[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 138 (Tuesday, October 6, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H9674-H9680]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  2030
             ISSUES SURROUNDING THE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Brady of Texas). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 7, 1997, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Owens) is recognized for 60 minutes.
  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee) for her conclusion.


              Constitutional Issues Regarding Impeachment

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. I thank the gentleman from New York for his very 
fine kindness. What I wanted to emphasize is I started out this evening 
by offering a constitutional explanation as to where we are. And so I 
wanted to put into the Record the noted words of the legal scholar from 
Yale University, Professor Charles Black. And I want to pick up on what 
the very fine gentleman from Detroit, Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the 
ranking member, has so eloquently emphasized. That Americans are asking 
us to get a handle on this. Republican colleagues are asking us to get 
a handle on this. And we can do this if we collaborate.
  Charles Black says to us: In the English practice, from which the 
framers borrowed the phrase, ``high crimes and misdemeanors'' denoted 
political offenses, the critical element of which was injury to the 
state. Impeachment was meant to address public offenses committed by 
public officials in violation of the public trust and duties. Because 
Presidential impeachment invalidates the will of the American people, 
it was designed to be justified for the gravest wrongs, offenses 
against the Constitution itself. In short, only serious assaults on the 
integrity of the processes of government and such crimes as would so 
stain a President as to make his continuance in office dangerous to the 
public order.
  Mr. Speaker, this is the reach that we should be reaching to 
understand whether Mr. Starr has presented anything of substance to 
this committee. Not the reach in 24 hours to Thursday to an impeachment 
inquiry with no standards and, might I say, one meeting that would 
warrant the determination of constitutional standards that we now 
understand may be set by the chairman.
  As I finish, let me simply say there is much to say here about how we 
proceed, but I certainly hope as we engage in this debate that we 
engage in it not classifying people for their party affiliation, for 
what part of the country they may have come from, but for nothing more 
than preserving this Constitution.
  I hope that everyone will perceive this as an American issue, 
attacking the very sovereignty of this Nation. And might I simply say 
that there were many voices on this committee that joined the gentleman 
from Michigan in 1974, many fine persons; Father Drinan, in fact, who 
has written articles to suggest that his experience shows no 
impeachable offenses. And he admitted that he raised the Cambodian 
issue and that the committee in its goodwill in 1974 refused to put 
that as an article of impeachment. They refused to put the tax evasion 
that was alleged as an article of impeachment.
  Mr. Speaker, might I just offer the words of my predecessor, Barbara 
Jordan. Many would want to say how she would be handling these events. 
I would offer to say her words exactly:


[[Page H9675]]


       Today I am an inquisitor. I believe hyperbole would not be 
     fictional and would not overstate the solemnness that I feel 
     right now. My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is 
     complete, it is total. I am not going to sit here and be an 
     idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the 
     destruction of the Constitution.

  She herself noted by quoting the Federal papers that impeachment is 
limited to high crimes and misdemeanors, and discounted and opposed the 
term ``maladministration.'' It is to be used only for great 
misdemeanors, as she quoted from the North Carolina Ratification 
Convention.
  We must be reminded that we have a constitutional obligation to not 
be idle spectators and not to see the destruction of the Constitution 
and a subversion of the Constitution. If that is what my Republican 
friends are alleging against the President of the United States, the 
executive, then they must prove it. They cannot prove it unless we 
proceed in an orderly, fair manner, confined to what was referred; not 
a fishing expedition, and certainly within a reasonable time frame to 
understand what the Constitution says in order to match that with the 
allegations.
  I am not sure the time has gone, but if the ranking member wants to 
finish, I am willing if the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens) would 
yield to him. This is wholly important. I am frightened by the prospect 
of what we are about to proceed with and how we are handling it.
  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers).
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I merely wanted to comment on the 
continuing brilliance of the gentlewoman from Texas. She is a respected 
lawyer, an experienced litigator, a proven public servant, and she 
makes me proud of the fact that she is currently sitting as a member of 
the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives. I thank 
the gentleman from New York for yielding.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.


