Congressional Record, Volume 146 Issue 79 (Wednesday, June 21, 2000)

[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 79 (Wednesday, June 21, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5508-S5536]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page S5508]]
FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001--Continued

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, this is a two front war--we need to
advance on both fronts. Clearly, we can't continue the administration's
pattern of ignoring this crisis.
I agree that we should increase education, prevention, and treatment
efforts, as well as local law enforcement efforts. But, will that
effort pay off, if we do so at the expense of attacking the source
country problem?
It is pretty clear that after seven years of doing nothing, the
administration is trying to play catch up in this crisis.
If we look at trends and commitments, during the Reagan Just-Say-No
years, drug production and use plummeted.
This trend sharply reversed in 1992 which was exactly when Clinton
was asked, ``If you had to do it over again, would you have inhaled?''
He answered, ``Sure, if I could have.''
Since 1992, and this unfortunate remark, drug use has soared and
production has tripled.
We need to attack both fronts in this war--here, at home, and abroad.
I think we have recommended a good balance for the battle abroad.
Let me remind everyone it is a very different package than the
request made by the administration--I have much more confidence in the
bill before the Senate than I did in the request.
The most important difference is our emphasis on a regional strategy.
Just as we saw production spike in Colombia when pressure was applied
to traffickers in Peru and Bolivia, I believe we would see the problem
shift back to Peru, Bolivia, and to Ecuador if we don't increase our
regional support.
Without compromising vital support for Colombia, we provided $205
million in support to Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and other nations in the
region. This more than doubles the administration's request of $76
million.
A second key difference between the bill and the request is the
support we offer for human rights programs. As the tempo of operations
against the traffickers pick up, I am concerned that abuses will also
increase.
Colombia's judicial system is weak and court officials are regularly
threatened making investigations and prosecutions extremely difficult.
Moreover, the military has undermined attempts by civilian courts to
prosecute officers accused of human rights abuses even though Colombian
law requires the transfer of these cases to civilian courts.
To address these concerns we have required certification that the
military is complying with their own laws and are cooperating in the
pursuit of these cases in civilian court. We also substantially
increase aid to government and non-government organizations involved in
the protection of human rights.
We paid for these increases by changing the helicopter package.
Again, let me say, striking the right balance is the key to our
success.
This bill strikes the right balance between domestic and
international law enforcement--the right balance between Colombia and
the other countries in the region--and the right balance between our
support for Colombian law enforcement and Colombian human rights
advocate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired. The
Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I have a copy of Senator Leahy's
statement. I am going to read a little from Senator Leahy's statement.
This is just a portion of his statement:

I have repeatedly expressed concerns about the
administration's proposal, particularly the dramatic increase
in military assistance. I am troubled about what we may be
getting into. The administration has yet to give me
sufficient details about what it expects to achieve, in what
period of time, what the long-term costs are, or what the
risks are.

That is, of course, part of the position that a number of us have
taken today. I thank Senator Leahy, who has a tremendous amount of
expertise in this area, for his statement. He goes on to say:

I commend Senator Wellstone for his amendment. It would
provide $225 million for substance abuse prevention and
treatment programs in the United States.
According to the Office of National Drug Control Policy,
drug abuse kills 52,000 Americans each year. It costs our
society nearly $110 billion annually. It has strained the
capacity of our criminal justice system and our medical
facilities, and brought violence and tragedy to families,
schools, and communities throughout this country.

I could not have said it better. Mr. President, 80 percent of
adolescents who need treatment--those who will, if not provided
treatment, sustain the demands for drugs in the future--today in our
country cannot get it. Some 50 percent of adults in our country who are
in need of a drug treatment program are not receiving it. Many
treatment programs have lines out the door.
And the conclusion of Senator Leahy's statement:

We should help Colombia. I support President Pastrana's
efforts to combat the violence, corruption, and poverty which
plagues his country. But I am not convinced the
administration's request for ``Plan Colombia'' will
effectively address those problems, nor is it likely to
reduce the flow of drugs into our country or ameliorate the
drug problem here at home.
We do know, however, that substance abuse treatment and
prevention programs work. A frequently cited Rand study
showed that, dollar for dollar, providing treatment for
cocaine users is 10 times more effective than drug
interdiction efforts, and 23 times more effective than
eradicating coca at its source. Scientific advances promise
to make treatment and prevention programs even better.
Ultimately, reducing the demand for drugs--which is what
these programs do--is the only long-term solution to reducing
the flow of illegal drugs from Colombia and elsewhere.
Mr. President, I commend Senator Wellstone--

Nice of him to say--

for his leadership on this issue and I urge other Senators to
support his amendment.

I urge other Senators to support this amendment.
I yield the floor.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, is all time yielded back?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has been yielded back.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, we are going to have two votes shortly.
The Senator from Alabama would like to modify his amendment and take
just a few moments to describe it. Then the previous plan was to have
two votes, back to back. I believe the Senator from Delaware will make
a motion to table the Wellstone amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Is that a unanimous
consent request?
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent the Senator from Alabama be
recognized for 5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The
Senator from Alabama.

Amendment No. 3492, As Modified

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I send a modification to the desk. I
would like to share a few thoughts about this situation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment will be
modified.
The amendment (No. 3492), as modified, is as follows:

[[Page S5509]]

heading for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, and provided under
the following provisions of law:
(A) Section 1004 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510; relating to
counter-drug assistance).
(B) Section 1033 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; relating to counter-
drug assistance to Colombia and Peru).
(C) Section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act (Public Law
90-629; relating to credit sales).
(D) Section 481 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(Public Law 87-195; relating to international narcotics
control).
(E) Section 506 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(Public Law 87-195; relating to emergency drawdown
authority).

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, the people of Colombia are good people.
They maintained a democracy for a long time. There are 40 million
people in Colombia. They are our fifth largest trading partner in Latin
America. They are struggling with violence that has been going on for
40 years. There are at least two major Marxist-oriented guerrilla
groups who control nearly 50 percent of the territory of Colombia. They
have attempted repeatedly, through President Pastrana, to negotiate
with these guerrillas and have had very little success. In fact, the
guerrillas have taken advantage of the good auspices of the people of
Colombia and President Pastrana, and even strengthened their hold on
the territory and strengthened their antidemocratic activities.
There are paramilitary groups in the country also who are operating
outside the law and are involved in drug trafficking.
The guerrilla organizations sustain themselves through the most
active kidnapping in the world. Colombia has the highest number of
kidnappings in the world. Its murder rate is probably the highest in
the world. The guerrilla groups sell protection for drug traffickers,
and that is how they make their money to maintain their existence.
I believe, as a former Federal prosecutor who has been involved in
studying the drug issue and has prosecuted many cases in the district
of Mobile, AL, involving quite a number of Colombian drug dealers and
cartel members, we are going to have limited ability containing the
drug problem in America through this money. But what we can do with
this money and what is critical that we do with this money is
strengthen the country of Colombia.
We need to say to them: We support you; we believe in your democracy.
The 97-plus percent, as Senator Biden said, of the people in that
country support their government, not these guerrilla organizations.
They want peace, they want unification, they want economic growth, they
want human rights, and they want a rule of law. That cannot be done and
we cannot expect Colombia to stop drug trafficking in their nation if
40 percent of the territory is outside their control--50 percent
perhaps.
I am distressed that this administration in public statements, in
testimony before committee hearings, has refused to say: We support
Colombia in their efforts against these guerrillas. They suggest their
only motive is to provide money to help knock down drug production in
Colombia. That is distressing to me. Ambassador Pickering testified and
I cross-examined him. He said: Our emphasis is drugs.
That is not the basis of what we are doing. We want to help Colombia.
We want Colombia to create a peaceful government to take control of its
country. We want to encourage strong leadership, the kind of leadership
that Abraham Lincoln provided when he unified this country. That is
what needs to be done in Colombia to bring this matter to a conclusion
once and for all.
If we do not do so, we are pouring new wine in old wine bottles. We
are pouring money down a dangerous rat hole.
This amendment says: We support you, Colombia. We believe in you,
Colombia. We explicitly endorse and support your efforts through peace
negotiations or warfare, if necessary, to unify your country, to bring
peace so you can then eliminate the drug trafficking that is occurring
there.
Drug trafficking is a major problem in Colombia. It is our No. 1
supplier of cocaine. The cocaine production in Colombia has more than
doubled in 5 years. Heroin is going up. Seventy percent of the heroin
in the United States comes from Colombia. The main reason is the
Government of Colombia does not control its territory. There are whole
areas of territory outside the control of the government. We should
support this country, and this amendment says so explicitly.
Mr. President, do I still have a minute under the agreement?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. SESSIONS. I yield the floor.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Senator from Delaware be recognized to offer a tabling motion on the
Wellstone amendment and that the vote on or in relation to the Sessions
amendment occur immediately after the vote on the Wellstone amendment,
and that the time on the Sessions amendment be----
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky has the floor.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Reserving the right to object. What did the Senator
ask for?
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I will not ask unanimous consent that
the time on the Sessions amendment be limited to 10 minutes.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Reserving the right to object. What is the Senator
asking for?
Mr. McCONNELL. I asked unanimous consent that the Senator from
Delaware be recognized to offer a tabling motion on the Wellstone
amendment and that a vote on or in relation to the Sessions amendment
occur immediately after the Wellstone vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is
so ordered. The Senator from Delaware.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I move to table the Wellstone amendment.
Mr. WELLSTONE. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the motion to table amendment No.
3518. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 89, nays 11, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 138 Leg.]

YEAS--89

Abraham
Akaka
Allard
Ashcroft
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Breaux
Brownback
Bryan
Bunning
Burns
Campbell
Chafee, L.
Cleland
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Coverdell
Craig
Crapo
Daschle
DeWine
Dodd
Domenici
Durbin
Edwards
Enzi
Feinstein
Fitzgerald
Frist
Gorton
Graham
Gramm
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Helms
Hollings
Hutchinson
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Moynihan
Murkowski
Nickles
Reed
Reid
Robb
Roberts
Rockefeller
Roth
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith (NH)
Smith (OR)
Snowe
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Torricelli
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden

NAYS--11

Boxer
Byrd
Dorgan
Feingold
Grams
Harkin
Leahy
Mikulski
Murray
Specter
Wellstone
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEAHY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the Senator from Alabama, it is my
understanding, would like to ask consent to

[[Page S5510]]

further modify his amendment after a discussion we have had.

Amendment No. 3492, As Further Modified

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I have a further modified amendment
consistent with the request of Senator Leahy to strengthen the language
that says our support for the Colombian Government would be conditioned
upon their following defined standards of human rights, as Senator
Leahy placed in the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is the Senator asking unanimous consent?
Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 3492), as further modified, is as follows:

On page 155, between lines 18 and 19, insert the following:
Sec. 6107. Declaration of Support. (a) Certification
Required.--Assistance may be made available for Colombia in
fiscal years 2000 and 2001 only if the Secretary of State
certifies to the appropriate congressional committees, before
the initial obligation of such assistance in each such fiscal
year, that the United States Government publicly supports the
military and political efforts of the Government of Colombia,
consistent with human rights conditions in section 6101,
necessary to effectively resolve the conflicts with the
guerrillas and paramilitaries that threaten the territorial
integrity, economic prosperity, and rule of law in Colombia.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate committees of congress.--The term
``appropriate committees of Congress'' means the following:
(A) The Committees on Appropriations and Foreign Relations
of the Senate.
(B) The Committees on Appropriations and International
Relations of the House of Representatives.
(2) Assistance.--The term ``assistance'' means assistance
appropriated under this heading for fiscal years 2000 and
2001, and provided under the following provisions of law:
(A) Section 1004 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510; relating to
counter-drug assistance).
(B) Section 1033 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; relating to counter-
drug assistance to Colombia and Peru).
(C) Section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act (Public Law
90-629; relating to credit sales).
(D) Section 481 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(Public Law 87-195; relating to international narcotics
control).
(E) Section 506 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(Public Law 87-195; relating to emergency drawdown
authority).

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the underlying
amendment.
The amendment (No. 3492), as further modified, was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Crapo). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, is there a pending amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Helms amendment, No. 3498, is pending.
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent the Helms amendment be
temporarily laid aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendments Nos. 3519, 3528, and 3532, en bloc

Mr. McCONNELL. I call up amendment No. 3519 by Senator Stevens,
amendment No. 3528 by Senator Inhofe, and amendment No. 3532 by Senator
Leahy. These three amendments have been cleared on both sides of the
aisle.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendments, en bloc.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] proposes
amendments Nos. 3519, 3528, and 3532, en bloc.

The amendments are as follows:

Amendment No. 3519

On page 38, on lien 12 after the world ``Appropriations''
insert the following: ``Provided further, That foreign
military financing program funds estimated to be outlayed for
Egypt during fiscal year 2001 shall be transferred to an
interest bearing account for Egypt in the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York within 30 days of enactment of this Act or
by October 31, 2000, whichever is later: Provided further,
That withdrawal from the account shall be made only on
authenticated instructions from the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service: Provided further, That in the event the
interest bearing account is closed, the balance of the
account shall be transferred promptly to the current
appropriations account under this heading: Provider further,
That none of the interest accrued by the account shall be
obligated except as provided through the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations''.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3528

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate regarding United States
citizens held hostage in Colombia)

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. ____. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON UNITED STATES CITIZENS HELD
HOSTAGE IN COLOMBIA.

(a) The Senate finds that.--
(1) illegal paramilitary groups in Colombia pose a serious
obstacle to U.S. and Colombian counter-narcotics efforts;
(2) abduction of innocent civilians is often used by such
groups to gain influence and recognition;
(3) three US citizens, David Mankins, Mark Rich, and Rick
Tenenoff, who were engaged in humanitarian and religious work
were abducted by one such group and have been held hostage in
Colombia since January 31, 1993;
(4) these 3 men have the distinction of being the longest-
held American hostages;
(5) their kidnappers are believed to be members of the FARC
narco-guerrilla organization in Colombia;
(6) the families of these American citizens have not had
any word about their safety or welfare for 7 years; and
(7) such acts against humanitarian workers are acts of
cowardice and are against basic human dignity and are
perpetrated by criminals and thus not deserving any form of
recognition.
(b) The Senate--
(1) in the strongest possible terms condemns the kidnaping
of these men;
(2) appeals to all freedom loving nations to condemn these
actions;
(3) urges members of the European Community to assist in
the safe return of these men by including in any dialogue
with FARC the objective of the release of all American
hostages;
(4) appeals to the United Nations Commission on Human
Rights to condemn the kidnaping and to pressure the FARC into
resolving this situation; and
(5) calls upon the President to raise the kidnaping of
these Americans to all relevant foreign governments and to
express his desire to see this tragic situation resolved.
____

amendment no. 3532

At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:

SEC. . INDOCHINESE PAROLEES.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any national of
Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos who was paroled into the United
States before October 1, 1997 shall be eligible to make an
application for adjustment of status pursuant to section 599E
of Public Law 101-167.

amendment no. 3519

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, we received a request April 21 to allow
fiscal year 2001 outlays--not budget authority--to be disbursed early
into a Federal Reserve account. We have never structured accounts
around outlays before, so we are looking at the scoring implications as
well as what this will provide to Egypt in security assistance.
I am not prepared to write a blank check to any government. It is
possible that this request could generate an additional $35 to $40
million for the Egyptians to spend on military equipment.
I would like to know what they plan to spend these resources on and
no one can tell me. I think we need to be better informed before
signing off on this approach.
Another problem with the proposal concerns actual control of the
resources. The reason there are no scoring consideration is the entire
amount is deemed obligated to Egypt once the funds are transferred into
this account. That means the Egyptians could default or cancel a
contract with an American company and we would have very little
recourse because the money is already in their account. We must be sure
that we will continue to have transparency and ongoing U.S. management
of these resources, both the funds put into the account and the
interest generated by the account.
Let me add, separate and apart form concerns about the actual account
structure, I am not sure we should be increasing U.S. security
assistance to Egypt. A short while ago, President Mubarak paid a visit
to Lebanon and issued a statement of support for

[[Page S5511]]

Hezbollah's terrorist war against Israel. At this delicate juncture
with rising concern about cross border violence against Israel, Mr.
Mubarek's comments were and are extremely damaging to peace and
stability, to say nothing of safety of Israeli civilians. I am not sure
what signal it sends to increase military aid after such unfortunate
remarks. After all, the aid is provided in recognition of Egypt's
service to the peace process established at Camp David--the President's
comments undermined those very principles and prospects.
In the State Department briefing justifying the request,
U.S. officials urged our support because of Mubarek's need to address
the requirements of ``his key constituents, the military.'' Frankly, I
think Mr. Mubarek needs to worry less about satisfying the military and
spend more time and effort shoring up democratic institutions and civic
society.

Once again this year he demonstrated a heavy handed political style
be extending for three more years the State of Emergency which grants
him far reaching powers. He has granted and maintained this sweeping
authority for nineteen years. Press censorship and restrictions on
political parties and activities are among many authoritarian measures
which are routinely enforced in Egypt--not characteristics of the most
open democracy.
In spite of my concerns about the trends in Egypt, I am prepared to
consider this request fully and carefully in consultation with the
chairman and others who I know are interested and expect we will have a
recommendation by the time we get to conference.

amendment no. 3528

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, S. 2522 contains $934.1 million for Plan
Colombia, a counternarcotics initiative. A portion of that is earmarked
for the investigations of human rights abuses. Certainly a part of the
drug culture that this bill is attempting to address is the abduction
of individuals by paramilitary groups who either hold their hostages
for ransom or use the abduction as a means of intimidation against law
enforcement. Frequently we hear of witnesses, prosecutors and judges
being taken from their homes, offices or off the street in broad
daylight in an attempt to stop the prosecution of drug kingpins.
However, innocent civilians, not involved in the war on drugs, are
targets as well. The amendment I am introducing addresses the latter.
My colleagues may not be aware but currently there are three American
citizens who are being held hostage by FARC, a narco-guerilla group in
Colombia. Many have been involved in obtaining their release but the 7
plus years of their captivity has complicated those efforts.
On the evening of January 31, 1993, a group of armed guerrillas
entered the village of Pucuro Panama. Once control of the village had
been secured, the guerrillas went to the homes of the Mankins, Riches,
Tenenoffs, three missionary families with New Tribes Mission who were
invited to live in Pucuro by village leaders to teach reading and
writing and provide medical care to villagers. David Mankins, Mark Rich
and Rick Tenenoff were tied up and their wives instructed to prepare
small packages of clothing for them. The guerrillas then forced the men
toward a trail that leads to the Colombian border.
Shortly after the kidnaping, FARC made contact with New Tribes
Mission, claimed credit for the abduction and demanded a $5 million
ransom. The mission refused to pay the ransom and shortly thereafter
contact ceased. Since then there has been many rumors and reports, but
not proof on their whereabouts.
David Mankins, Mark Rich and Rick Tenenoff have the dubious
distinction of being the longest held American hostages. Their families
have lived the last 7 years without knowing whether they are dead or
alive.
My amendment condemns the kidnaping; urges members of the European
Community to assist in the safe return of these men by including in any
dialogue with them the objectives of the safe return of these
missionaries; and appeals to the United Nations Commission to pressure
FARC to resolve this situation.
I am proposing this amendment for a couple reasons: first, FARC has
aggressively courted a dialogue with several in the European community.
In fact, I understand that in the upcoming weeks there will be
representatives of FARC in Europe looking for support of their
``revolution.'' I fear any recognition would be viewed as legitimizing
the illegal and cowardly activities of FARC and thereby compound
efforts to either gain release of these Americans to learn of their
fate.
Secondly, Dr. Larry Maxwell of Patterson Baptist Church in Patterson,
New York has begun a 240 mile walk to Washington, D.C. to bring
attention to the tragic situation of these families. Dr. Maxwell will
culminate his walk at the Capitol this coming Monday, June 26th, where
he will be joined by the families of the kidnapped men.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment because these American
citizens can easily be forgotten and we must not do that. Dave, Mark
and Rick needs our prayers and their families need to know that their
loved ones have not been abandoned. Finally, we need to encourage all
those who have worked during the last 7 years to bring an end to this
horrific ordeal to continue their effort.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendments
en bloc.
The amendments (Nos. 3519, 3528, and 3532) were agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I believe the distinguished Senator
from Washington is here and ready to offer an amendment.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.

Amendment No. 3517

(Purpose: To reduce the amount of funds made available for South
American and Caribbean counternarcotics activities, and for other
purposes)

Mr. GORTON. I have an amendment at the desk and I ask for its
immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Washington [Mr. Gorton], proposes an
amendment numbered 3517.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

Beginning page 141, line 9, strike ``$934,100,000'' and all
that follows through line 18 on page 155 and insert the
following: ``$200,000,000 to remain available until expended:
Provided, That the funds appropriated under this heading
shall be utilized in Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, and
other countries in South and Central America and the
Caribbean at the discretion of the Secretary of State.''.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, the effect of this amendment would be to
strike the Colombian drug money appropriation of $934 million and
substitute for that number $200 million. In other words, the passage of
the amendment would result in savings--that is to say, not spending--
almost three-quarters of a billion dollars, and by implication using
that money to pay down the national debt.
Curiously enough, I think the justification for the amendment is as
eloquently stated in the bill being managed by my friend from Kentucky
and by the committee report--which I commend to my colleagues--that
accompanies that amendment.
I will read one paragraph now from the committee report:

Historically, INL has provided support to the Colombian
National Police. The Supplemental anticipates a 7:1 shift in
funding from the Police to the Army. Given the past limited
role and resources provided for counter-narcotics activities
in Colombia and the region, the Committee is concerned about
the rapid, new, and unprecedented levels of spending
requested. The fiscal year 2000 program level of $50,000,000
for Colombia will now rise to nearly $1,000,000,000. The
Committee has grave reservations regarding the
Administration's ability to effectively manage the use of
these resources to achieve the expected results of reducing
production and supply of cocaine while protecting human
rights.

