senator Brownback at the completion of 
our presentations.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. BROWNBACK. With that understanding, no objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.

                          ____________________