            Congress Has More Important Business to Consider

  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I thank both of my colleagues from the 
Committee on the Judiciary and congratulate them on the magnificent job 
that they are doing. I am certain they are not here tonight because 
they want to be here, but because they feel a sense of duty to expound 
and further explain this very grave matter before us.
  Like the rest of my Democratic colleagues, we do not think this is 
the most important subject in the world. We are not anxious to be 
plunged into the deliberations concerning this impeachment. There are 
many other matters, many other priorities, many other issues that are 
far more important. And the talent and the time and the attention of 
people like my two colleagues on the Committee on the Judiciary we 
would like to devote to addressing those problems.
  Our problem is that we are trapped by the will of the majority. The 
pinnacle of global leadership, the set of profound priorities which we 
should be addressing have been overwhelmed and smothered by a blanket 
of trivialities and diversions which the majority wishes to expand and 
continue indefinitely.
  We are supposed to adjourn at the end of this week. I suppose it 
might be some kind of recess instead of the usual adjournment process. 
But as of Sunday, we will be no longer focused on the business, the 
routine business of the 105th Congress.
  We have the appropriations process that has been stalled, and only 
two appropriations bills have been taken through the entire process. We 
are going to have a monstrous continuing resolution which cannot do the 
business of the Nation and focus on the priorities as we should. We 
have a focus instead on the Committee on the Judiciary, which will 
absorb the time and attention of not only the people here in Congress, 
but the whole American public.
  An impeachment is a serious matter. It is always serious, whether it 
is an impeachment that is based on sound reasons. If there really are 
some impeachable offenses, it would be serious then. It is serious even 
if we go forward with the impeachment process and we do not have 
reasons for impeachment. There are no impeachable offenses.
  Either way, it is still serious. The time and the attention to be put 
into it is the same. The diversion of the decision-making powers away 
from more serious matters is the same. The divisions within the 
American public are likely to be the same. I think we have a procedure 
here that is without precedent. The Founding Fathers would have never 
dreamed of our being in this kind of predicament. We have an intensely 
partisan impeachment procedure going forward, an impeachment procedure 
based on personal blunders. The three Ps, partisan, personal. And 
finally we have an impeachment procedure that has been made 
pornographic by the release of certain kinds of information it is 
highly unusual for government documents to be concerned with.
  So, we are going down, down, down into a bottomless pit, and it seems 
to me that somebody ought to seek to try to get us out of this. I hope 
that better judgment will prevail and prevail soon, before we go deeper 
into the pit.
  We have a constitutional procedure being used as a camouflage for 
extremism. The Republican credo that ``politics is war without blood'' 
is underway here. We can see it manifest, war without blood. That means 
one goes all out to destroy his opponent. Go for the jugular. You want 
to gut the hog. That is what is driving the process here in Washington 
with respect to this impeachment procedure. Future generations will 
look back on us and really be ashamed of the kind of performance that 
we are setting forth here.
  The procedure goes forward despite the fact that the American people 
and their common sense have a different opinion. Obviously, it does not 
agree with the intensity we feel about certain things that are being 
set forth here. What we are doing represents an insult to the 
intelligence. It is contempt for the common sense. Polls are not 
supposed to govern us, but I think we ought to pay attention as Members 
of Congress to the flood of mail, the calls, e-mail.
  It is very interesting, my district is unfortunately a district where 
I have always had a problem of turnout for votes. The number of people 
who are registered never turn out more than 50, 55 percent. It is a 
great problem, and I have labored with it for years. And it has gotten 
worse really over the last few years, the number of people who bother 
to come out to vote. And we conclude that it is because they are so 
disappointed because of the fact that so much that is promised and so 
much that is needed never happens.
  In my district, we have a large number of schools that still have 
coal-burning furnaces. That has been the case for years and years, and 
I have been in office for quite a number of years, and I have been 
highlighting the fact and working hard to try to make something happen. 
But the coal-burning furnaces are still there. We have 275 in the whole 
city and a hundred in the borough of Brooklyn and 20 or 25 in my 
congressional district. They are still there.
  So I assume people are discouraged that nothing is happening. 
Unemployment has always been high in my district, and it is still high. 
It is true that as a result of the improvement in the economy, 
unemployment has gone down, employment has gone up, and people are 
grateful for that, I am sure. But I assume by that lower turnout that 
they have lost faith and they are not coming out because that problem 
was not being solved.
  But, Mr. Speaker, they are, in my district, concerned about what is 
happening here with the process of impeachment. I have a flood of mail, 
unprecedented. I have a flood of phone calls. I have a great amount of 
e-mail. It contradicts the theory that I formulated in my own head that 
people have given up on government, that hope has been abandoned. 
Obviously, they have not given up on government. There is still some 
basic expectations from government that makes them concerned about what 
happens with the office of the Presidency, who is going to occupy the 
White House. They are very concerned, very intense, very angry.
  I hope that they will translate that anger into some appropriate 
conduct, political action. People in my district want an end to the 
preoccupation with personal misbehavior, an end to magnifying personal 
blunders into high crimes and misdemeanors. They can see that there is 
no bribery or treason involved here. They can see that there is no 
conspiracy of note here.