I could hardly state my case better. We have a profound and dramatic
shift in focus. We have a huge 19-1 increase in the amount of money in
this bill focused on this particular problem, and we lack even a clue
as to whether or not it will have any positive impact on

[[Page S5512]]

drug trafficking between Colombia and the United States.
I will read the language found on page 151 of the bill, section 6106:

Limitations on Support for Plan Colombia and on the Assignment of
United States Personnel in Colombia

(a) Limitation on Support for Plan Colombia.--Except for
appropriations made by this Act and appropriations made by
the Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2001, for such
purpose, none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by any Act (including unobligated balances of prior
appropriations) shall be available for support of Plan
Colombia unless and until--
(1) the President submits a report to Congress requesting
the availability of such funds; and
(2) Congress enacts a joint resolution approving the
request of the President under paragraph (1).

In other words, let's spend $1 billion, and after it is spent, let's
ask the President for a justification of why we were spending it and a
plan for what we are going to do in the future.
That is absolutely, totally, completely backwards. This is a major
undertaking, a huge change in our relationship with Colombia, in what
we sometimes fatuously denominate a war against drugs, with some kind
of hope that it will have a positive impact. My guess is I will very
shortly be asked to enter into a time agreement so we can vote on this
amendment no later than 6 or 6:30 p.m. today. Time constraints will
lead me to accept that time agreement. But is it not equally bizarre
and irresponsible that we should put the United States into another
military adventure on the basis of so short and superficial a debate
about both means and ends in connection with this appropriation?
The Senator from Minnesota, Mr. Wellstone, just proposed an amendment
that got very few votes, that superficially at least was aimed at the
same goal. I say ``superficially'' because Senator Wellstone did not
propose to save any of the money. He simply proposed to spend about 25
percent of it with priorities that differed from those of the committee
and those of the President of the United States. The war and all the
equipment were still there under his amendment. We just had a quarter
of a billion dollars spent on various social program purposes.
His amendment, in other words, did not go to the heart of the
question that is before us. That question is, Are we prepared casually,
at this point, to take the first step in what has often in the past
been an inevitable series of steps toward engaging in another shooting
war?
I grant you there is a limitation of no more than 250 American
military personnel to accompany the equipment we will be selling to
Colombia under the provisions of this bill. But isn't that almost
always the way we begin an adventure of this nature, with pious
declarations that our participation is limited; we are just helping
some other country solve its own problems and challenges in some
military fashion? I think so.
But this is a shift from supporting a police force in a friendly
country to supporting an army engaged in a civil war, a civil war that
it has not been winning, a civil war in which the other side is very
well financed--indirectly, at least, in large part by Americans who
purchase cocaine--but without the slightest real control over the use
of the equipment that the Colombian Army will be receiving pursuant to
this bill.
How long will it be until we read the first news story about some of
this equipment showing up in the hands of the rebels, by capture or,
for that matter, by purchase? I don't know, but that is what has
constantly happened in the past in almost each of the other adventures
of this nature in which the United States has found itself.
But my fundamental point with respect to this amendment is that we
are voting money first and asking for the justification later. We
should get the justification first and make the determination as to
whether to spend this amount of money or how much we ought to spend
after we know exactly what the plan is and how the plan promises to
lead to any kind of successful conclusion.
But the bill says, right here on pages 151 and 152, we will spend the
$934 million and then the President will tell us how he is going to
spend future money, and we will get a joint resolution.
At a later stage in a similar adventure, we went through an almost
identical debate just a couple of weeks ago on Kosovo. We voted the
money and lacked, by a small margin, the courage even to say that it
had to be justified and authorized by Congress a year from now. I hope
we may have learned something from that experience. Should we not
seriously debate this matter first--not just in a couple of hearings in
an Appropriations Committee and essentially a rider on an
appropriations bill but seriously and extensively? Is this the single
best way in which to spend the almost three-quarters of a billion
dollars that is the subject of this amendment, even on drug
interdiction, much less on any other potential program in the United
States? Will it help Colombia? Does it really address drug problems in
the United States? Is there an exit strategy?

We know there was not any in Bosnia. We know there is not any in
Kosovo. And we sure are not told what it is here. One consequence of
passing this appropriations bill in its present form, however, is
certain. It will not be a one-time appropriation. It will not be the
only request we are asked to respond to, to deal with the Colombian
military, almost $1 billion in this appropriation--a downpayment. But
it isn't a downpayment we make on a home or an automobile. It is a
downpayment on which we don't know the schedule of future payments; we
don't know the total amount of future payments; we don't know how we
will measure success if, indeed, any success exists. It is simply the
beginning of an open-ended commitment, with the pious statement that
the President must come back a year from now and justify future
appropriations and get a joint resolution of Congress.
I don't think those lines are worth the paper they are printed on
because next year's foreign operations appropriations bill can just
appropriate another $1 billion, and its passage will be that joint
resolution, without any more justification than we have today.
In one respect, at least, I must interject with this comment: I have
been overly critical. In comparison with the way in which this problem
has been treated in the House of Representatives, this appropriation is
a model of responsibility. It includes considerably fewer dollars and
considerably more in the way of conditions--future conditions though
they may be. That means, unfortunately, the conference committee will
end up spending more money than we are spending here and probably with
fewer and less responsible requirements imposed on the administration
in the way in which the money is spent.
But my points in this amendment are simple. We are asked to engage in
another civil war. I repeat that. We are asked to engage in another
civil war with a major commitment to equipment and training for the
Colombian Army. Very rarely does this kind of commitment get made
without escalating into something more, in money or in personnel or the
like. Very rarely are insurgencies such as the one in Colombia
successfully met when those insurgencies have as large a source of
monetary support as this one seems to have.
In any event, I suppose one can even say that this is a good,
thoughtful, and responsible idea, but we do not know that. We have not
had any kind of national debate on the subject. We have not had
anything more than the most superficial justification for it by an
administration whose foreign policy guesses so far during the last few
years do not lend a great degree of confidence to most of us with
respect to the responsibility of this adventure.
In the relatively short period of time we have available, I ask my
colleagues to ask themselves the simple question: Do you know enough
about this idea to risk $1 billion on it in an open-ended commitment to
an entirely new adventure in a campaign which has rather spectacularly
lacked in success for the last 10 or 20 years? Wouldn't you like a
little bit more advanced justification? Wouldn't you like a little bit
more time to thoughtfully consider whether we want to involve ourselves
in this particular civil war? Isn't there somewhere that you can think
of that $700 million would be spent more wisely, even in connection
with our struggle against illegal drug usage in the United

[[Page S5513]]

States or for some other program entirely or for the reduction in the
national debt to which we all give so much lipservice, except when it
comes up against a new spending program?
What I offer is an amendment that will still have us spending four
times as much money in Colombia than we are spending during the course
of the current year--four times as much money, $50 million to $200
million--but one that will require the President to come up to us with
the very requirements that are set out on pages 151 and 152 of this
bill but with a difference. He will have to come up and justify it
before we give him the money rather than after it is over.
Next year, this request will be a very simple one: Oh, gosh, we have
already spent $1 billion. We can't stop now; it is just beginning to
show results; the helicopters have only been down there for 2 months;
we are only asking another $1.5 billion, or whatever the request; we
can't quit now; we won't show constancy; we won't show purpose. The
time to show constancy and purpose is right now.
This spending program, even with the restrictions and limitations
included in this bill, is not responsible. It is not the right way to
spend money. It is almost impossible to conceive that it will be
successful, and we should deal with it today, here and now, by very
simply saying: No; no, Mr. President, not until there is a far greater
justification than any that you have presented so far.
We should heed in our votes as well as in our words the very words of
the committee and show ``grave reservations regarding the
administration's ability to effectively manage the use of these
resources.'' If we have grave reservations, we should not be spending
the money until those reservations are met and we have a far greater
degree of confidence than any of us can show today that this spending
will be effective.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I have a hard time remembering the last
time I disagreed with my friend from Washington on an issue, but on
this one, regretfully, I do. We had a vote a few moments ago to reduce
the Colombian drug war money by $225 million. That was defeated 89-11.
Now my colleague from Washington would take it all the way down to a
mere $100 million for this effort. He would be the first one to agree
that, in effect, eliminates this effort. I think that is a mistake.
I will make the motion to table the Gorton amendment which I would
like to schedule for 4 p.m., if that is agreeable with Senator Gorton.
Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I am sorry, I did not hear.
Mr. McCONNELL. I was saying to my friend from Washington, I am
planning on making a motion to table at 4 p.m. and that would give us a
time certain for the vote. We can lay the amendment of the Senator from
Washington aside and go on to Senator Dodd who has an amendment as
well.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, has the unanimous consent request been
propounded?
Mr. McCONNELL. Not yet.
Mr. DODD. I am going to make a suggestion before my colleague makes
it. There are at least two other people who I know want to speak on the
amendment I am going to offer. I am worried about the timing. If we
schedule a vote at 4 p.m. and I presume a vote on my amendment to
follow immediately thereafter----
Mr. McCONNELL. I was not going to propound that.
Mr. GORTON. Will the Senator from Kentucky yield?
Mr. McCONNELL. I yield to the Senator from Washington.
Mr. GORTON. This Senator has made his case. He will need 5 minutes at
the most to repeat it. As the Senator from Kentucky knows, however, a
somewhat more drastic version of this amendment received 11 votes on
the Appropriations Committee, and there may very well be other Members
who do wish to speak on it.
While I am perfectly happy at this point to grant unanimous consent
to go on to another amendment, I would like the two Cloakrooms to be
able to circulate the thought that this amendment is before the body,
and if other Members want to come, that they be given an opportunity to
speak. I hope he defers his motion to table until that opportunity has
been presented.
Mr. McCONNELL. I will be happy to defer. As a fellow chairman of a
subcommittee on Appropriations, the Senator is sympathetic, I am sure,
of my goal to finish the bill. I was trying to move this along.
Obviously, I will defer to my friend from Washington if he is not
prepared to have that vote.
Mr. GORTON. If other people wish to speak, I want them to have that
opportunity. I am perfectly happy to vote before we leave this evening.
Mr. McCONNELL. I say to my friend from Washington, is there further
debate on the amendment? Does the Senator from Connecticut wish to
speak to the Gorton amendment?
Mr. DODD. Briefly. I will not take a lot of time. I know the chairman
wants to move this bill along.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I will be proposing another amendment
briefly. I did not speak during the consideration of the Wellstone
amendment but, in effect, the amendment offered by our friend and
colleague from Washington is tantamount to the same conclusion as the
Wellstone amendment. This amount will be reduced, as I understand the
amendment, to some $200 million, in effect gutting the program. An
amendment that says we not spend the money would have the same effect,
in my view.
This is a complicated and difficult issue. I say to my friend from
Washington, for whom I have the highest regard and respect, and I
listen to him carefully when he speaks on any issue, I am deeply
concerned. This is not a perfect package by any stretch of the
imagination. If I were crafting this alone, it would be somewhat
different than the package before us. I understand with 535 Members of
Congress and a Defense Department and a State Department and dealing
with regional governments as well in the hemisphere who are as
concerned about this issue as we are, we cannot craft a package that
reflects necessarily the views of every single person. We have to put
together a package that seems to make the most sense from a variety of
perspectives.
I did not speak on the Wellstone amendment, but my feelings are very
strong when it comes to this issue of Colombia.
Colombia is the oldest continuous democracy in Latin America.
I do not engage in hyperbole when I suggest to my colleagues that
this nation of Colombia is very much, in my view, on the brink of being
disintegrated by narcotraffickers and guerrilla forces operating in
that country.
The narcotraffickers are accumulating a fortune, a vast fortune,
significant parts of which are being used to finance the guerrilla
operations. The major source of funding for the narcotraffickers,
regretfully, comes from right here in the United States. We lose about
50,000 people a year in the United States to drug-related deaths. We
are the largest market for illegal Colombian drugs.
Just in the last 2 years, Colombia's coca production has grown by 40
percent. In 1999, the United States estimated the street value of
cocaine processed from Colombia's coca fields and sold on the streets
of this country was in excess of $6 billion.
Whether we like it or not, we are engaged in the conflict in
Colombia. Because of events in that country and because of our own
habits in this Nation, people are dying in the streets of America. This
is not some distant conflict without any ramifications here at home.
I do not believe this issue is necessarily going to be resolved
because we have a military aid package going to Colombia. It is going
to be resolved through a variety of measures and means. I, frankly,
have been terribly disappointed; we are now almost in July--this is a
request for help from our neighbor, from President Pastrana, from a
democratic government, where 1 million people are now displaced because
of the conflict in Colombia. And 100,000 people leave that country
every 6 months because of the war there, many of them coming to our
shores and many of them going to other nations.
Colombia is greatly distressed. Politicians, journalists, judges, and
innocent civilians are being gunned down. We think we put ourselves at
great risk

[[Page S5514]]

when we run for political office if someone slams a screen door in our
face. In Colombia, if you run for high office, you run the risk of
being killed. That is not an exaggeration.
Literally dozens and dozens of people who have had the temerity to
stand up to the narcotraffickers and to some of these paramilitary
forces, and others, have lost their lives. President Pastrana, the
President of the country, was actually taken hostage and kept in the
trunk of a car not that many years ago as a victim of this conflict.
My point is this. This package may not be perfect, but our delay in
responding to a neighbor's call for help is getting too long. Every day
we wait, every day we delay, means more lives lost, means greater
strength for these narcotraffickers, who respect no one, not
sovereignty, not governments, certainly not democratically elected
governments, and will use whatever means available to them in order to
secure their position and gain resources through their illegal trade in
death, a trade in death which costs the lives of people in this
country.
Obviously, we have to do a lot here at home. We can't blame the
Colombians because we have illegal drug habits in this country that
exceed anywhere else in the world. But part of the answer is going
after the source. So when we step up to offer the Colombian democracy a
chance to fight back, we are not only doing it for them; we are doing
it for ourselves.
So with all due respect to my friend from Washington, and others,
this may not be a perfect plan, but every day we delay in stepping up
to help our neighbor, we cause more hardship, more death and
destruction in our own country, and greater is the proximity of
Colombia losing its democratic government, losing its sovereignty.
So I hope that this amendment will be rejected, as was the previous
amendment, and that we will get about the business of passing this
legislation, and giving these people a chance to fight back, and also
giving ourselves an opportunity to reduce the hardship in our own
streets as a result of the narcotrafficking problem.
I do not claim to be any deep expert on the issue of antinarcotics
efforts, but I respect those who are. From General McCaffrey to our
colleagues in this Chamber, and in the other House, who work on this
issue every single day, almost without exception, they say this is a
must-pass program; that if we back away from our responsibility, if we
back away from an ally and a friend and a neighbor in trouble, then our
credibility, when it comes to fighting back on this issue, will be
severely damaged, if not lost entirely, in this part of the world.
President Pastrana deserves the admiration, support, and respect of
the American people and this Congress. From the first days he was
elected to office, he has sought to resolve the conflict in his country
with a major guerrilla group in his nation that has operated for 40-
some years, by sitting down with them to try to resolve their
differences. He even turned over a sizable portion of Colombia, his own
nation--a small percentage of the population resides in this area of
Colombia.
I have here a partial map of Colombia. It is not clearly shown on the
map, but a substantial portion of Colombia is in an area called the
llanos, a Spanish word for lowlands, wetlands. When you come out of the
Andes in Colombia, and come down into the llanos areas, the flat areas,
there is a large section of this piece of territory which President
Pastrana and his government conceded--in effect, an autonomous region--
as part of the effort to try to resolve this 40-year-old conflict with
the major guerrilla group called the FARC. As I said, a small
percentage of the Colombian population actually lives there. But that
was part of his concession to try to resolve this dispute. Just
recently, he also made a concession of some additional property.
I show you a better map of Colombia. It is a little clearer. On the
map you can see the darker area. Here is the Andean ridge that runs
from Venezuela down through Ecuador and through Colombia. There are
major population centers in the northern sections of Colombia around
Bogota.
This area over here is the least populated area of Colombia. It is in
this shaded area shown here where this concession was made. There have
also been concessions made in the north.
President Pastrana has desperately tried to bring this conflict with
this age-old guerrilla operation to a conclusion. But the problem is,
the major cocaine and major coca productions occur in areas very
similar--in fact, this is the darkened area, the DMZ area, in an area
called Caqueta and Putumayo. The Putumayo region is along the border of
Ecuador. And the Caqueta region is very similar to it. This is the
largest region from which these killer drugs come that end up on our
streets.
It is estimated, by the way, these narcotraffickers have profits in
excess of $1 million a day--some would suggest three times that
number--daily profits made in the streets of the United States to fund
their operations and to support guerrilla activities. They cannot
handle this alone. If it is left entirely up to Colombia to solve this
problem, it gets worse every hour.
I know it is a lot of money, $1 billion. It is not cheap. But every
day we delay, every day we refuse to step up, this problem becomes
worse and the narcotraffickers get stronger. They are already now in
Ecuador. They moved into this region, where they moved the product up
through Ecuador to the chemistry laboratories and then back down
through Ecuador and either back into Colombia or out to the United
States. It is a serious issue.
Their government has pleaded with us for some help for over a year.
We are now almost finished with this session of Congress, and we still
have not addressed this issue.
Again, I respect my colleague from Washington. But there was another
time, a half a century ago, when neighbors in another part of the world
asked for our help--not our direct involvement--in something called the
Lend-Lease Program. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in a national address to
the country, described it to the American public in terms of a house
being on fire and neighbors asking for some help.
In a sense, today, that is what we are being asked to do. We have
here a democratic neighbor, the oldest democracy in Latin America, one
of our best allies in the world, a group of people who have supported
us and have been through hell over the last 20 years as judges and
presidential candidates, prosecutors, state legislators. Anyone who had
the guts to stand up to narcotraffickers has gotten gunned down or
their families kidnapped and put through a reign of terror by these
people, and now they ask us for a little help. All of those drugs come
here. They end up on our streets. They kill our kids. They want to know
if we will help to put an end to it. I think it is very little to ask,
considering the magnitude of the problem, how precarious it is for us
here at home and for this good neighbor and friend to our south.
Regardless of party, political persuasion, or ideology, this is a
time when we need to say to democratic countries in this hemisphere, we
stand with you, particularly when the fight involves us very directly.
I hope this amendment will be resoundingly defeated and a strong
message sent that this Congress, despite its demands for attention and
time and resources, is not going to turn its back on the people of
Colombia. Rather we will be saying that we will, in an expeditious
fashion, provide the resources necessary so these people have a chance
to fight back against a crowd who wants to take their sovereignty and
simultaneously add to the carnage on our own streets.
For those reasons, I urge rejection of this amendment. When the
tabling motion is offered, I hope my colleagues will support it.
I yield the floor.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I want to bring my colleagues attention
to the importance of what we are trying to do with emergency aid to
Colombia. Why is this aid important? And why is now an emergency?
Illegal drugs pose a direct, immediate threat to the health and
safety of the citizens of the United States. Today, a majority of the
cocaine and heroin consumed in the United States, is grown, processed,
and smuggled from Colombia.
The Senate, today, has the opportunity to act. We have the
opportunity to provide a needed boost to the Government of Colombia and
their efforts to halt illegal drug production in their country. They
have a plan, and they have asked the U.S. for support. We should
provide it.

