[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 152 (Tuesday, November 2, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Page S13676]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION

  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I am not going to ask for a recorded vote 
against S. 688, the re-authorization of the Overseas Private Investment 
Corporation. But I want to make it clear that I am not stepping back 
from my philosophies on this issue.
  During my campaign for the United States Senate, I stressed the 
themes of balancing the budget, congressional reform, making government 
smaller, and moving the power out of Washington and into the states and 
localities. That is why I introduced the ``Overseas Private Investment 
Corporation Termination Act.''
  I still fee it is time to end this form of subsidies for large 
companies. I have never believed in giveaway programs. Whether you are 
a farmer or a large corporation you should play by the rules of the 
free market system. Less government should be in the motto of this and 
every Congress.
  OPIC may seem to have a good end goal but the problem is not the end 
but the means. Basically this is an insurance program run by the 
Federal Government for corporations who want to invest in risky 
political situations. This leads to the question, ``Is this the 
appropriate role for government?'' I don't believe so. But I also 
understand that the time is not yet ripe for ending this program.
  I have met with the President of OPIC, George Munoz. He and I have 
agreed that our problem is not a conflict of interest, not different 
goals, and not a lack of proper communication. We merely have a 
fundamental philosophical difference. I believe free trade means free 
trade, not ``more free than others.''
  I am a free trader. I am a supporter of the GATT and NAFTA. I believe 
that free trade is the best way to raise the living standards for all 
Americans. We need to support policies that reduce trade barriers. OPIC 
does not reduce trade barriers for all companies to compete in the 
marketplace. It is an income transfer program from U.S. taxpayers to a 
selected group of businesses. These subsidies may increase exports for 
a few selected companies that have the political influence to secure 
these loans, but it does little to expand the overall economic growth 
of this country.
  OPIC's re-authorization will soon pass this Senate, but I wish it to 
be known that I still recommend its termination. I continue to worry 
that the majority of my colleagues will not fully understand the 
detrimental potentialities of this organization until the American 
taxpayer is stuck with a tremendous bill.

                          ____________________