[[Page H9676]]

  Conspiracy occurs whenever a group of people get together to try to 
accomplish a particular end. We can call it a conspiracy. I looked it 
up in the dictionary to make certain that I was on sound ground. Any 
kind of action taken by a group of people, a set of plans made by a 
group of people to accomplish a certain end is a conspiracy.
  There are good conspiracies and bad conspiracies. Unlawful 
conspiracies, I suppose is what is meant by the counsel for the 
Committee on the Judiciary majority yesterday when he added conspiracy 
as a charge. Yes, I suppose he can find evidence of a conspiracy. There 
are all kinds of conspiracies, as I said before.
  When I was much younger, before I even became a teenager, I had a 
great love for peanut butter, and we were very poor. With a family of 
seven and the father is on minimum wage, you are very poor, and you 
have to stretch in a thousand ways to survive. Peanut butter was very 
important. Peanut butter was not a snack food in my house. It was the 
food that my mother put in our lunches. Peanut butter with crackers is 
good because the bread does not get soggy. And if you use graham 
crackers instead of regular crackers, it becomes a combination entree 
and dessert.
  It was a big deal. She had a big jar of peanut butter that she used 
for our lunches, and we could not raid the jar for snacks. Well, my 
siblings and I, we had a great love for peanut butter, so we conspired. 
The peanut butter was on a shelf at the top of the cabinet, and we 
learned very early that if we would go in the center of the jar to get 
our peanut butter out and not scrape the sides, our mother could not 
tell that we raided the jar unless she was very observant.
  So, together we could quickly get on a chair and get the jar down, 
scoop out a good scoop from the middle, and get away with spreading it 
and getting out of there. It took three of us to do it. It was a 
conspiracy.
  The ``peanut butter conspiracy'' is not equal to the conspiracy that 
took place in the basement of the White House with respect to Iran-
Contra.

                              {time}  2045

  In the basement of the White House we had a group of people who were 
directly involved in disobeying Congress and plotting, conspiring, to 
obliterate the will of Congress, to disobey it, to secretly sell guns 
to a power they had declared a hideous enemy. They were going to sell 
the guns, get the money, and use it to fund the Contras in Nicaragua 
against the will of Congress, after many years of deliberation had 
shown that Congress desired that we take that course of action. So we 
had a conspiracy.
  And when the conspiracy was uncovered, finally exposed, there was 
another conspiracy to help cover it up. They were actually shredding 
papers in the basement of the White House, and everybody knew about it 
for a long time before the Attorney General bothered to secure the site 
and make certain that evidence was not destroyed. And we had all kinds 
of other things that took place with respect to Iran-contra. It was a 
conspiracy. That is one kind of a conspiracy.
  We had a conspiracy when Benedict Arnold betrayed his own 
revolutionary army forces. He was a magnificent general, who had really 
performed quite well in the Revolutionary War on the side of the 
colonies, but he was upset and bitter and, for whatever reason, he 
decided to sell out. That was a conspiracy, too. Probably, unlike the 
peanut butter conspiracy, which had no serious repercussions, it could 
have had the greatest of repercussions. If Benedict Arnold had 
succeeded and not been discovered, it could have meant the end of the 
Revolutionary War. It could have been a blow that changed history 
entirely.
  So the consequences of Benedict Arnold's conspiracy were much more 
serious than the consequences of the peanut butter jar conspiracy, or 
even the consequences of the Iran-contra conspiracy. Iran-contra, if we 
had pursued it with vigor and had a special prosecutor who cared about 
what he was doing, as much as some others lately care, it would have 
been clearly a situation where we would have had an identification of a 
conspiracy.
  But would that conspiracy have merited an impeachment proceeding? I 
do not think so. I think it would have been very embarrassing, very 