[[Page S5515]]

That said, I don't want to mislead anyone into thinking this is
either the perfect or final assistance package that will come before
the Senate for Colombia. However, it is a good start. It will
strengthen the Colombian military while emphasizing the importance of
human rights. It will provide additional resources for the Colombian
National Police, and strengthen U.S. Colombian, and other nations in
regional interdiction capabilities in and around Colombia. Personally,
I would like to see more money for intelligence collection, and more
emphasis on coordination of activities between the Military and
National Police, and more assistance to Colombia to strengthen the rule
of law. However, these are all things that can be addressed in future
appropriations. We also need to address economic and trade issues to
help the legal economies in the region. This package provides important
assistance needed now to a government with the will and ability to act.
The drug problem is not going to be solved overnight. To confront
this threat, we must work locally, as well as internationally. We must
provide assistance so those who have been seduced by drug use can get
help, but we also--and I would say this has to be our first focus--we
also must keep people from becoming addicts in the first place. This
means education and prevention. It means using the law to punish those
who break it, providing the resources to help those who become
addicted, and it also means focused programs to stop drugs at the
source. That means that it is in both the moral and strategic interest
of the United States to support the Government of Colombia in its
efforts to rid the country of drug production. We should not squander
this opportunity.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I think it might be appropriate to lay
the Gorton amendment aside temporarily and go forward. Is the Senator
from Connecticut ready to offer his amendment?
Mr. DODD. I am.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Gorton
amendment be temporarily laid aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 3524

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I call up amendment 3524.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Dodd], for himself and
Mr. Lieberman, proposes an amendment numbered 3524.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

On page 142, on lines 3-5, strike the words ``procurement,
refurbishing, and support for UH-1H Huey II helicopters:''
and insert in lieu thereof the following: ``procurement and
support for helicopters determined by the U.S. Department of
Defense, in consultation with the Colombian military, to be
the most effective aircraft to support missions by elite
Colombian counter narcotics battalions in eradicating the
expanding cultivation and processing of illicit drugs in
remote areas of Colombia:''.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I offer this amendment on behalf of myself
and my colleague from Connecticut, Senator Lieberman, and others who
may wish to join us. I will read the substance of the amendment; then I
will go into the language. The substance of the amendment is as
follows: We would strike the words ``procurement, refurbishing, and
support for UH-1H Huey II helicopters'' and insert in lieu thereof the
following: ``procurement and support for helicopters determined by the
U.S. Department of Defense, in consultation with the Colombian
military, to be the most effective aircraft to support missions by
elite Colombian counter narcotics battalions in eradicating the
expanding cultivation and processing of illicit drugs in remote areas
of Colombia.''
I begin these remarks by stating what was perhaps obvious to my
colleagues but may not be obvious to all who are following this debate.
My colleague and I from Connecticut represent a division of United
Technologies known Sikorsky Aircraft which produces Blackhawk
helicopters. I am not proposing an amendment that mandates that the
Blackhawk helicopter be the helicopter of choice. I am sure that may
disappoint some of my constituents that I am not fighting on behalf of
a particular helicopter. Rather, my amendment provides for the
helicopter to be selected on its relative merits.
As I said a moment ago, when it comes to narcotics issues, I don't
claim great expertise. I don't claim to be a military expert when it
comes to making decisions about which helicopters may be the best to
use in a given situation. Rather than offer an amendment, which my
colleague from Connecticut and I might have done, to say we replace the
language here, which does call for a specific helicopter, with the one
that is produced in our home State, our amendment says, let the people
who have to make the assessment about what would work best in Colombia
decide, not what the Senators from Connecticut want or the Senators
from Texas or some other place. My amendment would allow our military
experts to say what makes the most sense, in consultation with the
people who will be receiving this military equipment.
Even if Senators disagree with this package in its entirety, I hope
they will support this amendment so that at least Colombia will be
receiving the kinds of equipment that will be necessary to get the job
done.
The questions raised by our colleague from the State of Washington
about whether or not this policy can work are not illegitimate. None of
us have a crystal ball to determine whether or not this particular
program is going to produce the desired results of those of us who
support it. One way we can almost guarantee it won't is to insist that
the Colombian Government accept only the hardware which we want to give
them, not which may be the best in order to deal with the problem but
that which we think they ought to have because of some parochial
interest.
I don't want to be in a position of demanding that the Colombian
Government take a helicopter made in my State. Nor should anyone else
be demanding they take one from theirs. Let us let the experts decide
on what works best. That is the reason I am offering this amendment
with a number of my other colleagues.
The administration's primary rationale in proposing the $1.2 billion
supplemental aid package in support of what is called Plan Colombia was
to assist the Colombian Government in stemming the massive growth in
coca cultivation in southern Colombia. Again, it is the area I
described in the shaded green around the Caqueta and Putumayo region.
It is not limited to those areas. There are other areas as well where
the products are grown. Those are the principal ones.
In the last 2 years, Colombia's coca production has grown by 40
percent. In 1999, the estimated street value in the United States was
in excess of $6 billion coming out of this region, just in a year
alone. We are talking about a billion-dollar program to deal with a
supply in coca alone, in 1 year, 2 years, in excess of $6 billion.

The Colombian Government has proposed to address the explosion in
coca production by going to the source, the coca-producing regions of
Putumayo and Caqueta in southern Colombia. However, these coca growing
areas are also strongholds of the FARC guerrilla organizations--
frankly, there is a relationship between the drug cultivators and the
guerrillas in these two areas. There are also right-wing paramilitary
organizations which operate in these areas, but the paramilitary groups
are more extensive in the northern part of the country.
To address these threat levels and logistical difficulties in
mounting substantial counter narcotics programs, President Pastrana has
made a central feature of his plan the so-called push into southern
Colombia, where the bulk of the problem resides. The key components of
the push into southern Colombia are to equip and train two additional
Colombian counter narcotics battalions, the training and deployment of
the first battalion having already occurred in December of last year,
and to provide tactical mobility, which is airlift capacity, to these
newly trained battalions so that the Colombian national police will
have sufficient area security to carry out

[[Page S5516]]

eradication and other drug law enforcement operations in southern
Colombia.
The Clinton administration specifically requested almost $600 million
to support that component of Plan Colombia, a request essentially met
in the House-passed emergency supplemental bill. The success or failure
of push into southern Colombia depends in no small measure not only on
the effectiveness of these battalions but also on the effectiveness and
the capacity and capability of the equipment with which we provide
them. It is going to be critically important that we not jam down the
throats of this government equipment that is not going to meet the
test, not going to help get the job done. That is why I offer this
amendment today.
President Pastrana and U.S. defense experts spent a number of months
discussing how best to ensure the maximum effectiveness of these
operations. Contrary to the assertion of my colleague from Washington,
a lot of time has been spent discussing this issue. There has not been
a lack of discussion about what is going on in Colombia. There has been
a lot of discussion, a lot of hearings.
Our Pentagon and other experts have determined that the ability to
transport substantial numbers of elite Army troops together with
members of the national police quickly and safely to remote areas of
Colombia would be absolutely critical to the overall success of the
larger strategy. After reviewing a number of different options,
including the possibility of non-U.S. aircraft, the Colombian Army
selected the Blackhawk helicopter as their equipment of choice in
dealing with this issue. According to Gen. Charles Wilhelm, Commander
in Chief of the Southern Command, our top military person in the
region, the ultimate decision to select the Blackhawk over other
options was based on its superiority in the following areas: range,
payload, survivability, versatility, service ceiling, and other
technical considerations.

Let me share a chart with you that makes the point more clearly than
anything I could have just said, in very specific terms. I have here a
chart that shows a comparison between the Huey II, presently demanded
in this bill, and the Blackhawk. Let me go down each one of the
critical areas identified by our top military people in the Southern
Command.
What is the maximum cruise speed of the Huey II? It is 100 knots. The
Blackhawk is 155 knots. The maximum number of passengers at sea level
is 11 persons for the Huey and 24 for the Blackhawk. The maximum
passengers at 9,000 feet is 8 persons the Huey and 18 persons for the
Blackhawk.
On this other chart, when you are based here in northern Colombia and
you have to get to southern Colombia, you have to fly over the Andes.
This is not at ground level or sea level. For those people who may be
familiar with the geography of this area, to suggest somehow you are
going to have an effective quick-response team, taking 8 people in a
Huey helicopter over the Andes, as opposed to a Blackhawk, which can
carry 18 at 9,000 feet, is to put this program in serious jeopardy.
The maximum flight time is 1.5 hours for the Huey; its 2.5 for the
Blackhawk. The range of a Huey is 196 nautical miles. It is 300
nautical miles for the Blackhawk. The ceiling--how high they can go--is
16,000 feet for a Huey and 20,000 feet in a Blackhawk. The weight the
Huey can carry is 10,500 pounds; the Blackhawk can carry 22,000 pounds.
Fuel consumption for a Huey is 600 pounds an hour. For the Blackhawk,
it is 700 pounds an hour. The sling load is 5,000 pounds for the Huey
and 9,000 pounds--almost double--for the Blackhawk. The payload at
4,000 feet again is more than double for the Blackhawk as opposed to a
Huey.
Mr. President, in virtually every category that our top military
people have said is important, the Blackhawk outperforms the Huey. I am
not offering an amendment that demands that we write in Blackhawk
instead of Huey. My amendment says let our military people decide which
is best. If you are going to vote for this program, then you ought to
let the military people decide what is going to give it the greatest
chance of success, and not have a bunch of Congressmen and Senators
tell you what is going to have the greatest chance of success. We
should give significant weight to what our military people think will
work in this area.
If you want to condemn the Plan Colombia program to failure at the
outset, then provide them with inferior equipment so that they can't
get the job done. I suggest that is what is happening with the present
language in this bill. In virtually every operational category--speed,
maximum passengers, flight time, ceiling, weight-carrying capacity--the
Blackhawk outperforms the Huey. That is not at all surprising, since
the Huey is a Vietnam war vintage aircraft, which first went into
production in 1959--40 years ago. The production of Hueys ended in
1976, a quarter of a century ago. The Blackhawk is newer; in fact, it
is still being manufactured. Moreover, the Blackhawk was engineered
specifically to address the deficiencies experienced with the Huey
during the Vietnam conflict.
The so-called Huey II is a retrofitted Huey. The upgrade package that
the Committee mark would fund was only developed 4 years ago and sold
to the Colombian armed forces to improve the performance of Hueys
currently in operation in that country. None of the U.S. services have
chosen to upgrade Huey inventories using the kits the Appropriations
Committee proposes to provide Colombia. In fact, the U.S. Armed Forces
are in the process of phasing out current inventories of the 800 Huey
aircraft and replacing them entirely with the newer model aircraft,
including Blackhawks. Hueys are no longer used in combat missions by
any of the U.S. Armed Forces.
The Appropriations Committee has indirectly acknowledged the
differences in capability of the two aircraft by recommending a 2-for-1
substitute of Hueys for Blackhawks--60 Huey II's, instead of 30
Blackhawks. That also means that the significant cost advantages that
the proponents of the Huey II have pointed to as a justification for
the substitution is significantly reduced. It is even further reduced
because U.S. military experts who are familiar with the conditions in
Colombia in which the aircraft will be operating have stated it will
actually take two-plus Hueys to accomplish what one Blackhawk could do.
If that is the case, then the cost advantage argument goes out the
window. The mission cost for a typical mission of transporting 88
troops from a base, at a distance of 98 miles or less, would cost
essentially the same.
The committee has asserted in it's committee report that one of the
rationales for substituting Hueys for Blackhawks was the more immediate
availability of Huey II's. I think that is disputable, in light of the
fact that the 60 Hueys would require major refurbishing. There is
currently a limited capacity in the United States, or Colombia for that
matter, to do that in a time frame that is much faster than the
delivery schedule that Sikorsky has proposed for the 30 Blackhawks.
However, setting that point aside for the moment, there is another more
fundamental flaw, with all due respect, in the committee's argument. It
assumes the Colombian army has trained pilots available to fly in the
60 Hueys once they arrive. Mr. President, that simply is not the case.
The expectation is that it will take between 6 to 9 months to train a
pilot to fly those Hueys, or the Blackhawks for that matter. In the
case of Hueys, at least double the number of pilots will need to be
trained to enable the Colombian Army to have an equivalent air mobility
for its elite battalions. You will need at least double the number of
pilots trained to carry out the missions. Frankly, the serious
questions as to whether or not that many individuals can be identified
on short notice in Colombia to undergo such training in order to
actually produce the necessary pilots to operate that many Hueys safely
and with the capacity and efficiency that is necessary.
Again, I don't claim to be an expert on this, conversant in all the
nuances of various helicopter technologies. For that reason, my
amendment does not demand that the Huey be the choice. I have made a
case for it here, but I have tried to point out the fallacies in the
demanding choice in the bill.
Again, whether or not you agree with this policy overall, I hope you
will support this amendment. In fact, if you will oppose the policy
because you think it is not likely to work well,

[[Page S5517]]

then you ought to be for this because at least this increases the
chance of success of this program. So my amendment simply says let the
pros make the choices--not Senators or Congressmen for a specific
State, but those who are knowledgeable about this issue, the defense
experts in our own country, and those in Colombia who know this
terrain.
Last, I will put up a chart that shows the relative ranges of the two
helicopters. If you look at the colored circles on the chart, the red
line is the range of a Huey. The black line is the range of a
Blackhawk. Look at the difference in terms of range capacity of these
two pieces of equipment.
With that, I hope that my colleagues will support this amendment when
a vote is called for on it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized.
Mr. McCONNELL. At the outset, neither of these helicopters were made
in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. My good friend from Connecticut has
done, as usual, a very effective job of representing his position. Were
I the Senator from Connecticut, I am confident I would be making a very
similar speech. Even though the amendment of the Senator from
Connecticut doesn't specify the particular kind of helicopter, as a
practical matter, if you leave that decision entirely to the Pentagon,
I think the Senator would agree that they are likely to prefer the
Blackhawk.

Let me just point out to my colleagues why the committee made the
decision that it did. First, this is primarily a cost decision. While
we didn't want to compromise on safety or capability, we had to
consider the fact that over the next several years of use, this
subcommittee will have to provide financial support to maintain and
operate whatever aircraft is selected to move Colombian troops. Mr.
President, this is not a one-time procurement decision. We will be
dealing with this in future years. According to the Defense Security
Cooperation Agency, the Blackhawks will cost about $12 million each and
then at least $1,200 an hour to operate. Counternarcotics aircraft are
expected to average 25 hours of flying time a month year-round. To
cover these costs, the administration has requested $388 million to
procure, maintain, and operate the 30 Blackhawks.
In comparison, the Huey II will cost $1.8 million to refurbish, and
then roughly $500 an hour for fuel, spare parts, and other operational
costs.
Frankly, the strongest argument the administration made for
Blackhawks over Hueys was that the former had twice the troop-carrying
capability, as Senator Dodd pointed out. While the Huey manufacturer
challenged this argument, I decided it was better safe than sorry. So
to address the issue, we doubled the number of aircraft we are funding
to 60. Even doubling the number of helicopters, the cost of the Huey
program stays under $120 million.
Supporters of the Huey have also argued that they can be made
available sooner than the delivery schedule of the end of the year for
the Blackhawk. Given the pilot shortages and the time it will take to
``train up'' either Blackhawk or Huey pilots, I don't see this aspect
as particularly decisive.
I think we have assured the Colombians that they can successfully
achieve their mission by taking the approach we recommended in the
bill.
I think we have assured the Colombians that they can successfully
achieve their mission at a lower cost, not only now but, very
importantly, to the budget here in the United States, and lower it in
the future for the United States.
With the savings we achieved by taking the approach we recommended in
the bill, we have been able to increase the regional support for the
Colombian police, increase support for human rights programs, and
sustain requested levels for equipment, training, and related support
for counternarcotics battalions.
Senator Dodd's chart points out the precise reason we chose to fund
60 Huey IIs rather than 30 Blackhawks. His chart points out that the
cost to operate the Huey is $617 per hour compared with the Blackhawk
cost of $1,675 per hour.
The foreign operations account has to pay for these operational costs
this year, next year, and every year after that. Those are years in
which we will probably not have $1 billion in emergency funds for
Colombia. That means we will have to cut into other accounts to keep
these helicopters flying in future years. Which accounts do we cut?
Refugees, UNICEF, funds for Armenia, and Russia, demining, or health?
What accounts will pay the price to fly Blackhawks in the future years
when Hueys would do?
These are U.S. units, which do not have Blackhawks, which will have
to wait while the production line produces Colombia's inventory. Given
the short- and long-term costs, and given the impact on the
availability for U.S. troops, the committee decided to provide twice
the number of refurbished Hueys which will meet all the troop transport
requirements in Colombia.
Those are the arguments for the approach the committee has chosen.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. REED. I thank the Chair.
Mr. President, I am impressed with Senator Dodd's logic and wisdom in
drafting legislation which does not direct the purchase but, rather,
makes the purchase subject to the decisions of the DOD, which will
ultimately be responsible for the training and military support for the
Colombian Army.
I am here today principally because I was fortunate enough last week
to be in Colombia and in the field with a narcotics battalion, to get
the opinions of those Colombian soldiers who actually have to fight
these missions, and to get the observations of the American special
forces troops who are training the Colombians. I think their
observations will be very useful and informative to my colleagues. I
believe I have an obligation to speak to those observations.
These are both excellent systems. But the question of what system do
you purchase and deploy is a function of the mission that the platform,
the helicopter, the system must execute.
Senator Dodd did a very good job of providing the context for the
proposed operation. Let me add a bit of detail, if I may.
The use of Plan Colombia from a military standpoint is to create a
counternarcotics battalion which will push into the South from the
provinces of Putumayo and Caqueta. This is part of the Amazon jungle.
It is all jungle. The last road ends at Tres Esquinas. All military
supplies for the core operation of that base must be done by air. The
context of the operation that is proposed is that they operate from
Tres Esquinas, which is about 150 nautical miles from the operating
base. That is their zone of operation.
The mission these counternarcotics troops will perform is to airlift
out of Tres Esquinas, to move into landing zones that are close to
either final laboratories or other significant assets of the
narcoterrorists, and to deliver, at a minimum, two platoons. Those 2
platoons have about 70 personnel. The ultimate lift will be a full
company of about 360 personnel.
It has been pointed out before that the range of the Huey II, Super
Huey, is about 75 nautical miles carrying 10 troops, and the Huey II
can range only half the target area, half of the 115 nautical miles,
without expensive refueling operations.
So the first tactical decision a commander would have to make if in
fact he were deploying Super Hueys would be to operate in the full
range of the area of operations. You would have to go ahead and
establish, at least temporarily, four refueling points so the Hueys
could come in and refuel. This is in some respects a tactical hindrance
to the operation.
First of all, you have to defend these positions in the field--in a
jungle area that is literally infested with guerrillas.
Second, the element of surprise would be at least somewhat vitiated
if in fact they were able to see you come in, refuel, and then lift
off, and go again to a target area.
In contrast to the range of the Huey II and the necessary-for-
refueling bases to cover the whole area, the Blackhawk has a range of
about 730 nautical miles and can carry 18 troops. This disparity
between range and capacity of troop lift also goes to the issue of cost
because obviously, in order to conduct these tactical operations, you
will need more of the Super Hueys than you would Blackhawk helicopters.
That doesn't completely

[[Page S5518]]

equate the force, but it in a significant way narrows operational
forces.

The military personnel on the ground, the Colombian National Army,
and the special forces advisers suggest that to put two platoons into
an LZ someplace in this area of operations would require seven Hueys as
compared to four Blackhawks. Again, tactically, four Blackhawk aircraft
flying at higher speeds and moving in without the necessity to refuel
gives them more operational capabilities, and it gives them more
capability to amass their forces, strike quickly, and pull back
quickly.
There is something else that has to be mentioned. They are flying
against military forces that potentially have fairly sophisticated
defense systems, which again puts a premium on speed and surprise--
being able to get in and out--and also the survivability of the
helicopters. That is again an issue that requires capital military
judgments about what system is most capable to operate and survive in
this type of environment.
There is another aspect to this. The lift capacity of the Blackhawk,
according to the people to whom I spoke, gives it an advantage when
they operate closely in the highlands of the Andes where you need lift
simply because of the altitude. It also gives the Blackhawks some
respect.
Also, this was suggested to me while I was in the field. If you are
going to do fast-rope rappelling operations, you have to come in, hover
over the objective, and get your troops out. Many places in this area
of operation will not be landing zones. You will have to require
rappelling operations to get your troops on the ground and get them out
again.
Another aspect that was alluded to by Senator Dodd is the aspect of
the ability of the Colombian forces to absorb a number of helicopters.
Right now, the State Department has managed to procure for the use of
the Colombians, at least temporarily, 18 Huey helicopters from Canada.
These are ``1-November'' models. Already, that has increased the
aviation capacity potentially of the Colombians by substantial
amounts. They are out finding pilots; they are finding logistical
support.

If we give them 30 Blackhawks, that will stress their logistical
ability to train pilots, to provide mechanics, to provide crews, to
provide the kind of logistic base they need. If we double that by
providing twice as many Hueys, we will put additional pressure on the
logistical base of the Colombian military forces to do the job. That is
something, practically, that we have to consider with respect to this
issue.
What Senator Dodd has suggested is very thoughtful and appropriate,
to make this military decision subject to military judgment and not our
particular judgment.
I was compelled to speak today because I had the chance,
gratuitously, to be at Tres Esquinas and Larandia on Sunday to talk to
the Colombian soldiers who will fly the missions and jump into this
difficult area. I talked to our special forces troops and our military
forces who are advising. They provided information, and it is important
my colleagues understand this information. It is appropriate we should
be considering this amendment, not to direct that the aircraft be one
variety or the other but to ensure that the Department of Defense make
a very careful review based upon some of the issues we have all talked
about, including range, lift capability, the nature of the operations,
the nature of the Colombian military forces, and their capacity to
integrate these platforms quickly into their operations.
I hope this debate accomplishes those missions. I yield the floor.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I urge the Senate to support the
committee's position on this issue.
Mr. DODD. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. STEVENS. Yes, but I have to leave quickly.
Mr. DODD. I would like to attend the ceremony, as well. Perhaps the
leadership could provide a window for those who want to attend that
ceremony.
Mr. STEVENS. It is above my pay grade. I will speak for 2 minutes and
express my position. If the vote occurs while I am gone, people will
see an old bull scratch the ground very hard.
As a practical matter, this position that we have taken is the best
one for Colombia. We looked at this very seriously. This account is
under attack now. Does anyone think year after year after year after
year we will be able to declare an emergency on this account?
We provided the Hueys. They can have two or more times the number of
Hueys for the cost of what the administration wants to do with
Blackhawks. The Blackhawks are fighting machines. They will be the tip
of a sword going into another Vietnam, if we are not careful. What they
need are the Hueys. They need to transport these people. They need to
be able to fight against the drug people. They do not need to get these
so they can fight against the insurgents.
I urge the Senate to realize what we are doing. We are doing our
utmost to increase the tremendous pressure upon the drug operations in
Colombia. We want to do that in a way that Colombia can sustain the
cost without coming back to this Congress year after year after year to
ask for money to maintain what we provided.
Others have spoken about the costs. The Huey is a good machine. We
are upgrading the Huey and providing our own troops for them. There is
no reason for anyone to be ashamed of flying a Huey in combat. But it
is not the type of situation that calls for Blackhawks to be a part of
our operation against the drug lords. What we need to do is provide the
assistance they need and to give them the ability, if they want to
continue this, to operate these machines.