serious, but the country was not placed at risk. The country's policy 
was violated, laws were disobeyed, felonies were committed, but I still 
think, as serious as Iran-contra was, it probably would not have 
merited impeachment. It was not Benedict Arnold, engaged in an activity 
which could have brought the country down. It certainly was not the 
peanut butter conspiracy.
  What happened at the White House with respect to the personal 
blunders there I will let others place on that continuum from the 
peanut conspiracy on one the hand to Benedict Arnold on the other. What 
happened at the White House, I will let others place it somewhere there 
and tell me if we have an impeachable offense.
  What the problem is here, and I do not want to go on, because I am 
certain that most Americans are quite tired of listening to the matters 
which are surrounding this impeachment process, the problem is that the 
people in my district want an end to the preoccupation with personal 
misbehavior or an end to the magnifying of personal blunders into high 
crimes and misdemeanors. But we cannot govern the agenda. We do not set 
the agenda. We are compelled by the majority in control to remain on 
this topic. But even though we are compelled to do that, we have a duty 
to place it in a larger, more urgent, and more important context.
  At this critical moment in history, as we approach the year 2000, the 
question that Americans ought to be asking is what is the overwhelming 
preoccupation of this indispensable Nation? What are we doing at this 
critical moment in history? Can we justify what we are doing in terms 
of what is at stake at this particular moment?
  There are serious matters related to race relations, and the 
President had the vision to appoint a Race Relations Commission. That 
Commission, in the final days of its deliberations, was totally 
ignored. Its report came out. I have already, on this floor previously, 
criticized that report as being weak in spirit. It represents tiny 
spirit, in that the people who were there had a golden opportunity.
  The President never intended for it to solve major problems, but it 
was a golden opportunity to make a statement about the profundity of 
the race relations problem in America. The race question, the race 
problem, racism in politics, demagogueing the race issue is a major 
issue in American politics. It sets up a situation where people who 
should have common interests are divided. It is part of a divide-and-
conquer strategy which is seriously affecting the ability of the Nation 
to govern itself. We let race issues get in the way.
  George Wallace, who recently died, and some people have sort of 
chosen to forget what he did in American politics, he took the race 
issue, the demagogueing of the race issue, and made it a fine art that 
many unscrupulous politicians could later never ignore. There was a 
time when both the Republican Party and the Democratic party, certainly 
at the national level, refused to tolerate on the floor of their 
conventions and in their deliberations open and blatant racist 
proposals. There was a time when they would not accept it. Even though 
the Democrats had to wrestle with holding together the coalition of 
southerners and northerners, there was a kind of respectability that 
prevailed; that did not go into certain areas. That all ended with 
George Wallace, and people started to follow in his footsteps.
  Richard Nixon followed in his footsteps with his southern strategy. 
When Ronald Reagan got ready to run for office, he went to 
Philadelphia, Mississippi, the site of the killing of Schwerner, Cheney 
and Goodman. He wanted to send a clear message to the south by going to 
that awful place where that awful set of murders had taken place and 
launching his campaign. So race became, from then on, a major part of 
the strategy of the Republican Party in terms of its divide and conquer 
strategy, and it continues to be.
  So race relations are very important, and we have sort of pushed that 
report of the Commission off to the side and it is like it never 
happened. There was no Commission; there was no report. The Commission 
itself did not live up to its potential. It at least could have been a 
scholarly pronunciation of what is at stake with respect to the 
problem.

[[Page H9677]]

  At the beginning of the Commission I had said I hoped that they would 
conclude that here is a serious problem which a Commission, in 
existence for 12 months, or 18 months, cannot resolve, but the 
Commission could set out a series of other steps that need to be taken. 
And one of the steps that should be taken is that a set of scholars, 
made up partially of Nobel prize winners, should be convened. And with 
the financing of the major foundations in this country and the rest of 
the world, that set of scholars should do a thorough study on race 
relations in the United States.
  And if they do not want to deal with race relations because that is 
too current and controversial, at least do a history of slavery and how 
the legacy of slavery has impacted on current race relations in this 
country and in some other parts of the world. Let us at least have a 
scholarly treatise, a scholarly encyclopedic approach to establishing 
what the facts are with respect to slavery and slave trade. Some of us 
think it is the greatest crime ever committed in the history of 
mankind. The obliteration of a set of people, in terms of their 
humanity, was at stake, and we think it deserves that kind of 
attention.

  But the race relations report did not come out with any kind of 
proposal to profoundly continue the exploration of the problem. They 
even backed away from saying that at least the country should, the 
official government that exists now, should foster an effort to have an 
apology for slavery. That is a horrible thought. Let us not apologize 
in America. We have had some polls taken which shows that 
overwhelmingly the American people are against any apology for slavery.
  It is a strange set of conduct when we consider the fact that 
apologies are breaking out all over. Every month there is some new 
apology. The Swiss apologizing over and over again for the fact that 
they swindled the poor refugees from Germany, Jewish refugees from 
Germany, out of great amounts of money. They are not only apologizing, 
they are compensating. They have set up some funds to restore.
  That is like reparations. That is another word we do not mention in 
America with respect to slavery. Reparations is a terrible dirty word. 
How dare we ask for reparations for 232 years of labor that was not 
paid for. How dare we make that kind of demand on the American people 
today when, after all, none of us lived at that time. We are not 
guilty.
  The Germans could say the same thing and the Swiss could say the same 
thing. But, recently, the Germans at Volkswagen, and Germans at another 
plant, without confessing that they used slave labor in their plants, 
the slave labor of the Jews and the other prisoners of war that 
resulted in an accumulation of wealth, which the allies allowed them to 
keep and they continued, so that wealth that was accumulated partially 
with the slave labor of prisoners of Jews and other prisoners during 
the war is still a part of that corporate set of assets. So without 
fully admitting it, they have started funds at Volkswagen to compensate 
for those prisoners and Jews and other prisoners who can be identified. 
They have started, I think $12 million at one plant, and since they 
started it there, Volkswagen followed with $12 million. So they are not 
only apologizing, they are compensating. They are providing 
reparations.
  In June of last year, the Pope apologized to the Jews for the 
Catholic church's silence during the holocaust. Last year the Japanese 
apologized to the Comfort Girls in Korea. Apologies are breaking out 
all over. So why is it that it is such a horrible thought to have the 
present government of America apologize for the American government's 
historic involvement with slavery?
  I really am trying to emphasize the fact that there is unfinished 
business here. We have unfinished business in several major places 
which we should be addressing in the year 1998 and at the close of this 
105th Congress. As we go toward the next century, the year 2000, we are 
going to be greatly crippled as a Nation if we do not address these 
kind of problems.
  Another set of problems that are obvious, and probably less intense 
emotionally, is the mushrooming set of global economic problems. They 
are very serious, the problems that are mushrooming around us. We still 
have unprecedented prosperity. We have a budget surplus that has been 
recently announced. But consider 10 years ago where the Japanese 
economy was and where it is today. We are not invulnerable, and the 
things that are happening around us already are having an impact.
  There was a multibillion dollar investment company, long-term 
investment, I do not have the exact name, but a multibillion dollar 
hedge fund, they called it. I do not understand what hedge funds are 
all about, so I will not try to describe it. But the hedge fund was of 
no significance to me until I heard that an agency of the United States 
Government, the Federal Reserve Board, had helped to rescue this 
private bank. Now, that concerns me greatly.
  We ought to be concerned about a precedent being set now, which is 
similar to what happened with the savings and loan swindle. Not quite 
exactly, because the money used to bail out the hedge fund was private 
money. The effort to organize it was the authority and the brainpower 
and the intimidation power, I guess, of the Federal Reserve. So it is 
not quite as bad yet as the savings and loan swindle.
  In the savings and loan swindle we had the American taxpayers, 
through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and an individual who 
was head of the corporation, taking the initiative to bail out big 
banks because they were too big to fail. Now we have an investment 
fund, a hedge fund, that was considered too big to fail. Americans, 
wake up. We need to take our eyes off the impeachment proceeding and 
take a look at the Federal Reserve's action with respect to this 
multibillion dollar hedge fund. American taxpayer money is next.
  They have used taxpayer money already because we pay the salaries of 
the Federal Reserve Bank. The whole apparatus of the Federal Reserve is 
a government apparatus. So we have already used the resources of the 
American government to bail out these big private multibillion dollar 
funds. What comes next?

                              {time}  2100

  What comes next? Which hedge fund will next be in trouble and when 
will they start using the taxpayers' money to help bail out some of 
these investment companies that are too big to fail?
  By the way, the reason they want to bail out the hedge fund is 
because the hedge fund owes the banks a lot of money. So we are right 
back to where we were with the savings and loan swindle. It is the 
banks, the banks that are private and do not want anybody to interfere 
with them and their private authority, they are private powers to 
govern themselves until they get in trouble. When they get in trouble, 
our banking system suddenly becomes a socialist system, where the 
taxpayers are commanded, without anything much to say about it, the 
taxpayers' representatives in Congress go forward to devise schemes to 
bail out the banks.
  We are in a situation now where the banks have collapsed in 
Indonesia, Malaysia, they are in serious trouble even in Japan. There 
was an article that appeared in today's New York Times on the front 
page that said the banks of Japan are now admitting that the amount of 
capital they have is far less than they have represented today. So the 
banks all over the world are collapsing and we are concerned with 
focusing on an impeachment procedure related to personal blunders at 
the White House and an overzealous investigation by the special 
prosecutor. Where are we, Americans, and what will our children say 
when they examine our behavior at this critical point in history?
  Let me just conclude by saying, there is one more set of concerns 
that I would like to invite you to consider. We are the indispensable 
Nation. We are the great global power. We have responsibilities that 
probably God has placed on us that no other Nation has. God has been 
very generous to us. Our beautiful skies and spacious plains and 
bountiful production of grain and food and natural resources, our long 
periods of peace, all the things that add up to making our Nation 
prosperous, we ought to be thankful to God that we have that, and try 
to give back something to this earth which indicates