I cannot see why we should start this precedent. I assume Senator
McConnell made the same comments. We have similar situations all over
the world. We are going to be faced in the next decade with trying to
suppress the supply of drugs coming literally from all over the globe.
This is no time to take the frontline item that we have for war-
fighting machines and provide it as assistance to people trying to
suppress drug producers.
I wish I had more time to deal with this because I believe very
strongly that if we go to the Blackhawks--with the cost of operation
per hour, the high maintenance cost, the high cost of continued
operation--we will start a trendline that this budget cannot sustain
into the future. We have to think about this not only in terms of what
we will do now but what it will do in terms of outyear costs to
continue this assistance. It is not a 1-year operation. We will not be
able to stop this drug operation in Colombia in 1 year.
We have done our best. In fact, we have not done it yet. If this
account gets overloaded, I seriously question even surviving the
Senate. We have been warned about that in terms of the level of
support. I believe Senator McConnell and his committee have brought to
us a bill that meets the needs, gives them the assistance, and gives
them the support to carry out their operations against the drug lords
without getting the U.S. in the position of building up a military
force in Colombia to deal with the other problems they face internally.
I hope the Senate agrees with our position.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Inhofe). The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I will join my good friend from Alaska
shortly, but this amendment I have offered says to let the people we
are going to get into the situation decide. Some people think we ought
not be involved with this. I respect their position, but I disagree. If
we are going to get involved with narcotraffickers who are as well
heeled and financed as any military group in the world, if we are going
to do the job right and properly, we ought to let the military people
decide what they need. My amendment says to let the military people
decide what works best.
Let me read what 24 of our aviation experts sent to Colombia
specifically for the purpose of trying to determine what equipment
would work best had to say on the impact of substituting 60 Hueys for
30 Blackhawks, as originally proposed:
The superior troop-carrying capacity and range of the Blackhawk
versus the Huey, coupled with the combat nature of the operations, the
requirement to operate at high altitude areas and the increased
survivability of both aircrew and troops, clearly indicate that the
Blackhawk is the helicopter that should be fielded to Colombia in
supporting the counterdrug effort.

[[Page S5519]]

Additionally, the number of acquired pilots, crew chiefs, gunners,
and mechanics to operate and maintain the Hueys is twice that of the
Blackhawks. Infrastructure requirements, maintenance, building,
parking, and refueling areas, as well as other associated building
requirements, are essentially double to support the 60 Hueys as opposed
to the 30 Blackhawks.
If this issue were to be decided strictly on dollars and cents--put
aside the issue of whether or not one piece of equipment is better than
the next--the 18 Hueys that are there, plus the 60 they talk about
sending, those numbers exceed what it would cost in order to have the
equipment that the military says they need to do the job. These are the
numbers from the military.
I am not suggesting you blindly follow the military in every case.
But my amendment says at least let them make a recommendation as to
what they think is right. It doesn't say you have to take the
Blackhawk. It says make the proper, intelligent decision.
We heard from my colleague from Rhode Island, a graduate of West
Point Academy, who served with distinction in the U.S. military for a
career. He was just in Colombia, along with others, going down to
assess what makes the best sense. He comes back with the same
conclusion: We ought to let the military people decide.
I have been to Colombia many times. I know that terrain, where the
flatlands are, where most of this problem exists. If I can get that
chart here which shows the map of Colombia? Let me make the point
again.

When you get down to the area where most of the narcotraffickers
operate, that is jungle. That is down along that Ecuadorian border, the
Putumayo River. There are no roads here at all. The roads end up here
in the highlands.
The idea that you are going to have the capacity to handle 90
helicopters--they do not have the personnel in Colombia to do that. If
you want to condemn this program to failure, then demand this language
be in this amendment. The change we are offering at least offers this
program a much higher chance of success down the road by allowing 60
Blackhawks, which every military expert who has looked at this says is
what you ought to have to deal with the altitude of the Andes because
of its lift capacity, personnel capacity to be able to move into this
area, and the speed to move in and out.
Again, it seems to me, if you look at the charts, on all the
comparisons here, using 1976 equipment--the last year the Huey was
made--as opposed to a modern piece of equipment is wrong. Unless you
think this is not an issue worth fighting over, if you think you want
to have these narcotraffickers control this country and take over this
place and ship on an hourly basis to this country the drugs that are
killing 50,000 people a year, we ought not support it at all. But if
you are going to do it and you think it is worthy of doing, then do it
right. Do it with the kind of equipment that will guarantee at least a
higher possibility of success, or we will end up doing it ourselves
down the road, which I don't welcome at all.
We now have Colombians who can fly these helicopters or can be
trained to do so. Let them do the job. If we send in inferior equipment
that can't get the job done, the problem gets worse, the situation gets
worse, and then we will be regretting the day we made a political
decision about the Hueys rather than a military decision about what
works best.
I urge colleagues, regardless of their position on whether or not
this is a program they want to support, to support this amendment which
says this decision ought to be left to the people who make the
calculated determinations of what works best. That is all this
amendment does. It does not demand a Blackhawk. It just says make the
decision about what makes the best sense. I will live with whatever
decision that is. But I don't want to have a political decision, I
don't want to be told I have to accept 60 or 90 Hueys, when I know in
Colombia you don't have the personnel to support it. It will take too
long, you will never get it done, and you don't have the capacity to
get the job accomplished.
I urge my colleagues to support the amendment when it comes to a
vote. I think my colleague from Connecticut wants to be heard on this
issue.
I don't know how the chairman of the committee wants to handle this.
I would like to be excused for about an hour to attend a very important
medal ceremony for one of our colleagues.
Mr. McCONNELL. We are not ready to schedule a vote yet, I am told.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, there are United States units that
don't have Blackhawks yet, that will have to wait while Blackhawks are
produced to send to Colombia, which could get by on Hueys. My good
friend from Connecticut has made a good case for a home State product,
the Blackhawk helicopter. The Blackhawk is not made in Kentucky. The
Huey is not made in Kentucky. What I am concerned about, as chairman of
this subcommittee, is two things: No. 1, the fact that even U.S. units
don't have Blackhawks yet and will have to wait, as I just said, while
these are sent to Colombia. And, No. 2 is the cost of operation.

We are not going to have $1 billion to spend on Colombia every year.
This is a unique year in which we are debating whether to spend $1
billion on the drug war in Colombia--an unusual year. But the cost of
operating these Blackhawks, if we go in that direction, is going to
come back every year and that is $1,000 an hour more than operating the
Huey--$1,000 an hour more than operating the Huey.
As the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee just
pointed out, and also the chairman of the Defense Subcommittee of the
Appropriations Committee, the Huey will get the job done for a lower
cost to the United States. The foreign operations account is going to
have to pay for these operational costs, as I just pointed out, not
just this year but the year after that and the year after that and the
year after that. That means we will have to cut into other accounts to
keep these helicopters flying.
That is the reason the subcommittee decided to go with the Huey
because we think the Huey will get the job done at less cost this year,
next year, and in years down the road, which is not to say I am sure
the Colombians would not like to have Blackhawks; I am sure they would.
All of our U.S. units that need them would like to have them, too, and
they don't have them yet. So that is the reason for the recommendation
of the subcommittee.
I hope when we subsequently vote on the Dodd amendment it will be
defeated. Mr. President, with that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the votes
occur in relation to the pending Dodd amendment and the Gorton
amendment beginning at 6:10 p.m., with the first vote in relation to
the Gorton amendment, to be followed by a vote in relation to the Dodd
amendment, with the time between now and 6:10 p.m. to be equally
divided for debate on both amendments, and no second-degree amendments
be in order prior to the votes just described, with 2 minutes between
the two votes for explanation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask the distinguished Senator from
Kentucky, does he have a feeling whether there will be votes after
those votes?
Mr. McCONNELL. I am told the majority leader wants to continue and
try to wrap the bill up tonight.
Mr. LEAHY. I am for that. There may be some difficulty with some of
the amendments coming down. I urge Senators who have amendments, even
if we have to put a couple aside, that they come down and start
debating their amendments.
I think I can speak for both the distinguished chairman and myself on
the pending amendment. There will be no difficulty in having it set
aside for the moment if somebody wants to start debate on another
amendment, especially if it is going to require a rollcall vote. I can
see a situation where it can easily be sequenced following these other
two amendments.
Mr. McCONNELL. I say to my friend from Vermont, as we speak, staff on

[[Page S5520]]

both sides are going over the amendments that were filed prior to the
deadline of 3 p.m. Hopefully, we will be able to process some of those
by agreement during this period between now and 6:10 p.m. I agree with
the Senator from Vermont, we want to make progress. If anybody wants to
come down and offer an amendment that might be contentious and debate
it, we will certainly be glad to see them.
Mr. LEAHY. The point is, we will jointly move to set something aside
so they can debate an amendment, if they wish. I urge that. It will
save us from having debate quite late this evening. In the meantime, we
will try to clear some amendments. Even in that regard, if there are
Senators who have amendments they wish cleared, we can try to do that.
I see the distinguished Senator from Virginia on the floor, one of my
Senators when I am away from home. I yield the floor.
Mr. WARNER. I thank my distinguished colleague.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I very much want to make a statement in
support of the subcommittee's efforts on the funding for the Colombia
operation. Our committee had a hearing on the subject. We looked into
it very carefully. At the appropriate time, I want to be recognized by
the Chair. I need a few more minutes to collect my documents, but I
judge from the managers, I would not be disruptive to what they are
engaged in were I to seek the floor in the near future.
Mr. McCONNELL. I say to my friend from Virginia, there is no time
like the present or the near present. Seeing no one else on the floor
at the moment, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendments Nos. 3529, 3536, 3540, 3544, And 3568, En Bloc

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, we have some more amendments that have
been cleared on both sides. Therefore, en bloc, I call up amendments
Nos. 3529, 3536, 3540, 3544, and 3568.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendments will be
considered en bloc.
The amendments are as follows:

AMENDMENT NO. 3529

(Purpose: To allocate development assistance funds for Habitat for
Humanity International)

On page 12, line 14, before the period insert the
following: ``: Provided further, That of the amount
appropriated or otherwise made available under this heading,
$1,500,000 shall be available only for Habitat for Humanity
International, to be used to purchase 14 acres of land on
behalf of Tibetan refugees living in northern India and for
the construction of a multiunit development for Tibetan
families''.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3536

(Purpose: Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the
Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and Related Programs (NADR)
budget)

On page 140, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following
section:

SEC. ____. NONPROLIFERATION AND ANTI-TERRORISM PROGRAMS.

It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the programs contained in the Department of State's
Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and Related
Programs (NADR) budget line are vital to the national
security of the United States; and
(2) funding for those programs should be restored in any
conference report with respect to this Act to the levels
requested in the President's budget.
____

amendment no. 3540

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate on the importance of
combating mother-to-child transmission of HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan
Africa)

At the appropriate place, add the following:
Sec. . (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
(1) According to the World Health Organization, in 1999,
there were 5.6 million new cases of HIV/AIDS throughout the
world, and two-thirds of those (3.8 million) were in sub-
Saharan Africa.
(2) Sub-Saharan Africa is the only region in the world
where a majority of those with HIV/AIDS--55 percent--are
women.
(3) When women get the disease, they often pass it along to
their children, and over 2 million children in sub-Saharan
Africa are living with HIV/AIDS.
(4) New investments and treatments hold out promise of
making progress against mother-to-child transmission of HIV/
AIDS. For example--
(A) a study in Uganda demonstrated that a new drug could
prevent almost one-half of the HIV transmissions from mothers
to infants, at a fraction of the cost of other treatments;
and
(B) a study of South Africa's population estimated that if
all pregnant women in that country took an antiviral
medication during labor, as many as 110,000 new cases of HIV/
AIDS could be prevented over the next five years in South
Africa alone.
(5) The Technical Assistance, Trade Promotion, and Anti-
Corruption Act of 2000, as approved by the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee on March 23, 2000, ensures that not less
than 8.3 percent of USAID's HIV/AIDS funding is used to
combat mother-to-child transmission.
(b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate
that of the funds provided in this Act, the USAID should
place a high priority on efforts, including providing
medications, to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV/
AIDS.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3544

(Purpose: To require a report on the delivery of humanitarian
assistance to Sudan, and for other purposes)

At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:

SEC. ____. REPORTING REQUIREMENT ON SUDAN.

One hundred and twenty days after the date of enactment of
this Act, the President shall submit a report to the
appropriate congressional committees--
(1) describing--
(A) the areas of Sudan open to the delivery of humanitarian
or other assistance through or from Operation Lifeline Sudan
(in this section referred to as ``OLS''), both in the
Northern and Southern sectors;
(B) the extent of actual deliveries of assistance through
or from OLS to those areas from January 1997 through the
present;
(C) areas of Sudan which cannot or do not receive
assistance through or from OLS, and the specific reasons for
lack or absence of coverage, including--
(i) denial of access by the government of Sudan on a
periodic basis (``flight bans''), including specific times
and duration of denials from January 1997 through the
present;
(ii) denial of access by the government of Sudan on an
historic basis (``no-go'' areas) since 1989 and the reason
for such denials;
(iii) exclusion of areas from the original agreements which
defined the limitations of OLS;
(iv) a determination by OLS of a lack of need in an area of
no coverage;
(v) no request has been made to the government of Sudan for
coverage or deliveries to those areas by OLS or any
participating organization within OLS; or
(vi) any other reason for exclusion from or denial of
coverage by OLS;
(D) areas of Sudan where the United States has provided
assistance outside of OLS since January 1997, and the amount,
extent and nature of that assistance;
(E) areas affected by the withdrawal of international
relief organizations, or their sponsors, or both, due to the
disagreement over terms of the ``Agreement for Coordination
of Humanitarian, Relief and Rehabilitation Activities in the
SPLM Administered Areas'' memorandum of 1999, including
specific locations and programs affected; and
(2) containing a comprehensive assessment of the
humanitarian needs in areas of Sudan not covered or served by
OLS, including but not limited to the Nuba Mountains, Red Sea
Hills, and Blue Nile regions.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3568

(Purpose: To allocate funds to combat trafficking in persons)

On page 20, line 18, before the period insert the
following: ``: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading and made available to support
training of local Kosovo police and the temporary
International Police Force (IPF), not less than $250,000
shall be available only to assist law enforcement officials
better identify and respond to cases of trafficking in
persons''.
On page 24, line 14, before the period insert the
following: ``: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $1,500,000
shall be available only to meet the health and other
assistance needs of victims of trafficking in persons''.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, they have been cleared on both sides of
the aisle. I ask unanimous consent the amendments be agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendments are agreed
to.
The amendments (Nos. 3529, 3536, 3540, 3544, and 3568) were agreed
to.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to reconsider the vote and move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 3521, As Modified, And 3584, As Modified

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send to the desk modifications to
amendments Nos. 3521 and 3584.

[[Page S5521]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell], for Mr.
Coverdell, for himself and Mr. Leahy, proposes an amendment
numbered 3521, as modified.

The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:

SEC. . PERU.

(a) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate
that:
(1) the Organization of American States (OAS) Electoral
Observer Mission, led by Eduardo Stein, deserves the
recognition and gratitude of the United States for having
performed an extarodinary service in promoting representative
democracy in the Americas by working to ensure free and fair
elections in Peru and exposing efforts of the Government of
Peru to manipulate the national elections in April and May of
2000 to benefit the president in power.
(2) the Government of Peru failed to establish the
conditions for free and fair elections--both for the April 9
election as well as the May 28 run-off--by not taking
effective steps to correct the ``insufficiencies,
irregularities, inconsistencies, and inequities'' documented
by the OAS Electoral Observation Mission.
(3) the United States Government should support the work of
the OAS high-level mission, and that such mission should base
its specific recommendations on the views of civil society in
Peru regarding commitments by their government to respect
human rights, the rule of law, the independence and
constitutional role of the judiciary and national congress,
and freedom of expression and journalism.
(4) in accordance with P.L. 106-186, the United States must
review and modify as appropriate its political, economic, and
military relations with Peru and work with other democracies
in this hemisphere and elsewhere toward a restoration of
democracy in Peru.
(b) Report.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall submit to
the appropriate committees of Congress a report evaluating
United States political, economic, and military relations
with Peru, in accordance with P.L. 106-186. Such report
should review, but not be limited to, the following.
(1) The effectiveness of providing United States assistance
to Peru only through independent non-governmental
organizations or international organizations;
(2) Scrutiny of all United States anti-narcotics assistance
to Peru and the effectiveness of providing such assistance
through legitimate civilian agencies and the appropriateness
of providing this assistance to any military or intelligence
units that are known to have violated human rights,
suppressed freedom of expression or undermined free and fair
elections.
(3) The need to increase support to Peru through
independent non-governmental organizations and international
organizations to promote the rule of law, separation of
powers, political pluralism, and respect to human rights, and
to evaluate termination of support for entities that have
cooperated with the undemocratic maneuvers of the executive
branch; and
(4) The effectiveness of United States policy of supporting
loans or other assistance for Peru through international
financial institutions (such as the World Bank and Inter-
American Development Bank), and an evaluation of terminating
support to entities of the Government of Peru that have
willfully violated human rights, suppressed freedom of
expression, or undermined free and fair elections.
(5) The extent to which Peru benefits from the Andean Trade
Preferences Act and the ramifications of conditioning
participation in that program on respect for the rule of law
and representative democracy.
(c) Determination.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the President shall determine
and report to the appropriate committees of Congress whether
the Government of Peru has made substantial progress in
improving its respect for human rights, the rule of law
(including fair trials of civilians), the independence and
constitutional role of the judiciary and national congress,
and freedom of expression and independent journalism.
(d) Prohibition.--If the President determines and reports
pursuant to subsection (c) that the Government of Peru has
not made substantial progress, no funds appropriated by this
Act may be made available for assistance for the Government
of Peru, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the
United States executive directors to the international
financial institutions to use the voice and vote of the
United States to oppose loans to the Government of Peru,
except loans to support basic human needs.
(e) Exception.--The prohibition in subsection (d) shall not
apply to humanitarian assistance, democracy assistance, anti-
narcotics assistance, assistance to support binational peace
activities involving Peru and Ecuador, assistance provided by
the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, or assistance
provided by the Trade and Development Agency.
(f) Waiver.--The President may waive subsection (d) for
periods not to exceed 90 days if he certifies to the
appropriate committees of Congress that doing so is important
to the national interests of the United States and will
promote the respect for human rights and the rule of law in
Peru.
(g) Definition.--For the purposes of this section,
``appropriate committees of Congress'' means the Committee on
Appropriations and the Committee on Foreign Relations in the
Senate and the Committee on Appropriations and Committee on
International Relations in the House of Representatives. For
the purposes of this section, ``humanitarian assistance''
includes but is not limited to assistance to support health
and basic education.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] for Mr. Abraham,
proposes an amendment numbered 3584, as modified.

The amendment, as further modified, is as follows:

On page 14, line 4, strike ``$15,000,000'' and insert
$8,000,000, of which $3,000,000 shall be made available from
Economic Support Fund assistance fun assistance''.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, these amendments that have been
modified have been approved by both sides. I ask unanimous consent that
the amendments be agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The
amendments are agreed to.
The amendments (Nos. 3521 and 3584), as modified, were agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to reconsider the vote and move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator would withhold.
Mr. McCONNELL. I withhold.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank the managers for their efforts on
this very important piece of legislation. They will have my support.
Mr. President, I have been associated with this very important piece
of legislation providing aid to Colombia since it was first recommended
to the Congress of the United States.
I commend the administration and, in particular, General McCaffrey. I
have had an opportunity, as chairman of the Committee on Armed Services
and, indeed, for some 22 years to work with General McCaffrey,
particularly during the period of the Gulf War in 1991 when he showed
extraordinary leadership as a troop commander in that decisive battle
to turn back Saddam Hussein's threats.
Now he has volunteered, once again, as an American patriot, to take
on this somewhat thankless task of dealing with the almost insoluble
problems of the importing into this country of drugs. This is one
effort by the general--indeed, the administration, and others--to try
to curtail this illegal importation of drugs.
I heard a colleague earlier today concerned about: Well, we are not
spending enough money here at home. My quick research and consultation
with other colleagues indicates that I think some $500 million in
taxpayers' money has been added by this Congress to the
Administration's budget requests for domestic programs over the past 3
years. This money has been expended in an effort to educate and to, in
every other way, help Americans, first, avoid the use of drugs and
then, if misfortune does strike an individual and their families, to
try to deal with the tragic consequences.
So I rise to speak in support of the U.S. counternarcotics activities
in the Andean ridge and neighboring countries, as provided for in this
bill, and to address the impact of drug trafficking on the stability of
the region.
The importance of this region to the United States cannot be
overestimated. I will give you one example. The region provides the
United States with almost 20 percent of the supply of foreign oil. The
number is likely to increase with the recent discovery, in Colombia's
eastern plains, of reserves estimated at 2 million barrels. The ongoing
controversy over the price of gas by the American motorists at this
very moment is reason to help Colombia fight this problem.
When I say help this nation, I have been privileged to meet with
their President in the course of his visits here, and also meet with
the Foreign Minister, the Ambassador--the very courageous Ambassador
from Colombia to the United States--and many others

[[Page S5522]]

from that nation. And, indeed, I have met with private citizens here in
America who have had their origin and background in Colombia. So I have
talked to a wide range of individuals.
This legislation is the right thing. I commend all those, certainly
here in the Senate, and particularly those in the current Government of
Colombia, as well as the citizens who have worked to foster this
legislation.
Mr. President, to reiterate I rise to speak in support of United
States counter-narcotics activities in the Andean Ridge and neighboring
countries as provided for in this bill, and the impact of drug
trafficking on the stability of the region. The importance of this
region to the United States cannot be overstated.
This region provides the United States with almost 20 percent of its
supply of foreign oil--a number that is likely to increase with the
recent discovery in Colombia's eastern plains of reserves that are
estimated at two billion barrels. The ongoing controversy over the
price of gasoline that the American motorist is paying only serves to
reinforce the importance of this commodity in our everyday life and
economy.
In sharp and tragic contrast is the threat from this same region
posed by illegal drugs to American citizens on the streets of our
cities and in the playgrounds of our schools. An estimated 80 percent
of the cocaine and 90 percent of the heroin smuggled out of Colombia is
destined for the United States. Sadly these drugs have caused, directly
and indirectly the death of 50,000 Americans each year and the loss of
billions of dollars from America's economy.
I am also very concerned about the impact that narco-trafficking in
Colombia is having on the democratically elected governments in the
region. Many of these countries have only recently transitioned from
military dictatorships to democracies--and as recent events have
demonstrated--these democracies are fragile. The ``spill over'' effect
from the narco-trafficking in Colombia could prove enormously
destabilizing to the surrounding nations.
Additionally, this region is home to the Panama Canal, a waterway of
significant importance to America. With the United States no longer
maintaining a permanent military presence in Panama, it is crucial that
we be vigilant against any threat as a consequence of drug trafficking
our friends in the Panamanian Government and the Canal itself.
The President's recent request for a $1.6 billion supplemental aid
package to assist Colombia and its neighbors in their counter-narcotics
efforts, and the funding which will be appropriated through this and
other acts for that purpose, represents an increased U.S. role in the
region's difficulties. The rampant violent criminal activities of the
various terrorist organizations and paramilitary groups involved in
narco-trafficking, including kidnaping and murder, continue to
undermine the stability of the democratically elected governments of
the region. This is particularly true in Colombia.
The proposed aid package, much of which will be provided to Colombia
in order to fund portions of the $7.5 billion Plan Colombia, represents
one of the most aggressive foreign policy actions of the United States
in Latin America in recent history. However, the funding contained in
this package is only a small part of our overall commitment to this
problem. We already spend hundreds of millions of dollars and deploy
hundreds of military personnel to the region every year. In addition to
the proposed increase in funding, our support for Plan Colombia will
require us to deploy many more military personnel in order to train
Colombia law enforcement and military personnel. This is a matter of
grave concern for the Senate Armed Services Committee, which has as its
primary focus the safety and well-being of the men and women who
proudly serve in the Armed Forces.
The decision by the Congress to support Plan Colombia and an
increased American involvement in the region was not to be an easy one
to make. Some have compared the situation in Colombia to Vietnam, and
warn against such a U.S. military involvement in an internal matter.
Others believe that such involvement is in our vital interest and warn
of the consequences if we refuse to engage.
On April 4th of this year, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a
hearing on this issue in order to explore the problem and determine
what, if any, assistance was appropriate. Our witnesses at that hearing
included Brian Sheridan, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special
Operations and Low Intensity Conflict; Rand Beers, Assistant Secretary
of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs;
General Charles Wilhelm, Commander-in-Chief, United States Southern
Command; and Mr. Peter Romero, Acting Assistant Secretary of State for
Western Hemisphere Affairs.
Mr. President, at that hearing I asked our witnesses five questions I
believe to be essential in making a decision regarding what role the
United States should play in this effort:
(1) Is it in our vital national security interest to become involved?
(2) Will the American people support this involvement?
(3) Can we make a difference if we become involved?
(4) Will American involvement create a reaction amongst the people of
the region that is counter to our interest? and
(5) Are those we propose to help committed to achieving the same
goals we support?
These are not easy questions but the testimony of the witnesses left
me to conclude that it is in our interest, that we can make a
difference, and that we will have the support of the people of the
United States and the people of the region if we take appropriate and
effective action to help the democratically elected governments of this
region regain control of their sovereign territory.
Mr. President, this bill represents that appropriate action and I
believe that our Armed Forces will ensure that it is effective.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the time in the
quorum call be divided equally to both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my time come
off of the time of the Senator from Kentucky.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, we will be voting in just a few moments in
regard to the Gorton amendment. I rise to talk about the bill but also
to oppose, with due respect, the Gorton amendment.
What is at the heart of this debate on the emergency aid package to
Colombia, the very essence of why we need to help restore stability in
Colombia and help combat the violent insurgents, is the urgent need to
keep drugs off our streets in the United States and out of the hands of
our children. That is what this debate is all about; that is what this
vote on the amendment is all about.
As my colleagues know, this emergency package would provide $934
million to support Colombian efforts to eliminate drugs at the source,
improve human rights programs, improve rule of law programs, and
increase economic development. The fact is, there is an emergency in
our neighbor to the south, in the country of Colombia. This country,
this democracy, is embroiled in a destabilizing and brutal civil war, a
civil war that has gone on for decades with a death toll reaching at
least 35,000.

[[Page S5523]]

Today, we have heard a lot of speeches about human rights abuses in
Colombia and what has taken place in the past. In that context, I
remind my colleagues of the fact the current aid package that the
Senator from Kentucky has put together is based on legislation Senators
Coverdell, Grassley, Graham, and I introduced last fall, which was
developed with the protection of human rights in mind. It is an
integral part of this bill. Our colleagues have a right to be concerned
with past human rights abuses. The way to deal with this is through the
conditions that are written all through this bill.
My office met with numerous human rights organizations. We worked
closely with Senator Leahy's office, and many others, to ensure that
safeguards were put in place to prevent U.S. assistance from being used
by those in Colombia who do not respect human rights.
Many of those original provisions have been incorporated into the
package before us, such as funds to monitor the use of U.S. assistance
by the Colombian armed forces and Colombian national police; funds to
support efforts to investigate and prosecute members of both the armed
forces and the paramilitary organizations involved in human rights
abuses. It also contains funds to address the social and economic needs
of the displaced population in Colombia.
Our provisions were not only developed to punish human rights abuses
in Colombia but, more importantly, they were developed to prevent those
abuses.
The fact is that this Congress places such a strong emphasis on the
protection of human rights that the legislation before us today would
provide more funding for human rights--$25 million to be exact--than
was in the President's requested budget. It is more than the President
requested.
This Congress is committed to the protection of human rights and will
continue to monitor the assistance we provide to ensure that every
penny is used for its intended purpose, which is the respect for and
protection of human rights.
Many of us on the floor today, and those watching in their offices,
have spent a lot of time and energy to expel communism and bring
democracy to this hemisphere and to bring a rule of law and human
rights protection to this hemisphere. The 1980s were a true success
story for the ideals we believe in and for our attempt to spread those
ideals and beliefs in democracy throughout this great hemisphere. The
people of this hemisphere paid a very heavy price, but I think that
price was worth paying to achieve the spread of democracy throughout
the hemisphere. We brought democracy and we brought opportunity to our
neighbors.
Today, the drug trade--not communism--is now the dominant threat to
peace and freedom in the Americas. It threatens the sovereignty of the
Colombian democracy and the continued prosperity and security of our
entire hemisphere. Tragically, our own drug habit--America's drug
habit--is what is fueling this threat in our hemisphere. It is our own
country's drug use that is causing the instability and violence in
Colombia and in the Andean region.
The sad fact is that the cultivation of coca in Colombia has doubled,
from over 126,000 acres in 1995 to 300,000 in 1999. Poppy cultivation
also has grown to such an extent that it is now the source of the
majority of heroin consumed in the United States. Not surprisingly, as
drug availability has increased in the United States, drug use among
adolescents has also increased. To make matters worse, the Colombian
insurgents see the drug traffickers as a financial partner who will
sustain their illicit cause, which only makes the FARC and ELN--these
guerrillas--grow stronger and stronger day by day. So the sale of drugs
in the United States today not only promotes the drug business, but it
also fuels the antidemocratic insurgents in Colombia.
Some may ask, why does Colombia matter? Why are we taking good tax
dollars to help our neighbors to the south? I think the answer is
simple. It matters because Colombia is shipping their drugs into the
United States. It matters because the drug trade is a source of rampant
lawlessness and violence within Colombia itself--violence and
lawlessness, which has destabilized that country and now threatens the
entire Andean region.
Fortunately, in the last few years, Congress has had the foresight to
recognize the escalating threats, and we have been working to restore
our drug-fighting capability beyond our shores. Many of us who have
worked very tirelessly on the Colombian assistance package this year
also worked together just a few short years ago to pass the Western
Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act, which is now the law of the land. This
3-year plan is designed to restore international eradication,
interdiction, and crop alternative development funding. With this law,
which we passed on a bipartisan basis, we have already made a $800
million downpayment--$200 million of which represents the first
substantial investment in Colombia for counternarcotics activities.
The emergency assistance package that we have before us this
afternoon is based on a blueprint that Senator Coverdell and I
developed and introduced last October--3 months before the
administration unveiled its proposal. As our plan, the emergency
assistance package the Senator from Kentucky has crafted goes beyond
counternarcotics assistance and crop alternative development programs
in Colombia. It goes beyond Colombia and targets other Latin-American
countries, including Bolivia, Peru, Panama, and Ecuador.
This regional approach is the only approach, it is the right
approach, and it is critical. Both Peru and Bolivia have made enormous
progress in reducing drug cultivation in their respective countries,
and they have done it with the help, candidly, of our assistance, and
it has worked. Now, an emphasis only on the Colombian drug problems
risks the obvious ``spillover'' effect of Colombia's drug trade
shifting to adjacent countries in the region.
Some of my colleagues have taken the floor today to express hesitancy
and reluctance and opposition to this assistance package. I wish to
take a moment to direct my comments specifically to them and
specifically to some of my colleagues on this side of the aisle.
Our Western Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act was an attempt to change
the direction of our national drug policy--a drug policy that clearly
was not working. We took that first step. Today, we must take the
second step. We passed that very important legislation because we had
to; we had to because the current administration, unfortunately, had
presided over the literal dismantling of our international drug-
fighting capability.
Let me explain. When President George Bush left the White House, we
were spending approximately one-quarter of our total Federal antidrug
budget on international drug interdiction, either on law enforcement in
other countries, on our own Customs, on the DEA, and on crop
eradication. Basically, it was taking that huge chunk of the Federal
antidrug budget and spending it to try to stop drugs from ever reaching
our shores. It was a balanced approach and it made sense.
After 6 years of the Clinton Presidency, that percentage of our
budget--that one-quarter of our total budget--was reduced to 13 to 14
percent, which is a dramatic reduction in the percentage of money we
are spending on international drug interdiction.
That is why many of us in this body--on a bipartisan basis, in both
the House and here in the Senate--worked to pass the Western Hemisphere
Drug Elimination Act. Speaker Hastert, before he was Speaker, played a
major role in working on the House version of this bill, as did many,
many others.
We passed that bill. It became law. It has made a difference. We have
begun to at least reverse the direction of our foreign policy. We need
to get back to that balanced approach, where we spend money on
international interdiction, domestic law enforcement, treatment, and
education. It has to be a balanced approach.
We passed the bill, it became law, and we started to reverse that
policy. The initiative for that came, quite candidly, from this side of
the aisle, with support from the other side of the aisle. We saw what
the administration was doing and we said that the policy had to change.
We said we needed to put more money into interdiction, and that is
exactly what we did. We said, candidly, we needed a balanced policy

[[Page S5524]]

and we began to move in that direction. Now, today, we need to build on
that effort.
We need to build on that effort, which today is focused primarily on
the current crisis that we see in Colombia. Senators Coverdell,
Grassley, Feinstein, and others worked with me to put together a
package specifically dealing with the situation in Colombia.
I ask my colleagues to look at the big picture. Step back from the
debate about this amendment and look at where we are going as a
country. Think about what is in the best interest not of Colombia, but
of the United States. This assistance package before us, which my
colleague from Kentucky has put together, was put together because
Colombia is our neighbor, and what affects our neighbor to the south
affects us. We have a very real interest in helping to stabilize
Colombia and keeping it democratic, keeping it as our friend, keeping
it as our trading partner, and keeping its drugs off our streets.

Colombia faces a crisis that is different than any crisis that any
country has ever faced before in the history of the world. Many
countries have faced guerrilla movements in the past few decades, but
no country has ever faced guerrillas with as much money as the
Colombian guerrillas have. I don't know of any country that has ever
faced a guerrilla movement supported by so much illegal drug money. A
synergistic relationship is involved between the drug dealers and the
guerrillas; each one benefits from the other; each one takes care of
the other. While this is a crisis that Colombia faces, it is a crisis
driven by those who consume drugs in our country, and we must admit
that it is a crisis that directly impacts all of us in the United
States. It directly impacts you; it directly impacts me, our children,
and our grandchildren.
I ask my colleagues to really consider the great human tragedy that
Colombia is today. I ask my colleagues to remember how we got here, and
to remember what role this side of the aisle, with help from the other
side, played in trying to deal with the Colombian problem, and what
role we played in trying to increase the money we were spending and the
resources we were providing to stop drugs from ever coming into to our
country.
The emergency aid package before us today is in the best interests of
the Colombian-Andean region. There is no doubt about that. But, more
importantly, and more significantly for this body and for the vote we
are about to cast, it is in the best interest of the United States.
It is clearly something we have to do. It may be tempting on the
Gorton amendment to say: Look. Why don't we just take that money? We
don't need to send it to Colombia. We don't need to send it down there.
What do we care about what goes on in Colombia? Let's keep it here,
spend it here, and apply it to the national debt.
I understand how people may come to the floor and say that. I
understand how people may come to the floor and think that and maybe
even vote that way. But I think in the long run it would be a tragic
mistake.
If we are trying to make an analogy, let me be quite candid. The
analogy isn't any long-term involvement in the United States. The
analogy shouldn't be to Bosnia; it shouldn't be to Vietnam; It
shouldn't even be Kosovo. The analogy is what happened in the Central
Americas in the 1980s.
Quite candidly, many people on this side of the aisle and on the
other side were directly involved in trying to make sure democracy
triumphed in Central America. We were successful because people took
chances. People cast tough votes. People said we care. Today, when you
travel through Central America, you find democracies. I have had the
opportunity within the last several years to do that, and to travel to
most every Central American country. No, things are not perfect. But
each of those countries is moving towards more democracy. Each of those
countries is moving towards more market-driven economies. Each of those
countries has a chance to develop a middle class.
That is the analogy. The United States cared. We were involved. The
people there got the job done.
Colombia faces a very difficult challenge. Will this be the only time
Members of the Senate are asked to vote on this and to send money to
deal with this? Of course not. We all know that. This is a commitment,
and it is probably going to be somewhat of a long commitment. But I
think it is clearly in our national interest.
We vote today not to assist Colombia. We vote today really to assist
ourselves because what happens in Colombia directly impacts the United
States--whether it is trade, whether it is illegal immigration, or
whether it is drugs coming into this country. What happens in that
region of the world has a direct impact on people in Cleveland, on
people in Cincinnati, or any other State, or any city in the United
States. We vote in our self-interest today for this package. We vote in
our national self-interest, I believe, to vote down the Gorton
amendment.
Mr. President, I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Voinovich). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I rise today to express my serious
concerns about the foreign operations bill that is before us. I am
concerned, and I believe that many of my colleagues will be concerned,
about what is in this bill. And I am even more concerned about what is
not in it.
What is here in this bill, is an extremely expensive package of
support to the Colombian military, designated, of course, as emergency
spending. I recognize that Colombia is a country in crisis. I believe
that it is in the national interest of the United States to help
Colombia emerge from that crisis and into an era in which basic human
rights and the rule of law are firmly entrenched in the fabric of
Colombian society.
I recognize that we all share an interest in fighting the terrible
impact that illegal drugs have on our own society and in our own
communities. So I have made a very serious effort to evaluate this
initiative over a number of months. I have heard the perspectives of my
constituents, of the business community, of human rights activists, and
of the administration. I have also heard from Colombian civic groups
and labor unions and from the Colombian government itself. In the end,
I remain deeply skeptical about the wisdom of this undertaking.
My primary concerns about the proposed package of assistance to
Colombia are two-fold. First, I am concerned about the degree to which
this package involves the United States in a counter-insurgency
campaign in Colombia. The aim of our assistance to the Colombian
military would be to combat narcotics traffickers, I have no doubt--but
its primary use would be to wage war against the rebels who control the
south. Our country's history teaches us something about how easy it is
to get stuck in such situations, about how seductive arguments to
increase our involvement might become after we invest massive resources
in this phase of the counter-insurgency campaign. It troubles me that,
because of the drug-related elements of the Colombia issue, we in this
body are not, perhaps, walking into this scheme with our eyes wide open
to these dangers.
But my primary concern, Mr. President, is the impact that Plan
Colombia could have on the human rights of Colombians. The Colombian
military, which this package of assistance would directly support, has
been involved in serious human rights abuses and has a record of
collaborating with the murderous paramilitary forces that terrorize
Colombian citizens. The package in the foreign operations
appropriations bill seems, in the words of the Economist magazine, to
``merely bolt three shiny new antidrugs battalions on to an abusive and
unreformed military force.'' That action would escalate a war in which
civilians bear the brunt of the violence. I know that Senator Leahy has
worked hard to establish human rights conditions for the use of this
assistance. But I am not at all certain that it is appropriate for the
United States to engage the Colombian military to this degree at this
time.

I note that the Senator from Vermont has a point when he questions

[[Page S5525]]

the emergency designation for this spending package. Colombia has been
in crisis for some time. But of course, the emergency designation frees
this body from fiscal discipline--discipline, Mr. President, that we
badly need.
In contrast, for a genuine emergency, for the devastating flooding in
southern Africa, this bill provides only one-eighth, one eighth, of the
administration's request. It was not so long ago, that the entire
country was moved by video and photographs of the people of
southeastern Africa, clinging to life in trees and rooftops as flood
waters rushed past them. These floods were particularly tragic because
the country most seriously affected by them, Mozambique, has made
significant strides toward recovery from its long and brutal civil war.
Though the country is still affected by extreme poverty, in recent
years Mozambique has enjoyed exceptional rates of economic growth.
While more needs to be done, the country has improved its record with
regard to basic human rights. Mr. President, the people of Mozambique
have been fighting for a better future. This kind of disaster comes at
a terrible time, and it will require the assistance of the
international community to help the people of Mozambique to hold to the
opportunities that lay before them before the waters rose.
And an appropriate level of funding for the communities ravaged by
flooding in southern Africa is just the beginning. Even a cursory
glance will indicate that there is a great deal that is not in this
appropriations bill.
The news is not entirely bad. I applaud the increased funding levels
to combat the global HIV/AIDS crisis, which I believe is one of the
most important international issues that this country faces in this new
millennium, although I would still like to see that level increase.
And I am pleased to see provisions linking the resumption of certain
military and security assistance programs for Indonesia to key
conditions--conditions which bolster the position of reformers in the
new government by requiring real accountability for human rights abuses
and real cooperation with the international community on matters
relating to East Timorese refugees. On this note, I would point out to
my colleagues the fact that UNHCR personnel recently suspended
activities in three refugee camps in West Timor because the security
situation in these camps, where military-backed militias continue their
campaign of intimidation and destabilization, has made it impossible to
for humanitarian workers to continue to do their jobs. Provisions like
those included in this bill are still critically important as are the
more comprehensive provisions of a bill that I have introduced, S.
2621, the East Timor Repatriation and Security Act of 2000.
Despite the laudable elements, this bill funds only $75 million of
the administration's $262 million debt relief request--and that's
excluding the $210 million supplemental request, which also goes
unfunded. This bill barely addresses the crushing debt burden that
stands as an obstacle to growth and development throughout much of the
developing world.
This bill allocates only $85 million for peacekeeping operations.
That is a sizable cut. It is likely to threaten one of the most logical
and far-sighted initiatives that we have in this area, Mr. President,
the African Crisis Response Initiative, or ACRI, which trains African
militaries to help them to become more effective in working to secure
stability and share the global burden of peacekeeping.
This bill cuts two of the most important accounts for international
development aid, the ESF account and the World Bank IDA account, below
fiscal year 2000 levels.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has found that the U.S.,
when compared to twenty other donor nations worldwide devotes the
smallest portion of its national resources to development aid--the
smallest portion by far. The typical donor country in the study
contributed more than three times the share of national resources that
the U.S. contributes. In fact, the U.S. fails--and fails miserably--to
contribute the U.N. target level of even point-seven-percent--not seven
percent, but seven-tenths of one percent--in aid to the developing
world. The Center found that, using a number of different sources, the
level of U.S. development aid in fiscal year 2001 would be equal to its
lowest level since the end of World War II, measured as a share of the
economy. That conclusion refers to the Administration's request, a
request that this bill falls $1.7 billion below the President's
request. I believe that we must exercise more foresight and that we
must re-think our priorities to make more room for the world around us
and for the global context in which our great nation will operate in
this new century.
I believe strongly in fiscal discipline. I believe in governing
within our means. I know that means tough choices. But I also know some
of the appropriations bills we have just passed and no doubt will see
more of the same as we consider spending in fiscal year 2001. Yet we
continue the disturbing trend, a trend that I believe runs counter to
our national interest and counter to our national identity, of turning
our back on the rest of the world.
I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 3517

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I wish to speak in opposition to the
amendment offered by the Senator from Washington. Is there time
remaining on that issue?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont controls the time,
and there are 17 minutes.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am sorry. I was distracted. What is the
Senator from Florida asking?
Mr. GRAHAM. Is the Senator controlling the time in opposition to the
amendment of the Senator from Washington?
Mr. LEAHY. Well, by default I am. Would the Senator like some time?
Mr. GRAHAM. Yes. I request 8 minutes.
Mr. LEAHY. I yield 8 minutes to my good friend, the senior Senator
from Florida.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I have spoken earlier this afternoon on
the issue of Colombia in the context of the amendment offered by the
Senator from Minnesota. But now that we have another amendment relative
to this provision within the foreign operations appropriations bill, I
am pleased to have been afforded this opportunity to speak a second
time.
I believe that the fundamental thrust of the amendment offered by the
Senator from Washington, which would cut all but $200 million of the
recommended appropriations for the United States share of the financing
plan in Colombia, would essentially eviscerate not only the U.S.
participation but would probably eliminate the prospects of other
nations, that see themselves looking to the United States for
leadership in terms of dealing with the crisis in Colombia, and would
probably have a very destabilizing effect on Colombia's stated
intention to provide more than half of the $7.5 billion cost of the
comprehensive plan in Colombia.
Essentially, what we would be saying, by adopting this amendment, is
that we are prepared to see Colombia continue in the almost death
spiral of downward direction in which it has been in for the past many
months.
I would like to first point out what are some of the national
interests of the United States that would be sacrificed if we were to
allow that to occur. Of course, the most fundamental sacrifice would be
the loss of an effective democratic partner in the efforts to build
stability within the Western Hemisphere. Colombia is the longest
continuous democracy on the continent of South America. It is a country
that other countries, which are relatively new democracies, look to for
leadership and example.
What a horrendous consequence it would be if, by our lack of
responding to the call for help at this critical time, we were to be
the principal agent of converting this nation of over half a

[[Page S5526]]

century of democracy into a failed state.
There are also consequences to the region, particularly the Andean
region. That is a region that is already in trouble, as I know the
Presiding Officer is well aware.
There is a new and untested government in Venezuela. We have, in
Ecuador, the first successful military coup in Latin America in almost
two decades. Peru is in the midst of a very contentious election
aftermath which in many quarters has been called incredible in the
sense of not being a credible election.