[[Page H9678]]

that we are grateful, we feel ourselves blessed and we want to do 
something for the rest of the world. We ought to be concerned.
  Let me invite you, take your mind off the impeachment, take your mind 
off the personal lives of people here in Washington and for a moment 
consider a report that was done by the United Nations Human Development 
Fund, the United Nations Human Development Report, which every year 
comes out and looks for new ways to measure the lives of people 
throughout the world, what is happening with people.
  This year the report put out by Kofi Annan puts aside faceless 
statistics like the per capita gross domestic product or the export-
import figures and puts aside the report, those kinds of things, it 
burrows into the facts about such things as what are children eating 
across the world, who goes to school across the world, whether there is 
clean water to drink, how women share in the economy, who does not get 
vaccinations against diseases that go on killing people even though we 
know how to prevent diseases, even though we have vaccinations that 
prevent the diseases, they keep going on and killing people because the 
medicine is not available.
  This year the report takes its first look at what people have, from 
how many people have simple toilets or family cars, and what proportion 
of the world's goods and services are consumed comparatively by the 
rich and what proportion are consumed by the poor. The report concludes 
that the pie is huge. The world's consumption bill is $24 trillion a 
year. Let me repeat that. The world is consuming $24 trillion a year 
worth of resources. But the servings that go on from one part of the 
world to another are radically different. Let me repeat. I am 
summarizing from the United Nations Human Development Report issued by 
the head of the United Nations Kofi Annan. I could not get the full 
report in time. It was supposed to get here today but it was not here, 
so when I get it, I certainly, probably next year, want to quote 
directly from it, give you the pages and tell you where you can get it. 
I am sure you can get it yourself from the United Nations. What I am 
reading from is a summary, a few highlights. It is not a summary, a few 
highlights from the New York Times, the Sunday Times of September 27 of 
this year, 1998. The New York Times had a set of highlights with a few 
photographs. I am going to read a few of those so that you can come 
back to where we ought to be in this world, on this planet earth, where 
we as the indispensable Nation, the most fortunate Nation that has ever 
existed in the history of the world, where we ought to be contemplating 
what we can do about these problems and where we are here, how does it 
affect the future existence of our children. Are our children going to 
be able to survive in a world where there are such gross injustices and 
such great unevenness in the way resources are distributed? Are human 
beings, by their very nature cunning, scheming, brainy, crafty animals, 
are they really going to sit by in three-quarters of the world and let 
one-quarter of the world have everything indefinitely? Can that go on? 
Can you deal with that? Or should you worry about whether some future 
leaders of our Nation might seek some kind of final solution by getting 
rid of all the have-nots instead of trying to make certain that the 
world deals with the problems of the have-nots in a different way.
  Let me just read a few of these highlights that appeared in the New 
York Times and think about it. Put aside the impeachment characters, 
the Peyton Place scenario, put it aside and consider what citizens of 
the indispensable Nation ought to be considering at this hour in our 
history.
  The haves. The richest fifth of the world's people consume 86 percent 
of all goods and services, while the poorest fifth consumes just 1.3 
percent. The richest fifth of the world's people consumes 86 percent of 
all goods and services while the poorest fifth consumes just 1.3 
percent. Indeed, the richest fifth consumes 45 percent of all meat and 
fish, 58 percent of all energy used and 84 percent of all paper. The 
richest has 74 percent of all telephone lines, and owns 87 percent of 
all vehicles. The richest fifth of the world's people consume 86 
percent of all goods and services. The ultrarich, the three richest 
people in the world have assets that exceed the combined gross domestic 
product of the 48 least developed countries. The ultrarich, the three 
richest people, three rich individuals in the world, have assets that 
exceed the combined gross domestic product of the 48 least developed 
countries.
  In Africa, the average African household today consumes 20 percent 
less than it did 25 years ago. The average African household consumes 
20 percent less than it did 25 years ago. There are more African 
households. There is terrible leadership. You cannot blame it all on 
colonialism. Twenty-five years ago colonialism's remnants were still 
there. People lived better. Has the leadership that has resulted after 
colonialism was ended decreased the standard of living? Or did 
resources get pulled out by the colonial powers? Whatever, the fact is 
that the average African household now is living much worse. They 
consume 20 percent less than they did 25 years ago.

  Consider the fact that the world's 225 richest individuals, of whom 
60 are Americans, with total assets of $311 billion, have a combined 
wealth of over $1 trillion, equal to the annual income of the poorest 
47 percent of the entire world's population. Let me repeat that. The 
world's 225 richest individuals, of whom 60 are Americans, with total 
assets of $311 billion, have a combined wealth of over $1 trillion, 
equal to the annual income of the poorest 47 percent of the entire 
world's population. Americans alone spend $8 billion a year on 
cosmetics. That is $2 billion more than the estimated annual total 
needed to provide basic education for everyone in the world. Americans 
spend $8 billion a year on cosmetics, $2 billion more than the 
estimated annual total needed to provide basic education for everybody 
in the world.
  The have-nots. Of the 4.4 billion people in developing countries, 
nearly three-fifths lack access to safe sewers, a third have no access 
to clean water, a quarter do not have adequate housing, and a fifth 
have no access to modern health services of any kind. Of the 4.4 
billion people in developing countries, nearly three-fifths lack access 
to safe sewers, a third have no access to clean water, a quarter do not 
have adequate housing, and a fifth have no access to modern health 
services of any kind.
  Smoke is an interesting topic in this set of highlights. Of the 
estimated 2.7 million annual deaths from air pollution, 2.2 million are 
from indoor pollution. 2.7 million annual deaths from air pollution. Of 
that total, 2.2 million are from indoor pollution, including smoke from 
dung and wood burned as fuel, which is more harmful than tobacco smoke. 
Eighty percent of the victims of this kind of death by smoke are rural 
poor in developing countries.
  Telephone lines. Sweden and the United States have 681 and 626 lines 
per 1,000 people respectively. Afghanistan, Cambodia, Chad and the 
Democratic Republic of the Congo have one telephone line per 1,000 
people.
  Ice cream and water. Europeans spend $11 billion a year on ice 
cream--$11 billion a year on ice cream--$2 billion more than the 
estimated annual total needed to provide clean water and safe sewers 
for the world's population.
  AIDS. At the end of 1997, over 30 million people were living with 
HIV, with about 16,000 new infections a day, 90 percent in developing 
countries. It is now estimated that more than 40 million people will be 
living with HIV in the year 2000.
  Land mines. More than 110 million active land mines are still 
scattered in 68 countries, with an equal number stockpiled around the 
world. Every month more than 2,000 people are killed or maimed by mine 
explosions. In a world where poverty is rampant, we still are spending 
large amounts of money on weapons, and land mines is one of the most 
devastating spread throughout the entire world.
  Pet food and health. Consider the fact that Americans and Europeans 
combined spend $17 billion a year on pet food, $4 billion more than the 
estimated annual total needed to provide basic health and nutrition for 
everyone in the world. $17 billion a year spent on pet food by 
Americans and Europeans. That is $4 billion more than we need to 
provide basic health and nutrition for everyone in the world.
  I am reading from highlights of the United Nations Human Development

[[Page H9679]]

Report. These highlights appeared in the New York Times on September 27 
of this year. I will close with the last one of the highlights. I want 
to leave this with you to consider over again and I will repeat it, I 
assure you, in the next few years over and over again and update it 
because it sums things up in a very dramatic way. $40 billion a year, 
the key figure, $40 billion a year. Remember, our defense budget is 
more than $250 billion a year. $40 billion a year. It is estimated that 
the additional cost of achieving and maintaining universal access to 
basic education for all, basic health care for all, reproductive health 
care for all women, adequate food for all and clean water and safe 
sewers for all is roughly $40 billion a year, or less than 4 percent of 
the combined wealth of the 225 richest people in the world. I repeat. 
It is estimated that the additional cost of achieving and maintaining 
universal access to basic education for all, basic health care for all, 
reproductive health care for all women, adequate food for all and clean 
water and safe sewers for all is roughly $40 billion a year, less than 
4 percent of the combined wealth of the 225 richest people in the 
world.