Even Bolivia, which has been a source of stability, had to impose
essentially a period of martial law. And on the north side, we have
Panama, which has recently been given full control of the Panama Canal,
and where there are great concerns about the stability of that country,
and particularly its vulnerability to drug traffickers.
So here Colombia sits, in the middle of this very vulnerable,
fractious part of our hemisphere. If it goes down, it will have
enormous spillover effects, and the consequences will be dire for U.S.
interests.
What we most think about when we hear the word ``Colombia'' is drugs.
Colombia has become an even greater source of drugs due, in part, to
the success of our efforts in Peru and Bolivia in reducing coca
production, but also, unfortunately, due, in large part, to the fact
that we now have a marriage between the narcotraffickers, the
guerrillas, and the paramilitaries who are all working together in
various places in Colombia, particularly in the southern most regions,
to have contributed to a doubling, maybe soon a tripling, of drug
production in that nation over the last decade.
Colombia is also an important economic partner of the United States.
It has one of the larger economies in Latin America, and it has been a
significant trading partner for the United States.
Colombia has had a long period not only of democracy but also of
sustained economic growth. It was not until 3 or 4 years ago that the
record of every year being better than the last was broken in terms of
the economy of Colombia. It was able to avoid a series of economic
crises in South America and be a solid bastion of economic stability.
That pattern is now broken, with 20 percent unemployment, a 3- to 5-
percent drop in gross domestic product, and an outflow of investment.
Finally, we have a national interest in terms of the people of
Colombia believing that their future and their hope is in Colombia, and
that they do not have to flee and become another diaspora in the United
States.
There has been substantial out-migration, oftentimes of the people
with the very skills that are going to be necessary to restore the
democracy and economy in Colombia.
When I was in Bogota, in December of last year, I was told that if
you wanted to apply for a visa to leave Colombia, even as a tourist or
for one of the standard visas, it took 10 months to get an appointment
to meet with the U.S. consulate official to apply to get a visa. That
is how backlogged they are because of the number of people who are
trying to legally leave the country. One can imagine if these
conditions of violence and economic turmoil continue how many people
will be leaving illegally from Colombia with the United States as their
primary destination.

We have a lot at stake. This is not a trivial issue with which we are
dealing. I hope just as we, by a very strong vote, rejected previous
propositions that would have diluted our capacity to be a good neighbor
on this critical issue, that we will do so again in defeating the
amendment offered by the Senator from Washington.
Once we have acted, we still will have some work to do, in particular
work to do in terms of internationalizing the friends of Colombia to be
a strong support group to continue this effort, remembering that 30
percent of Plan Colombia is going to be paid by other than the United
States or Colombia--the Colombians have yet to identify who will pick
up that 30 percent of the cost--and that we must put greater emphasis
on the economic recovery of Colombia, which I hope will include items
such as bringing parity to the Andean pact nations vis-a-vis the
recently adopted increase in trade preferences for the Caribbean Basin
and extending the Andean trade preference to the year 2008 in order to
give investors greater confidence.
There is important work to do today, important work to do tomorrow.
The goal is to be a good neighbor and contribute to the salvation of a
very good friend of the United States, Colombia, at a time of dire
need.

Amendment No. 369

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Smith of Oregon). The Senator from
Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the
first vote begin at 6:15, with the time between now and 6:15 divided
equally between the Senator from Connecticut and the Senator from
Washington.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The
Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank the Chair and my friend and colleague from
Kentucky.
Mr. President, I rise to support the amendment offered by my friend
and colleague from Connecticut. I am proud to be a cosponsor of that
amendment. I respectfully oppose the amendment offered by my friend and
colleague from the State of Washington.
As has been amply testified to here on the floor today, Colombia is
in a crisis that includes a flourishing drug trade emanating from that
country, an aggressive guerrilla movement spreading within it, right-
wing paramilitary operations, and human rights abuses on all sides. All
of this represents a fundamental threat to democratic government, the
rule of law and economic prosperity in Colombia, and undermines
stability in the region. It also, closer to home, results in the sad
reality of a continued massive drug flow into these United States.
There has been literally an explosion of cocaine and heroin production
in Colombia, and too much of it ends up in our country.
The democratically elected leader of Colombia, President Pastrana,
has urgently asked for our assistance and has shown strong leadership
in developing a long-term comprehensive strategy for dealing with the
multifaceted crisis his country faces.
The United States is not pushing its way into this situation, nor are
we attempting to impose an outside solution. The Colombian Government
quite simply cannot carry out these constructive plans it has without
substantial help from its friends abroad. Our Government has quite
responsibly pledged that the United States will make a major
contribution to this critical effort, and I am convinced that is in our
national interest to do so. The administration's budget request for
what has become known as Plan Colombia seeks to help that country and
other nations in the region tackle the issues of the drug trade,
guerrilla and paramilitary violence, human rights abuses, internally
displaced people, and economic deterioration.
This assistance package would allow for the purchase of 30 Blackhawk
helicopters to do the essential job of transporting counter narcotics
battalions into southern Colombia. These Blackhawks are fast, they have
tremendous capacity, and they are well suited for long-range
operations. Unfortunately, the Senate version of the foreign operations
appropriations bill eliminates the funding for the Blackhawks and
replaces them with twice as many of the slower, less capable Huey II
helicopters. While the Huey II is an improvement over the 1960s vintage
Huey helicopter, it does not have the same performance capabilities,
including range, speed, lift, or survivability, at any altitude as does
the Blackhawk.
The Colombian Army itself chose the Blackhawk to meet its long-term
requirements for all of its forces and believes it is the best solution
for providing helicopter support to the newly formed counternarcotics
battalions. The Blackhawk would allow the Colombians to put more troops
on the ground, more quickly and from greater distances, allowing for a
higher initial entry of the battalions and for more rapid
reinforcement, all necessary to achieve success against opponents on
the ground. For some missions in the mountains at high altitudes, the
Huey II simply will not work at all.
In sum, the Colombians have concluded that the Blackhawks best suit
their need for counter drug missions,

[[Page S5527]]

which is at the heart of our American interest in this aid package.
Both General McCaffrey and General Wilhelm have strongly concurred.
In addition, in May, a team of 24 U.S. Army aviation experts was sent
to Colombia to conduct an assessment of the operational effectiveness
and support requirements of the Blackhawks versus the Huey IIs in
Colombia. In a preliminary report on its finding, the team said:

The superior troop carrying capacity and range of the UH-
60L, or Blackhawk, versus the Huey II, coupled with the
combat nature of operation, limited size of landing and
pick up zones within the area of operations, the
requirement to operate in high altitude areas and the
increased survivability to both aircrew and troops,
clearly indicated that the Blackhawk is the helicopter
that should be fielded to Colombia in support of a counter
drug effort.

That was from a U.S. Army report.
Senator Dodd and I have offered an amendment that says the U.S.
Department of Defense, in consultation with the Colombian military,
will determine what kind of helicopters will be most effective to
support the purposes for which we are spending this money, which are
counternarcotics in Colombia. The Senate ought not to micromanage the
decision on which helicopters will be used. It is a decision that ought
to be left to those who are the experts.
We cannot pretend this overall emergency aid package is a perfect
solution to all the problems confronting Colombia or any of the other
countries in the region. Neither is this assistance a panacea to the
problems of drug abuse and addiction in the United States. It is a
strong and credible step forward.
For these reasons, I support the underlying package, oppose the
Gorton amendment, and proudly support and cosponsor the Dodd amendment.
I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, the capacity of this body for self-
delusion seems to this Senator to be unlimited. Time after time, we
permit this administration to involve us in some new armed conflict
without seriously examining the consequences of that involvement, the
cost of the involvement, the length of the involvement, or even the
possibility that we will attain the goals of that involvement.
Mark my words, we are on the verge of doing exactly the same thing
here that we have done so frequently in the last 7 or 8 years. This
bill includes almost $1 billion for an entirely new, and almost totally
military, involvement in a civil war in Latin America, without the
slightest promise that our intervention will be a success, and it does
it in a totally backward fashion.
The very committee report that recommends spending this almost $1
billion says that the committee ``has grave reservations regarding the
administration's ability to effectively manage the use of these
resources to achieve the expected results.''
Well, if we have grave reservations, why are we doing it before those
reservations have been met?
The bill is a paradox. It says to the administration, spend $934
million, and then come to us and tell us what you have done and why it
should go on. But if Kosovo and Bosnia are any indication, when the
administration comes back next year, the answer will be: Well, we are
already in it; we can't quit now.
That is what we have been told for 6 or 7 years in Bosnia and 2 or 3
in Kosovo, with no end in sight. And there will be no end in sight here
either, Mr. President. This bill says let's get in a war now and
justify it later. My amendment says let's hear the justification first;
let's seriously consider what we are getting into and then maybe vote
the money.
This amendment takes $700 million of the $934 million and says, for
now, let's pay down the debt with it. Let's expand our present help to
Colombia and its police forces, rather substantially, but let's not get
into a new armed conflict until we have far greater justification than
we have received to this point.
It just seems impossible to me to believe that in the absence of the
debate of the whole country, with all of the lessons we must have
learned not just in this administration, but in previous
administrations, about how easy it is to get in and how hard it is to
get out, we will blithely make this downpayment--and this is a
downpayment only. Next year, maybe we will need a lot more money if
they are not doing very well down there. And how much of the equipment
is going to end up in the hands of rebels by sale or capture or
otherwise? We have no way of controlling that without a presence on the
ground.
I urge this body to say to the administration: No, we are not going
to do this until you first come to us with a formal overall plan with a
beginning, middle, and an end, and a plan for how we are going to
achieve our goals. Get the authority first and then fund it. It is 10
times better for this society to put that $700 million on our debt and
not get in a civil war in South America. That is what this debate is
all about--not that we don't like the Colombians or that we don't want
them to be successful, but we don't want a part of their war.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, let me remind my colleagues that the
Wellstone amendment was defeated 89-7. That would have taken $225
million out of the committee's proposal to fight the war on drugs in
Colombia. The amendment of the Senator from Washington, my good friend,
would leave only $200 million. It would, in fact, completely terminate
this effort, as he candidly admits would be his desire. I hope the
Gorton amendment will not be approved.
Mr. President, there are several amendments cleared on both sides
which I would like to get out of the way at this point. Temporarily, I
ask unanimous consent to lay aside the two amendments upon which we are
about to vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendments Nos. 3495, 3491 and 3539, As Modified, En Bloc

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send amendments Nos. 3495, 3491, and
3539, as modified, to the desk en bloc and ask for their immediate
consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] proposes
amendments en bloc numbered 3495, 3491, and 3539, as
modified.

The amendments are as follows:

AMENDMENT NO. 3495

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate concerning the violence,
breakdown of rule of law, and troubled pre-election period in the
Republic of Zimbabwe)

On page 140, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

SEC. ____. SENSE OF SENATE REGARDING ZIMBABWE.

(a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
(1) people around the world supported the Republic of
Zimbabwe's quest for independence, majority rule, and the
protection of human rights and the rule of law;
(2) Zimbabwe, at the time of independence in 1980, showed
bright prospects for democracy, economic development, and
racial reconciliation;
(3) the people of Zimbabwe are now suffering the
destabilizing effects of a serious, government-sanctioned
breakdown in the rule of law, which is critical to economic
development as well as domestic tranquility;
(4) a free and fair national referendum was held in
Zimbabwe in February 2000 in which voters rejected proposed
constitutional amendments to increase the president's
authorities to expropriate land without payment;
(5) the President of Zimbabwe has defied two high court
decisions declaring land seizures to be illegal;
(6) previous land reform efforts have been ineffective
largely due to corrupt practices and inefficiencies within
the Government of Zimbabwe;
(7) recent violence in Zimbabwe has resulted in several
murders and brutal attacks on innocent individuals, including
the murder of farm workers and owners;
(8) violence has been directed toward individuals of all
races;
(9) the ruling party and its supporters have specifically
directed violence at democratic reform activists seeking to
prepare for upcoming parliamentary elections;
(10) the offices of a leading independent newspaper in
Zimbabwe have been bombed;
(11) the Government of Zimbabwe has not yet publicly
condemned the recent violence;
(12) President Mugabe's statement that thousands of law-
abiding citizens are enemies of the state has further incited
violence;
(13) 147 out of 150 members of the Parliament in Zimbabwe
(98 percent) belong to the same political party;
(14) the unemployment rate in Zimbabwe now exceeds 60
percent and political turmoil is on the brink of destroying
Zimbabwe's economy;
(15) the economy is being further damaged by the Government
of Zimbabwe's ongoing

[[Page S5528]]

involvement in the war in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo;
(16) the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization
has issued a warning that Zimbabwe faces a food emergency due
to shortages caused by violence against farmers and farm
workers; and
(17) events in Zimbabwe could threaten stability and
economic development in the entire region.
(18) the Goverment of Zimbabwe has rejected international
election observation delegation accreditation for United
States-based nongovernmental organizations, including the
International Republican Institute and National Democratic
Institute, and is also denying accreditation for other
nongovernmental organizations and election observers of
certain specified nationalities.
(b) Sense of the Senate.--The Senate--
(1) extends its support to the vast majority of citizens of
the Republic of Zimbabwe who are committed to peace, economic
prosperity, and an open, transparent parliamentary election
process;
(2) strongly urges the Government of Zimbabwe to enforce
the rule of law and fulfill its responsibility to protect the
political and civil rights of all citizens;
(3) supports those international efforts to assist with
land reform which are consistent with accepted principles of
international law and which take place after the holding of
free and fair parliamentary elections;
(4) condemns government-directed violence against farm
workers, farmers, and opposition party members;
(5) encourages the local media, civil society, and all
political parties to work together toward a campaign
environment conducive to free, transparent and fair elections
within the legally prescribed period;
(6) recommends international support for voter education,
domestic and international election monitoring, and violence
monitoring activities;
(7) urges the United States to continue to monitor violence
and condemn brutality against law abiding citizens;
(8) congratulates all the democratic reform activists in
Zimbabwe for their resolve to bring about political change
peacefully, even in the face of violence and intimidation;
and
(9) desires a lasting, warm, and mutually beneficial
relationship between the United States and a democratic,
peaceful Zimbabwe.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3491

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate regarding the significance
of the availability of certain funds under this Act for an acceleration
of the accession of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO))

On page 140, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:
Sec. 591. It is the sense of the Senate that nothing in
this Act regarding the assistance provided to Estonia,
Latvia, and Lithuania under the heading ``Foreign Military
Financing Program'' should be interpreted as expressing the
sense of the Senate regarding an acceleration of the
accession of Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
____

amendment no. 3539, as modified

(Purpose: To authorize non-lethal, material assistance to protect
civilians in Sudan from attacks, slave raids, and aerial bombardment)

On Page 20, line 2, after the word ``Development'', insert
the following: ``Provided further, That up to $10,000,000 of
the funds appropriated under this heading, should be used,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, to provide
assistance to the National Democratic Alliance of Sudan to
strengthen its ability to protect civilians from attacks,
slave raids, and aerial bombardment by the Sudanese
government forces and its militia allies: Provided further,
That in the previous proviso, the term `assistance' includes
non-lethal, non-food aid such as blankets, medicine, fuel,
mobile clinics, water drilling equipment, communications
equipment to notify civilians of aerial bombardment, non-
military vehicles, tents, and shoes.''

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, these amendments have been cleared on
both sides of the aisle.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendments?
Without objection, the amendments are agreed to.
The amendments (Nos. 3495, 3491, and 3539, as modified) were agreed
to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEAHY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator
Feinstein be added as a cosponsor to amendment No. 3476 and that
Senator Bennett be added as a cosponsor to amendment No. 3519.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time having expired, the question is on
agreeing to the Gorton amendment No. 3517.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the
Gorton amendment and the Dodd amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from
Washington, Mr. Gorton.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr.
Domenici) is necessarily absent.
Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) is
necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?--
The result was announced--yeas 19, nays 79, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 139 Leg.]

YEAS--19

Allard
Boxer
Collins
Craig
Crapo
Enzi
Fitzgerald
Gorton
Gramm
Grams
Gregg
Harkin
Hutchinson
Kohl
Leahy
Mikulski
Murray
Specter
Thomas

NAYS--79

Abraham
Akaka
Ashcroft
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Breaux
Brownback
Bryan
Bunning
Burns
Byrd
Campbell
Chafee, L.
Cleland
Cochran
Conrad
Coverdell
Daschle
DeWine
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Edwards
Feingold
Feinstein
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Hagel
Hatch
Helms
Hollings
Hutchison
Inhofe
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Moynihan
Murkowski
Nickles
Reed
Reid
Robb
Roberts
Rockefeller
Roth
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith (NH)
Smith (OR)
Snowe
Stevens
Thompson
Thurmond
Torricelli
Voinovich
Warner
Wellstone
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Domenici
Inouye

The amendment (No. 3517) was rejected.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, may we have order.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will come to order. Senators will
please clear the well.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I wish the Senators would respect the Chair.
The chair has asked for order.
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, may we have order in the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be in order. The Senate will
be in order.
The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. SANTORUM. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I would say we are down to just a
handful of amendments we are trying to work out now and should be able
to give some more information as soon as the next vote is completed.
Mr. LEAHY. Several Senators have been very helpful, saying they are
going to withdraw amendments or look to another piece of legislation. I
appreciate that. It is possible to finish this bill this evening if we
continue to have the cooperation we have had on both sides of the
aisle.
Mr. McCONNELL. I thank the Senator from Vermont.

Amendment No. 3524

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 2 minutes equally divided on the
Dodd amendment.
The Senator from Connecticut.
The Senate will be in order. Senators will take their conversations
to the Cloakroom, please. If Senators will give their attention to the
Senator from Connecticut, we can begin.
The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, in one minute: The amendment I am proposing
along with my colleague from Connecticut and others merely says the
decision on which type of equipment will be used in the Colombian
effort ought to be determined by the U.S. military in conjunction with
the Colombian military. The present language requires specifically a
Huey helicopter. I do not think that decision

[[Page S5529]]

ought to be made by Members of Congress, necessarily.
The military categorically, in a 24-member review of what was needed
to make the program in Colombia successful, requests that it be the
Blackhawk helicopter.
In a letter from the Colombian Ministry of Defense they specifically
request it. They would have to change their entire infrastructure to
handle a Huey helicopter. The cost is excessive--more than the
Blackhawk. The amendment doesn't say buy Blackhawks, it says let the
military make the decision. Congress ought not be mandating the kind of
equipment that is going to help best to make this work. Our amendment
allows for the experts to make the decision, not Members of Congress.
I urge adoption of the amendment and ask unanimous consent the letter
be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

Republica De Colombia,

Ministerio De Defensa Nacional,

Santa Fe De Bogota, June 21, 2000.
Hon. Ted Stevens,
Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. C.W. Young,
Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairmen: We wish to thank the U.S. Congress for its
support of Plan Colombia and the U.S. Administration's aid
package to assist the people of Colombia in our fight against
the explosive cultivation of coca. With your support, this
aid will reverse the trend of increased drug production,
violence and instability that we are all too familiar with.
While we are grateful for your consideration of the aid
package, we are concerned with the Senate's proposal to
replace the 30 UH-60L, Blackhawks with 60 ``Huey II''
helicopters. The decision to provide the Colombian Military
with UH-60 helicopters was determined jointly by Colombian
and US Military experts to be the best aircraft for the
mission.
The Blackhawk is our clear choice given the austere
environment in which our security forces must operate. First,
it has redundant systems and protections that not only make
it much more difficult to shoot down, but more importantly,
affords our soldiers and crew increased survivability in a
crash. Second, the Blackhawk is 50% faster than the Huey II
allowing a quicker response time for our security forces to
reach remote, inaccessible drug producing areas. Third, it
has much greater range. Therefore, the need for forward
arming and refueling stations is significantly reduced.
Fourth, the Blackhawk flies and operates better at higher
altitudes, an important consideration given that the Andes
mountain range runs the entire length of Colombia. Lastly, it
carries three times the number of soldiers at high altitudes
and twice as much at sea level, inserting more troops and
security forces on the ground sooner. Optimal maneuverability
at high altitudes and troop carrying capacity is crucial in
counter narcotics operations, specially taking in
consideration the areas where poppy cultivation takes place.
While the Huey II helicopter may be less expensive to
purchase and operate, there are considerable indirect
expenses not being factored in by the Huey II advocates. For
example, 60 Huey IIs require twice the number of trained
pilots as 30 Blackhawks. In addition to more trained pilots,
they require more trained mechanics, maintenance facilities,
spare parts, equipment, force protection, and hangar space at
airfields. Any initial savings in acquiring the Huey II's
would be offset by these associated logistics and support
costs.
Blackhawk is the backbone of our military's helicopter
combat fleet. Therefore our infrastructure is being
standardized around it and more important, our force
structure planning for the future is based in this type of
aircraft. As for today, our government has already acquired
Blackhawks with our own resources and has the appropriate
logistic facilities to operate and maintain up to 30
additional UH-60L Blackhawks.
Some members of the US Congress have proposed a combination
of Blackhawks and Huey's. Given our force structure planning
stated above, introducing new Huey II's into our fleet would
require separate pilot training, spare parts and
supplementary maintenance facilities, not to mention the
delays or changes in the projection of the force. This will
pose a major logistic problem and extra efforts, since the
fleet must be jointly operated increasing tactical, technical
and administrative costs. The Ministry does believe that the
UH-1Ns will be vitally important for a successful transition
to the more advanced UH-60 Blackhawk. We also believe there
will be a continuing need to retain some of the UH-INs after
the integration of the UH-60 fleet into the Colombian
counternarcotics program.
If the Congress of the United States considers that
additionally to the 30 Blackhawks initially requested, based
on our needs and operative and logistical capabilities, the
government of Colombia should receive a number of Bell
helicopters, we suggest that the U.S. Government give
consideration on? supporting our extensive pilot training
requirements by starting a program to acquire 20 Bell 206
training helicopters. These aircraft would enable our armed
forces to establish a joint pilot training school that would
meet our existing and future pilot training requirements.
We appreciate the efforts and kind support you have given
the aid pack in this process. Thank you for your
consideration.
Sincerely,
Mayor General Luis Ernesto Gilbert Vargas,
Director of National Police.
General Fabio Velasco Chavez,
Commander in Chief of the Air Force.
Admiral Sergio Garcia Torres,
Commander in Chief of the Navy.
General Jorge Enrique Mora Rangel,
Commander in Chief of the Army.
General Fernando Tapias Stahelin,
Commander in Chief of the Military Forces.
Luis Fernando Ramirez Acuna,
Minister of National Defense.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
The Senate will be in order.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the issue is this. We do not have
enough Blackhawks for our own troops, much less the Colombian troops.
The Blackhawks are much more expensive, about $1,000 an hour more
expensive to operate. The Huey II will get the job done. We ought to do
that in the most efficient way, looking not only at this year's
appropriation but down the road. We will have to pick up the operation
and maintenance cost on the Blackhawk in subsequent years. The Huey II
will do the job.
The Senator from Connecticut has done his usual articulate job of
arguing for a home State interest. The Blackhawk is made in
Connecticut. I would probably be making the same speech if I were from
Connecticut. But the least expensive alternative is the Huey II. That
is why the committee recommended what it did.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, is there any time left?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The yeas and nays have
been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr.
Domenici) is necessarily absent.
Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) is
necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brownback). Are there any other Senators
in the Chamber who desire to vote?
The result was announced, yeas 47, nays 51, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 140 Leg.]