                              {time}  2115

  Take your mind off the impeachment proceeding, the diversion away 
from real problems, and consider the fact that a lot of these 
statistics have some implication even in America where people are not 
getting the appropriate health care. More than 10 million people are 
not getting or have no health care coverage. Take your mind off and 
consider the fact that large amounts of children still go hungry, even 
in America. Take your mind off the impeachment procedures and the 
trivialities related to it, and consider the fact that we are not 
focused on problems that could be solved.
  The most important thing about these highlights of the United Nations 
report is that they tell us that the problems of the world are soluble 
with the resources that we have available in the world right now. The 
doomsayers who said that the overpopulation of the world would 
guarantee that it would be impossible for everybody to survive, they 
are not correct. You can use $40 billion a year and provide for the 
survival and a decent life for all the people of the world, just $40 
billion distributed in some kind of intelligent way.
  Indeed, you know, never blame God for the travails of mankind. You 
know, God has put on this earth a bountiful supply of resources, food, 
energy. You know, it is all here. You know, when you consider the fact 
that so much is being wasted, all you have to do is take it and 
distribute it a different way.
  God must spend many days weeping about the ingratitude of the 
American leadership of his Earth, of this planet. What other Nation at 
any time in history has enjoyed so many benefits, been so blessed by 
God, and yet we trivialize our role, and we ignore our destiny. We have 
a duty to see to it that the distribution of these resources should 
take place in some kind of way to relieve all this massive suffering.
  One thing about God is that He is not a dictator, He is not a tyrant. 
God does not intervene into the affairs of mankind. What a pity that He 
is not setting the order and forcing the distribution. What a pity that 
He has so much stake in the free will of mankind. What a pity that He 
blesses certain nations at different times in history, and He waits for 
them to follow through.
  The Roman Empire once commanded all the known world. China commanded 
the world that the Romans did not know much about. Those empires did 
not, the leadership did not behave in ways which spread the benefits of 
their empires and guaranteed that they would continue.
  We are in the same position, probably more so than the Roman or the 
Chinese ever were. We are the indispensable Nation now abandoning our 
responsibilities. We have an indispensable Nation that chooses to turn 
away even from domestic matters which have an impact on the rest of the 
world.
  If we were to educate our own populous, guarantee that every 
youngster in America had his talents fully developed, we would have a 
priceless resource to send out for the rest of the world. I mean we 
would be able to deal with these medical problems, we would be able to 
deal with the education problems, the sewer problems, the various 
problems. We alone have enough resources, human resources, if they were 
fully developed, if we would just use our resources to develop our own.
  I often talk about computers and technology in the schools, and back 
in my district people say that, well, you know, we think you have 
become some kind of aficionado of computers. You lost your bearing in 
terms of the importance of technology in the schools. And my answer is 
that when I talk about computers, I am not an aficionado. I do not even 
know how to handle my E-mail well. I mean I assure you nothing personal 
about it, computers are the way of the future. Just as the automobile 
created a whole culture, computers are creating a whole culture for 
America and for the rest of the world.
  When I talk about computers, I am not talking about a plaything or a 
luxury. I am talking about putting computers in schools so that every 
child has the exposure as early as possible to computer literacy, 
computer learning, because that is the way the world is going, that is 
where the jobs are going to be. That is definitely where the jobs are 
going to be.
  Already we have a shortage, and we had on the floor of this House a 
bill which tried to solve the immediate problem of the shortage of 
computer information technology working by bringing in foreigners. We 
are going to bring in 90,000 per year and increase that up over the 
next few years, and yet the Department of Labor says that the shortage 
will be even worse. Five years from now we are talking about more than 
1 million, 1.5 million vacancies that exist.
  So this is not a luxury, this is not a hobby. I am talking about a 
culture that is being created.
  You know, when the automobile was being developed, I suppose all the 
schools in America looked at the automobile and said, do not teach any 
kids about auto mechanics. I mean, you know, that is a luxury, this is 
a plaything. You know, the automobile has a place in our culture which 
provides millions of jobs from the engineers that produce them, the 
workers in the factory, the salesmen, the mechanics; you know, from A 
to Z people who have high school education, some who do not have a high 
school education, all kinds of people are employed in the automobile 
industry. The computer industry will be the same in a very few years. 
It is moving, mushrooming, at a much more rapid rate than the 
automobile industry was built, and that has implications for the whole 
world and all of these problems throughout the world. You can educate 
the whole world if you were to computerize centers across the world and 
you did not have to depend on them creating their own teachers, locally 
first, but you could have physics and science and math and literature, 
whatever you want, piped in by long distance learning. You could do it 
in a matter of 10 or 20 years using the technologies that are now 
placed at our disposal by the computers and the Internet. You know, you 
could revolutionize the way the world takes care of itself.
  All of that is possible, you know, if you focus first on educating 
your own population.
  You know, school construction makes it possible for you to have 
buildings that can be wired, hopefully, for computers and be wired for 
the Internet. The E-rate, which was a magnificent stroke by Congress 
requiring that the FCC come up with a plan for providing discounted 
services to schools, that is about to go down the drain because of the 
fact that some very narrow-minded, tinny-spirited people, greedy people 
will not go forward and let the E-rate provide the discounts to the 
schools that they should provide.
  We are the indispensable Nation with tinny minds, major experience, 
and at a points where we could revolutionize and turn the world on its 
axis and move it in a new direction. We refuse to do it.
  The present quagmire. In the present quagmire our only hope is to 
accelerate the timetable and move out of the mud back to a set of 
priorities worthy of this indispensable Nation. We either move back to 
a set of priorities worthy of a Nation, or we can be plunged deeper 
down. We go into the pit with Larry Flynt who put an advertisement in 
the Washington Post calling, offering a million dollars for anybody who 
has information about an illicit affair with a

[[Page H9680]]

Congressman or any other member of the government. That is the 
direction which leads to total chaos, but that is the downhill motion 
that we are now in. That is the direction we are going. Let us not sink 
deeper into the quagmire, but instead move rapidly.
  We are into an impeachment process. The committee has voted, the 
Committee on the Judiciary. The only way out is to accelerate the 
timetable, move it, get out of the mud, get back to a contemplation of 
the real problems that matter most to America, to most of our people. 
Listen to the American people and their common sense. Listen to the 
American people instead of having contempt for them. Their intelligence 
has risen to the occasion. Our democracy can be saved if you listen to 
the American people, their sense of balance and justice.
  Get out of the quagmire and back to the business of the indispensable 
Nation.

                          ____________________