YEAS--47

Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Boxer
Breaux
Bryan
Byrd
Cleland
Conrad
Daschle
Dodd
Durbin
Edwards
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Grams
Hagel
Harkin
Hollings
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Mack
McCain
Moynihan
Murray
Reed
Reid
Robb
Rockefeller
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Smith (OR)
Snowe
Specter
Torricelli
Wellstone

NAYS--51

Abraham
Allard
Ashcroft
Bennett
Bingaman
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Campbell
Chafee, L.
Cochran
Collins
Coverdell
Craig
Crapo
DeWine
Dorgan
Enzi
Fitzgerald
Frist
Gorton
Gramm
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Helms
Hutchinson
Hutchison
Inhofe
Jeffords
Kohl
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
McConnell
Mikulski
Murkowski
Nickles
Roberts
Roth
Sessions
Shelby
Smith (NH)
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Domenici
Inouye

The amendment was rejected.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to lay that motion on the table.

[[Page S5530]]

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I know Senators are anxious to get a feel
for what the proceedings will be for the remainder of the evening and
in the morning. I commend the managers for the work they have been
doing and commend Members for the help we have been receiving from them
on both sides in terms of disposing of amendments one way or another.
I believe we are very close to getting an agreement that would get
the remaining amendments done tonight. Then, in the morning, we could
turn to the Labor-HHS appropriations bill and have stacked votes at 2
o'clock, both on any amendments and final passage of the foreign
operations appropriations bill and any amendments that might be ready
to be voted on and put in that staked sequence at 2 o'clock tomorrow.
We do not quite have that agreement yet. But for all Senators who are
still working on it, I hope they will work with us to get it completed
momentarily. If that cannot be done, I will be calling up the Kyl
amendment No. 3558, and getting a second so we can have a rollcall vote
on that, and other amendments, tonight.
I think we can get this bill done without having to have that
recorded vote. But if we can't get an agreement as to how we are going
to complete our work, then we will be having more votes tonight.
So for the Senators who are waiting to get final information, just
give us a few more minutes. I think we are about to the point where we
can enter this agreement, and then we would have a feel for the
remainder of the night.
Mr. LEAHY. If the Senator from Mississippi will yield, Senators have
been working very hard on both sides to clear things.
I suggest this as an alternative to some of my colleagues. A number
of matters are things that could just as well be handled in report
language.
The Senator from Kentucky and I, in some of those instances, have
been able to work that out. With the help of both the Republican
leadership and the Democratic leadership, we have been able to get rid
of many of these amendments. I think we are so close to working out the
suggestion the distinguished Senator from Mississippi has made, that
Senators should look at that. It is one that is strongly supported by
the managers of this bill. I hope we might make it possible to do it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, in cooperation with the manager on our side,
we have worked very hard to move this legislation along. On the
proposed unanimous consent request that would be propounded by the
majority leader, we would complete debate on all amendments tonight and
vote, as the leader indicated, tomorrow after 12 o'clock. We have one
outstanding objection on that. We are in the process of working to have
that resolved. We hope to have that done in the near future.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.

Amendments Nos. 3553, 3537, 3515, 3546, As Modified, 3547, As Modified,
3549, As Modified, 3545, As Modified, 3172, As Modified, and 3522, As
Modified, En Bloc

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, we have some more amendments that have
been cleared on both sides. I call up amendment No. 3553 by myself;
amendment No. 3537, Senator Byrd; amendment No. 3515, Senator Shelby.
Then the following amendments, Mr. President, I call up and send
modifications to those amendments to the desk: Senator Reid, No. 3546;
Senator Reid, No. 3547; Senator Reid, No. 3549, Senator Chafee,
amendment No. 3545; Senator Helms, amendment No. 3172; Senator
Landrieu, amendment No. 3522.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I believe there
is still a question on the amendment by the distinguished Senator from
Rhode Island that we are trying to work out. I wonder if that could be
withheld for the moment.
Mr. McCONNELL. The Senator says there is a question about the Chafee
amendment?
Mr. LEAHY. Yes.
Mr. McCONNELL. I will withhold the Chafee amendment No. 3545. These
are the modifications which I send to the desk.
Mr. LEAHY. I will continue to work with my friend from Rhode Island
to see if we can work out whatever the problem is.

Amendment No. 3527

(Purpose: To transfer $24 million from elsewhere in the bill to Peace
Corps to bring FY 2001 funding up to FY 2000 levels)

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send a Dodd amendment to the desk and
ask for its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] for Mr. Dodd,
proposes an amendment numbered 3527.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 28, line 4 strike all after the first comma thru
the word ``Provided,'' on line 7, and insert in lieu thereof
the following: ``$244,000,000, including the purchase of not
to exceed five passenger motor vehicles for administrative
purposes for use outside the United States: Provided, That
$24,000,000 of such sums be made available from funds already
appropriated by the Act, that are not otherwise earmarked for
specific purposes: Provided further,''.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, the amendment I have offered would restore
the FY 2001 appropriations for Peace Corps programs to FY 2000
appropriations levels.
Today, approximately 7000 Americans are Peace Corps volunteers. They
are recent college graduates, mid-career professionals, and retired
seniors. They live and work in the far corners of the globe--in Africa,
Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and the Pacific.
As we consider this matter, American volunteers are diligently working
to improve the lives of citizens in 77 countries throughout the world.
Mr. President, the President has requested $275 million in
appropriations for FY 2001. While I would like to see this Senate
approve an amendment to increase funding in this bill to meet the
administration's request, I am simply asking that the Senate restore
funding to the FY 2000 levels.
My request of my colleagues is a modest one--their support for an
amendment to raise funding in this bill for the Peace Corps by $24
million--from $220 million to $244 million--to bring the FY 2001
appropriations for this agency up to this fiscal year's appropriations.
This amendment does not add any new money to the bill, but rather
allows the Clinton administration to use unearmarked funds already
appropriated in this bill.
Absent adoption of this amendment, the Appropriations Committee mark
will reduce funding for the upcoming fiscal year by 10 percent over the
current fiscal year's funding for the Peace Corps.
What are the consequences of such reductions in funding?
Peace Corps posts will have to be shut down in as many as eleven
countries;
The number of new volunteers accepted by the agency will have to be
cut by 16 percent, some 1,250 fewer individuals will have the honor of
serving their country;
Plans for new initiatives to enable Peace Corps volunteers to bring
the benefits of information technology to underserved communities
throughout the world and to bolster HIV/AIDS prevention priorities in
Africa and elsewhere will fall by the wayside;
New country programs will remain unfunded;
The agency's ability to provide future emergency assistance through
its newly established Crisis Corps of returned volunteers to respond to
the devastation of unanticipated disasters such as those experienced in
Central America following the 1998 devastation of Hurricane Mitch will
be severely impaired.
Finally it will undermine the Agency's ability to replace outdated
computer systems in order to meet government financial management
requirements, not terribly exciting but very important to the overall
functioning of the Peace Corps as an organization.
The funding level in the bill is totally inconsistent with what the
Congress did in 1999. Last year the Congress went on record in support
of increased funding for the Peace Corps for

[[Page S5531]]

FY 2001 to $298 million--beyond the Administration's request--in order
to support an increase in Peace Corps volunteers.
I am not asking the Senate to vote on an increase of that magnitude
today. I am simply asking support for a steady state budget.
Mr. President, thirty-four years ago, I was a Peace Corps volunteer
in the Dominican Republic. My two years as a volunteer had a profound
impact on my life. I will treasure my Peace Corps experience forever--
as will nearly every returned Peace Corps volunteer one meets.
Next year the Peace Corps will celebrate its 40th anniversary. It is
important that we insure that the agency is sufficiently funded to live
up to the expectations that its success has engendered throughout the
world.
For these reasons I strongly urge my colleagues to support this
amendment and the restoration of funding for the Peace Corps.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 3527) was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, we have the block of amendments that
have been cleared on both sides at the desk, some of them as modified.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendments are agreed
to.
The amendments (Nos. 3553; 3537; 3515; 3546, as modified; 3547, as
modified; 3549, as modified; 3172, as modified; and 3522, as modified),
en bloc, were agreed to as follows:

amendment no. 3553

On page 33, line 18, insert, ``: Provided further, That
funds made available as a U.S. contribution to the Heavily
Indebted Poor Countries Trust Fund shall be subject to the
regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations''.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3537

(Purpose: To make technical amendments to language limiting support for
Plan Colombia)

Beginning on page 151, line 21, strike ``(a)'' and all that
follows through line 7 on page 152 and insert the following:
(a) Limitation on Support for Plan Colombia.--
(1) Limitation.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), none
of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by any
Act shall be available for support of Plan Colombia unless
and until--
(A) the President submits a report to Congress requesting
the availability of such funds; and
(B) Congress enacts a joint resolution approving the
request of the President under subparagraph (A).
(2) Exceptions.--The limitation in paragraph (1) does not
apply to--
(A) appropriations made by this Act, the Military
Construction Appropriations Act, 2001, or the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act, 2001, for the purpose of support
of Plan Colombia; or
(B) the unobligated balances from any other program used
for their originally appropriated purpose to combat drug
production and trafficking, foster peace, increase the rule
of law, improve human rights, expand economic development,
and institute justice reform in the countries covered by Plan
Colombia.
On page 152, line 17, insert ``in connection with support
of Plan Colombia'' after ``Colombia''.
On page 152, line 19, strike ``250'' and insert ``500''.
On page 152, strike lines 20 and 21.
On page 153, line 1, insert ``United States'' after ``of''.
On page 153, line 4, strike ``100'' and insert``300''.
On page 153, between lines 18 and 19, insert the following:
(d) Statutory Construction.--Nothing in this section may be
construed to affect the authority of the President to carry
out any emergency evacuation of United States citizens or any
search or rescue operation for United States military
personnel or other United States citizens.
(e) Report on Support for Plan Colombia.--Not later than
June 1, 2001, and not later than June 1 and December 1 of
each of the succeeding four fiscal years, the President shall
submit a report to Congress setting forth any costs
(including incremental costs incurred by the Department of
Defense) incurred by any department, agency, or other entity
of the Executive branch of Government during the two previous
fiscal quarters in support of Plan Colombia. Each such report
shall provide an itemization of expenditures by each such
department, agency, or entity.
On page 153, line 19, strike ``(d) Monthly Reports.--'',
and insert ``(f) Bimonthly Reports.--''.
On page 153, line 21, strike ``30'' and insert ``60''.
On page 154, line 1, insert ``United States'' after
``and''.
On page 154, line 3, strike ``(e)'' and insert ``(g)''.
On page 154, line 5, strike ``subsection (a)(2)'' and
insert ``subsection (a)(1)(B)''.
On page 154, line 9, strike ``subsection (a)(1)'' and
insert ``subsection (a)(1)(A)''.
On page 154, line 12, strike ``subsection (a)(1)'' and
insert ``subsection (a)(1)(A)''.
On page 155, line 12, strike ``(f)'' and insert ``(h)''.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3515

(Purpose: To make the limitation on assignment of United States
personnel in Colombia inapplicable to certain intelligence and
intelligence-related activities of the United States Government)

On page 155, between lines 18 and 19, insert the following:
(g) National Security Exemption.--The limitation contained
in subsection (b)(1) shall not apply with respect to any
activity subject to reporting under title V of the National
Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 413 et seq.).
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3546, As Modified

(Purpose: To allocate funds for the Secretary of State to meet with
representatives of countries with a high incidence of the practice of
dowry deaths or honor killings to develop a strategy for ending the
practices, and for other purposes)

On page 140, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

SEC. ____. ELIMINATION OF DOWRY DEATHS AND HONOR KILLINGS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of State should meet with
representatives from countries that have a high incidence of
the practice of dowry deaths or honor killings with a view
toward working with the representatives to increase awareness
of the practices, to develop strategies to end the practices,
and to determine the scope of the problem within the refugee
population.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Dowry death.--The term ``dowry death'' means the
killing of a woman because of a dowry dispute.
(2) Honor killing.--The term ``honor killing'' means the
murder of a woman suspected of dishonoring her family.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3547, As Modified

(Purpose: To require that funding for the United States Agency for
International Development be used to develop and integrate, where
appropriate, educational programs aimed at eliminating the practice of
female genital mutilation)

On page 12, line 14, strike ``loans.'' and insert the
following: ``loans: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, up to $1,500,000 may be used
to develop and integrate, where appropriate, educational
programs aimed at eliminating the practice of female genital
mutilation.''.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3549, As Modified

(Purpose: To authorize the Secretary of State to determine the
prevalence of the practice of female genital mutilation and to
development recommendations for eliminating the practice)

On page 140, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

SEC. ____. ELIMINATION OF FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.

The Secretary of State shall conduct a study to determine
the prevalence of the practice of female genital mutilation.
The study shall include the existence and enforcement of laws
prohibiting the practice. The Secretary shall submit the
findings of the study and recommendations on how the United
States can best work to eliminate the practice of female
genital mutilation, to the appropriate congressional
committees by June 1, 2001.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3172, As Modified

(Purpose: Relating to support by the Russian Federation for Serbia)

On page 140, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

SEC. ____. SUPPORT BY THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION FOR SERBIA.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) General Dragolub Ojdanic, Minister of Defense of the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and an
indicted war criminal, visited Moscow from May 7 through May
12, 2000, as a guest of the Government of the Russian
Federation, attended the inauguration of President Vladimir
Putin, and held talks with Russian Defense Minister Igor
Sergeyev and Army Chief of Staff Anatoly Kvashnin;
(2) General Ojdanic was military Chief of Staff of the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia during the Kosovo war and has
been indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the
Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for crimes against humanity and
violations of the laws and customs of war for alleged
atrocities against Albanians in Kosovo;
(3) international warrants have been issued by the
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia for
General Ojdanic's arrest and extradition to the Hague;
(4) the Government of the Russian Federation, a permanent
member of the United Nations Security Council which
established the International Criminal Tribunal for the
Former Yugoslavia, has an obligation to arrest General
Ojdanic and extradite him to the Hague;
(5) on May 16, 2000, Russian Minister of Economics Andrei
Shapovalyants announced

[[Page S5532]]

that his government has provided the Serbian regime of
Slobodan Milosevic $102,000,000 of a $150,000,000 loan it had
reactivated and will sell the Government of Serbia
$32,000,000 of oil despite the fact that the international
community has imposed economic sanctions against the
Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the
Government of Serbia;
(6) the Government of the Russian Federation is providing
the Milosevic regime such assistance while it is seeking debt
relief from the international community and loans from the
International Monetary Fund, and while it is receiving corn
and grain as food aid from the United States;
(7) the hospitality provided to General Ojdanic
demonstrates that the Government of the Russian Federation
rejects the indictments brought by the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia against him and other
officials, including Slobodan Milosevic, for alleged
atrocities committed during the Kosovo war; and
(8) the relationship between the Government of the Russian
Federation and the Governments of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia and Serbia only encourages the regime of Slobodan
Milosevic to foment instability in the Balkans and thereby
jeopardizes the safety and security of American military and
civilian personnel and raises questions about Russia's
commitment to its responsibilities as a member of the North
American Treaty Organization-led peacekeeping mission in
Kosovo.
(b) Actions.--
(1) Fifteen days after the date of enactment of this Act,
the President shall submit a report to Congress detailing all
loans, financial assistance, and energy sales the Government
of the Russian Federation or entities acting on its behalf
has provided since June 1999, and intends to provide to the
Government of Serbia or the Government of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia or any entities under the control of
the Governments of Serbia or the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia.
(2) If that report determines that the Government of the
Russian Federation or other entities acting on its behalf has
provided or intends to provide the governments of Serbia or
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or any entity under their
control any loans or economic assistance and oil sales, then
the following shall apply:
(A) The Secretary of State shall reduce assistance
obligated to the Russian Federation by an amount equal in
value to the loans, financial assistance, and energy sales
the Government of the Russian Federation has provided and
intends to provide to the Governments of Serbia and the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
(B)(i) The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the
United States executive directors of the international
financial institutions to oppose, and vote against, any
extension by those institutions of any financial assistance
(including any technical assistance or grant) of any kind to
the Government of the Russian Federation except for loans and
assistance that serve basic human needs.
(ii) In this subparagraph, the term ``international
financial institution'' includes the International Monetary
Fund, the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, the International Development Association, the
International Finance Corporation, the Multilateral
Investment Guaranty Agency, and the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development.
(C) The United States shall suspend existing programs to
the Russia Federation provided by the Export-Import Bank and
the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and any
consideration of any new loans, guarantees, and other forms
of assistance by the Export-Import Bank or the Overseas
Private Investment Corporation to Russia.
(D) The President may waive the actions described in
subsections 2A, 2B, and 2C if he determines and reports to
Congress that it is in the national interests of the United
States of America.
(3) It is the sense of the Senate that--The President of
the United States should instruct his representatives to
negotiations on Russia's international debt to oppose further
forgiveness, restructuring, and rescheduling of that debt,
including that being considered under the ``Comprehensive''
Paris Club negotiations.
____

AMENDMENT NO. 3522 As Modified

(Purpose: To provide for the rehabilitation of the transportation
infrastructure of Bulgaria and Romania)

At the appropriate place, insert:
Of the funds appropriated under the heading ``Support for
East European Democracy'' rehabilitation and remediation of
damage done to the Romanian and Bulgarian economies as a
result of the Kosovo conflict should be given priority
especially to those projects that are associated with the
Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe, done at Cologne June
10, 1999 (commonly known as the ``Balkan Stability Pact''),
particularly those projects that encourage bilateral
cooperation between Romania and Bulgaria, and that seek to
offset the difficulties associated with the closure of the
Danube River.

Mr. McCONNELL. I move to reconsider the vote and move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, we previously agreed to amendment No. 3536.
I ask unanimous consent that the distinguished senior Senator from
Michigan, Mr. Levin, be added as a cosponsor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent Senator Helms
be added as a cosponsor to the Coverdell amendment on Peru.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator
Lautenberg be added as a cosponsor to Senator Edwards' and Senator
Torricelli's amendment No. 3589.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 3584, As further Modified

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, amendment No. 3584 was accepted earlier.
The sponsor of that amendment, the distinguished Senator from Michigan,
Mr. Abraham, has agreed to a modification of his amendment. I ask
unanimous consent to send the modification to the desk and ask that it
be accepted in lieu of the earlier amendment No. 3584.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment, as further
modified, is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 3584, as further modified) was agreed to, as
follows:

In lieu of amendment No. 3584, insert the following:
On page 14, line 4, strike ``$15,000,000'' and insert:
``$18,000,000''.
On page 14, line 7, after ``Lebanon'' insert: ``: Provided,
That not less than $15,000,000 of the funds made available
under the previous proviso shall be made available from funds
appropriated under the Economic Support Fund.''

Mr. LEAHY. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 3568

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I don't know whether we have reached
agreement or not or whether there will be time for discussion tomorrow.
I thank my colleagues. I believe amendment No. 3568 has been
accepted. This is an amendment I have offered with Senator Brownback,
who is in the chair. I point out to colleagues that this amendment
would use $250,000 of the funds appropriated to Kosovo to help police
better identify and respond to cases of trafficking. It also would
provide some help for those who live in the Newly Independent States of
the former Soviet Union who have been victims of trafficking. I thank
both the Senator from Kentucky and the Senator from Vermont for
accepting this amendment.
I especially thank Senator Brownback for the work I have been able to
do with him dealing with the awful aspect of this new global economy:
the trafficking of women forced into prostitution, and terrible labor
conditions. We have a great piece of legislation. Both of us hope it
will pass soon. This amendment to this piece of legislation is a good
step in the right direction. I thank my colleague, Senator Brownback,
for his support. I thank Senators for supporting this amendment.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.

Amendment No. 3588

(Purpose: To make available up to $1,000,000 to fund the Secretary of
Defense to work with the appropriate authorities of the Cuban
government to provide for greater cooperation, coordination, and other
mutual assistance in the interdiction of illicit drugs being
transported over Cuba airspace and waters)

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have an amendment which has been
cleared on both sides. I send the amendment to the desk and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Specter] proposes an
amendment numbered 3588.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.

[[Page S5533]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

On page 140, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

SEC. . UNITED STATES-CUBAN MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN THE
INTERDICTION OF ILLICIT DRUGS.

Allocation of Funds.--Of the amount appropriated under the
heading ``Department of State, International Narcotics
Control and Law Enforcement'', up to $1,000,000 shall be
available to the Secretary of Defense, on behalf of the
United States Coast Guard, the United States Customs Service,
and other bodies, to work with the appropriate authorities of
the Cuban government to provide for greater cooperation,
coordination, and other mutual assistance in the interdiction
of illicit drugs being transported over Cuban airspace and
waters, provided that such assistance may only be provided
after the President determines and certifies to Congress
that:
(a) Cuba has appropriate procedures in place to protect
against innocent loss of life in the air and on the ground in
connection with interdiction of illegal drugs; and
(b) that there is no evidence of the involvement of the
government of Cuba in drug trafficking.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, the essence of this amendment is that up
to $1 million shall be made available to the Secretary of Defense on
behalf of the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Customs Service, and other
bodies to work with the appropriate authorities of the Cuban Government
to provide for greater cooperation, coordination, and other mutual
assistance in the interdiction of illegal drugs being transported over
Cuban airspace and waters, provided that such assistance may be
provided after the President determines and certifies to Congress that
Cuba has appropriate procedures in place to protect against innocent
loss of life in the air and that there is no evidence of the
involvement of the Government of Cuba in drug trafficking.
The Government of Cuba has been prepared for some time to provide
further assistance to the United States through the use of their
airspace and coastal waters on drug interdiction.
In June of 1999, I had occasion to visit Cuba and I had a long
meeting with their President, Fidel Castro. We covered a wide variety
of subjects. One of them was the issue of drug interdiction.
I believe this is a measure which our officials in all branches of
the Federal Government favor to try to cut down on the flow of drugs.
There is, obviously, a sharp disagreement as to what our policy should
be toward Cuba with respect to the embargo. But whatever anybody may
think about those subjects, it is my view that there is no doubt that
we ought to take up the availability of assistance from Cuba on drug
interdiction. That is what this amendment will do.
There is a real issue about U.S. policy toward Cuba. I voted against
the Dodd amendment, which would create a commission to make
recommendations on that policy, because I think that the issue of
policy really ought to be decided by the next President of the United
States in conjunction with the Congress. The times have certainly
changed, so that Castro no longer presents a threat to export communism
to Latin America. I believe that the consideration of change in policy
really ought not to be entrusted to a commission at the present time,
which would report after January 20 of next year, when the issue really
is for the President of the United States--whoever may be elected.
I supported the Gorton amendment, which would strike the funds for
Colombia, although I knew at the time that the funding for Colombia
would pass by a large number. I have visited Colombia on a number of
occasions over the past decade. I am very much in favor of assisting
Colombia in restoring law and order to that nation, to try to avoid the
destabilizing effect of the drug cartels. But I do not believe that it
is appropriate to spend hundreds of millions of dollars--almost a
billion dollars in the Senate appropriations and $1.4 billion in the
House. I believe there is currently an imbalance in the $18 billion a
year spent on drugs, with about two-thirds of that--or $12 billion--
going to the so-called supply side, and some $6 billion going to the
so-called demand side.
My view is that we would be doing better to spend money on
rehabilitation and education to try to eliminate the demand for drugs.
I was an original sponsor of legislation many years ago to bring in the
military on interdiction, and I think that it is a good policy. But no
matter how strong our interdiction is, drugs will come into the United
States as long as there is a demand for drugs. My experience as
district attorney of Philadelphia shows that a great deal can be done
to prosecute drug dealers and street crime and move up the chain to
drug kingpins. But, again, as long as there is a demand for drugs,
there will be a supply. So it is my view that the wiser course of
action is to spend more money on education and rehabilitation through
the drug courts, which are now part of the crime bill of 1994. It is
because of my view that funds are better spent on rehabilitation and
education and the demand side that I supported the Wellstone amendment.
I thank my many colleagues who have worked with me to clear this
amendment. As with most Senators, I would like to have a rollcall vote.
We are trying to bring this matter to a conclusion. Tomorrow, we are
going to start on the appropriations bill of Labor, Health, Human
Services, and Education, which comes from the subcommittee I chair. So
I appreciate the acceptance of this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 3588) was agreed to.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LOTT. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

amendment no. 3569

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3569.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. Nickles] proposes an
amendment numbered 3569.

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

On page 142, line 11 after the word ``purposes:'' insert
the following: ``Provided further, That of the funds made
available under this heading, not less than $100,000,000
shall be made available by the Department of State to the
Department of Justice for counter narcotic activity
initiatives specifically policing initiatives to combat
methamphetamine production and trafficking and to enhance
policing initiatives in drug `hot spots' ''.

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, just briefly, this amendment would
transfer $100 million away from the Colombian aid into the Department
of Justice to be used for drug interdiction, for counternarcotic
activities including and especially to combat methamphetamine
production and trafficking, which is rampant throughout the United
states, and also to use this money to enhance policing initiatives
throughout the country in drug hotspots.
I appreciate the cooperation of my colleagues and hope we will have
an affirmative vote on that.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, we may need a moment more to have a chance
to review the unanimous consent proposal. I believe we have one worked
out that is fair and acceptable to Senators on both sides of the aisle.
If we can get this agreement entered into, then there would be no
further votes tonight, nor in the morning. Then we would begin the
final debate at 1:30, with the votes that are necessary stacked at 2
p.m., and final passage at that time.
In the morning, though, we would go to Labor-HHS Appropriations at
9:30. Any votes relative to that bill would also be put in a stacked
sequence beginning at 2 p.m., if any are ready. We certainly hope good
progress can be made on that bill tomorrow. We look forward to working
with the managers of that legislation.
I see Senator Reid is looking over the consent request. If he has any
questions, I will be glad to respond.

unanimous consent agreement

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all remaining
first-degree amendments in order to the pending bill be offered and
debated tonight, along with any relevant second-degree amendments, and
the votes occur in relation to those amendments beginning at 2 p.m. on
Thursday, with

[[Page S5534]]

4 minutes prior to each vote for explanation.
I further ask consent that at 1:20 p.m. on Thursday, the Senate
resume consideration of the pending bill, and Senator Feingold be
recognized to offer his filed amendment regarding Mozambique, and that
amendment be voted on in the voting sequence under the same terms as
outlined above.
I further ask consent that following the introduction of the Feingold
amendment, it be laid aside and Senator Boxer be recognized to call up
her two filed amendments, Nos. 3541 and 3542, and there be 40 minutes
total for debate on both amendments, with the votes occurring in the
voting sequence as outlined above.
I ask unanimous consent that following the disposition of the
amendments, the bill be advanced to third reading and the Senate
proceed to vote on that motion. I further ask consent that following
that vote, the bill then be placed back on the calendar awaiting the
House companion bill.
I further ask consent that at 9:30 a.m., the Senate begin
consideration of the House Labor-HHS and Education appropriations bill
and any votes ordered relative to that bill, following the concurrence
of the two leaders, occur at the end of the voting sequence scheduled
at 2 p.m. on Thursday, with the same 4 minutes allocated for
explanation prior to those votes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I ask the
majority leader, with regard to the amendment I intend to offer, I hope
the agreement contemplates the possibility that we can work out
something on the amendment so a vote would not be required.
Mr. LOTT. Certainly. That is always the case. If the Senator gets it
worked out, or something changes his mind, he obviously would have that
opportunity. The managers, I am sure, would be glad to work with him
this evening to work out some satisfactory way. I don't know the
substance of the amendment, other than it is on Mozambique. Certainly,
that would be contemplated.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, if the
Senator will yield, the conversation Senator Leahy and I had with the
manager of the bill is that we have talked about their reviewing that
very closely to see if something can be worked out. Today, there was a
very emotional event at the White House. Senator Inouye was awarded the
Congressional Medal of Honor. It was one of the most dramatic events I
have ever attended. Senator Akaka is calling and he desires some
morning business to talk about this. There are lots of people in from
Hawaii and from around the country. We are coming in at 9:30 a.m. to
begin Labor-HHS.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, why don't we amend the request to say that
we come in at 9:30, and after the opening and the prayer, we go to
Senator Akaka for 30 minutes, and we will begin Labor-HHS bill at 10
o'clock. We are all certainly very proud of Senator Inouye and how he
and the men of his unit served this country. For it to be appropriately
memorialized in this Chamber by his colleague from Hawaii is more than
appropriate. I am pleased to make that addition.
Mr. REID. Further reserving the right to object, when Senator
McConnell finishes his business tonight--and that should be shortly--I
ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Rhode Island be recognized
for 30 minutes, and that the Senator from Nevada, Mr. Reid, be able to
speak. I have amendments that the committee has worked on during the
day, and I would like to speak on those after Senator Reed from Rhode
Island speaks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I want to
further clarify that there would be no prohibition in this unanimous
consent agreement if it would be necessary to withdraw the amendment
which I propose.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I certainly know of no reason the Senate
wouldn't agree to the Senator's amendment being withdrawn if the
Senator desires to do so.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, will the majority leader simply have
that reflected in the agreement?
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I include in the unanimous consent request
that if Senator Feingold wishes to withdraw his amendment, that would
be in order.
Mr. FEINGOLD. I thank the majority leader.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, in light of this agreement, there will be no
further votes tonight, and the next series of votes will occur at 2
p.m. on Thursday.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I would simply like to thank the majority
leader. Much of this was done to accommodate my daughter's graduation
tomorrow morning. He went out of his way. I thank him, as well as the
minority leader and the minority whip, for doing that for me. It shows
the comity of the Senate, as well. I thank all of the leaders for that.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I thank Senator Schumer. I thank all of my
colleagues and the managers for the work they are doing.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished majority
leader for helping us wrap up this matter in due time.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, will the Senator yield before the majority
leader leaves?
Mr. McCONNELL. I yield to the Senator from Nevada.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, when we were riding up here together, I told
the Senator we couldn't finish tonight.
Mr. LOTT. The Senator was right.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.

Amendment No. 3589

(Purpose: To provide emergency funding to the Department of Commerce
and the Department of Agriculture to assist communities affected by
Hurricane Floyd, Hurricane Dennis, or Hurricane Irene)

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk that
has been cleared on both sides by Senator Edwards on behalf of himself,
and Senator Torricelli, and Senator Robb.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Kentucky (Mr. McConnell), for Mr. Edwards,
Mr. Torricelli, and Mr. Robb, proposes an amendment numbered
3589.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

On page 140, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

emergency funding to assist communities affected by hurricane floyd,
hurricane dennis, or hurricane irene

Sec. 5____. (a) Economic Development Assistance.--
(1) In general.--There is appropriated, out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for fiscal year
2000, for an additional amount for ``Economic Development
Assistance Programs'', $125,000,000, to remain available
until expended, for planning assistance, public works grants,
and revolving loan funds to assist communities affected by
Hurricane Floyd, Hurricane Dennis, or Hurricane Irene.
(2) Emergency designation.--The $125,000,000--
(A) shall be available only to the extent that the
President submits to Congress an official budget request for
a specific dollar amount that includes designation of the
entire amount of the request as an emergency requirement for
the purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 900 et seq.); and
(B) is designated by Congress as an emergency requirement
under section 251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C.
901(b)(2)(A)).
(b) Community Facilities Grants.--
(1) In general.--There is appropriated, out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for fiscal year
2000, for an additional amount for the rural community
advancement program under subtitle E of the Consolidated Farm
and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 2009 et seq.),
$125,000,000, to remain available until expended, to provide
grants under the community facilities grant program under
section 306(a)(19) of that Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(19)) with
respect to areas subject to a declaration of a major disaster
under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) as a result of
Hurricane Floyd, Hurricane Dennis, or Hurricane Irene.
(2) Emergency designation.--The $125,000,000 is designated
by Congress as an emergency requirement under section

[[Page S5535]]

251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(b)(2)(A)).

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. President, let me begin by thanking Senators
Stevens, Lott, McConnell, Leahy, and Byrd for accepting this amendment,
No. 3582. Throughout the process of dealing with Hurricane Floyd and
its impact on my State they have been unstinting in their help and
deserve the thanks and deep appreciation of the people of North
Carolina. I've also had the honor of working with Senators Torricelli
and Robb on this amendment. They have fought hard for their States.
This amendment would provide $125 million in funding to the Economic
Development Administration this year. It would also provide $125
million in funding this year for USDA's Community Facilities program.
Mr. President, this money is desperately needed. Although 9 months
have passed since Hurricane Floyd struck North Carolina, the people of
eastern Carolina are still struggling to rebuild. Thousands still live
in FEMA trailers. Hundreds of businesses still haven't reopened.
Several cities are still operating under sewage and water moratoria.
This amendment will mean the difference between businesses reopening
and businesses closing, people working and people not working, cities
thriving and cities withering.
I believe this amendment will make a real difference, and will put us
on the road to recovery. Let me submit a list of possible $100 million
in EDA projects that has been prepared by the State. This list is by no
means exhaustive, but it illustrates the extent of the need and how
much good this money can be used for.
I am enormously pleased that this amendment has been accepted. We
have a lot more work to do in order to enact it into law. I hope this
provision will be incorporated into the final supplemental
appropriations package that is being negotiated as part of the Military
Construction appropriations conference. The innocent victims of
Hurricane Floyd deserve no less.
Indeed, the Federal Government has consistently provided this type of
aid to disaster victims. I ask unanimous consent that a list of
previous assistance packages be printed in the Record. It is only fair
to treat this disaster in the same manner.
I ask unanimous consent that my remarks be printed in the Record
following the amendment.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

EXAMPLES OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS THAT REQUESTED EDA FUNDS COULD FUND (50% MAXIMUM PARTICIPATION UNLESS WAIVED)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total project
District and county Applicant cost Project description
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7--Brunswick...................... Brunswick County................................. $6,600,000 Construct 1.65 mgd WWTP that will immediately
serve a new industry creating 300 jobs.
5--Alamance....................... Burlington....................................... 5,000,000 Upgrade existing 12.0 mgd East Burlington
facilities to meet effluent limits (400 jobs).
7--Duplin......................... Duplin County/Beulaville......................... 2,500,000 Water improvements to serve three existing
industries retaining/saving 350 jobs and the
construction of a multi-tenant building.
1--Edgecombe...................... Edgecombe W/S Districts No. 1&2.................. 4,242,000 Water and sewer improvements to serve a new
industry that will create 800 jobs.
4--Chatham........................ Goldston-Gulf Sanitary District.................. 227,389 Water improvements (50 jobs).
2--Harnett........................ Harnett County/Fuquay-Varina..................... 4,000,000 Regional water transmission main and municipal
sewer improvements to serve an expanding
industry (400 jobs) and industrial development.
3--Lenoir......................... Lenoir County.................................... 3,512,700 Upgrade and expand the city's 4.08 mgd plant to
6.0 mgd. The expansion requires upgrades to more
stringent effluent limits. (300 jobs).
--Nash........................... Rocky Mount...................................... 10,000,000 Infrastructure for new subdivisions of affordable
housing.
4--Chatham........................ Siler City....................................... 2,050,000 Collection system rehabilitation to eliminate
inflow/infiltration adversely impacting WWTP's
treatment capacity. (125).
5--Rockingham..................... Town of Reidsville............................... 2,537,512 Water, sewer and street construction to develop
phase I of the Town of Reidsville's 300 acre
industrial part (800 jobs).
1--Warren......................... Warren County.................................... 2,943,999 Sanitary sewer replacement to eliminate inflow
and infiltration that is reducing the WWTP's
treatment capacity that will create 600 jobs.
3--Wayne.......................... Wayne County..................................... 2,080,000 Sewer improvements that will serve industries
creating 700 jobs.
2--Wilson......................... Wilson County.................................... 1,751,065 Replacement of a major sewer interceptor to
correct inflow/infiltration resulting in WWTP
operating under a moratorium and SOC (400 jobs).
----------------
Total......................... ................................................. 47,444,665
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

POTENTIAL EDA PROJECTS--FY 2000 SUPPLEMENTAL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total project
District and county Applicant cost Project description
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1--Edgecombe...................... Tarboro.......................................... $3,000,000 Water and sewer improvements in Kingsboro
corridor to retain commerce and support
industrial growth in non flood-prone areas.
1--Edgecombe...................... Pinetops......................................... 1,500,000 Waste water treatment plant flooded during
Hurricane Floyd. Funds would allow for expansion
of industrial and residential capacity of
facility.
1--Edgecombe...................... Tarboro.......................................... 600,000 Water and sewer lines to accommodate the
expansion of commerce and the development of 2
low to moderate income subdivisions.
1--Edgecombe...................... Tarboro Area Development Corporation/NC 350,000 As part of NC ``Main Street'' project,
Department of Commerce, Division of Community rehabilitate Royster-Clark Building. This
Assistance. project will increase utilization of downtown
properties, including mixed-use development;
increase tax base in Tarboro area, including
property and sales tax; create employment
opportunities through an enhanced commercial
district; and encourage private sector
development in real property; related
improvements, and job creation. $300,000 for
construction/renovation; $50,000 for planning
and technical assistance.
2--Nash........................... Rocky Mount...................................... 4,000,000 Water and sewer and natural gas improvements to
Whitakers industrial park to accommodate the
relocation of businesses to non flood-prone
areas.
3--Lenior......................... Coastal Community College........................ 1,300,000 Acquire and renovate existing building to
accommodate the relocation of businesses located
in flood-prone areas (business incubator).
3--Lenior......................... La Grange........................................ 3,000,000 Expansion of water and sewer capacity will
support the relocation of existing businesses
and residents to non flood-prone areas.
3--Onslow......................... Onslow County.................................... 3,000,000 Water and sewer extensions to county owned
industrial park to support the relocation of
commercial activities to non flood-prone areas.
7--Duplin......................... Duplin County/Beulaville......................... 2,500,000 Water improvements to serve existing industries
(retaining more than 300 jobs) and the
construction of multi-tenant commercial building
to serve flood-displaced businesses.
7--Pender......................... Pender County.................................... 1,400,000 Berming and drainage improvements to save more
than 600 jobs at industrial sites severely
impacted by Hurricane Floyd.
1 and 8--Pitt..................... Farmville........................................ 1,500,000 Provide sewer pump stations and extensions to
serve new ethanol facility that will create 1000
jobs--replenishing the 450 jobs lost after
hurricanes.
1 and 8--Beaufort................. Beaufort EDC..................................... 1,500,000 Construct industrial building for lease to flood-
displaced businesses.
1 and 3--Pitt..................... Greenville....................................... 3,000,000 Water and sewer extensions to serve business and
housing relocations to non flood-prone areas.
1 and 3--Pitt..................... Farmville........................................ 1,000,000 Provide water and sewer pump station to serve US
258/US 264 interchange area to provide for the
expansion of commerce and the development of
subdivisions/housing.
Multiple........................ NC Department of Commerce, Division of Community 1,400,000 The ``Main Street'' program is an ongoing,
Assistance. successful State initiative to revitalize
commercial districts in North Carolina
communities. Targeting vacant or abandoned
buildings for rehabilitation, the program
infuses new activity into commercial districts
by reclaiming and renovating structures for
commercial and mixed-use. Building renovation is
an important part of comprehensive projects that
enhance quality of life and commerce for North
Carolina towns. Planning and technical
assistance and construction funds for ``Main
Street'' program in disaster impacted
communities (Clinton, Elizabeth, Wilson,
Farmville, Goldsboro, Kinston, Lumberton, New
Bern, Smithfield, Southport, Tarboro, and
Washington). $400,000 in planning and technical
assistance funds would support economic
improvement feasibility analyses of ``Main
Street'' projects, including use of appropriate
hazard mitigation technologies. $1 million in
construction funds would facilitate the
implementation of project/rehabilitation of
buildings--supporting new jobs and the
revitalization of towns and commercial areas.
Multiple........................ Multiple Counties................................ 20,000,000 2 urban and 5 rural communities were under water/
sewer moratoriums due to capacity prior to the
1999 hurricane season (Wilson, Bethel, Fremont,
Mount Olive, Snow Hill, Kinston, and Ahoskie).
$300 in RM alone--4 additional rural facilities
are now operating under moratorium due to flood
damage (Fountain, Winton, Aulander, and
Pikeville). As a critical component of the
repair and recovery and reconstruction process,
especially regarding the reconstruction of
affordable housing and relocation of commercial
activities, the capacity of these facilities
must be addressed.
----------------
Total......................... ................................................. 49,050,000 .................................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Unless waived, EDA projects require a 50% cost-share.

[[Page S5536]]

In past disasters, EDA funding, combined with Community Development
Block Grants, has been a critical tool in helping towns and cities
recover: Midwest Floods in 1993--$200 million for EDA plus $200 million
for CDBG; Northridge Earthquake in 1994--$55 million for EDA plus more
than $225 million for CDBG; Tropical Storm Alberto in 1994--$50 million
for EDA plus $180 million for CDBG; Red River Valley Floods in 1997--
$52 million in EDA plus $500 million for CDBG; and in the Agriculture
Appropriations, there is no EDA or CDBG funding allocated for Hurricane
Floyd affected states. None.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, this amendment has been cleared on both
sides of the aisle.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 3589) was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I
move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.

____________________