[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 22 (Thursday, February 15, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1520-S1522]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. DeWine):
  S. 376. A bill to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to modify 
for fiscal years 2002 through 2004 the procedures relating to 
assistance for countries not cooperating in United States

[[Page S1521]]

counterdrug efforts, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Foreign Relations.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am sending to the desk a bill for 
myself and Mr. DeWine to reform the current certification requirement 
for international drug control. As many members know, I have been a 
strong supporter of the drug certification process. I remain one. Of 
late, however, we have seen a lot of criticism of the process. Some of 
this has been by foreign countries and some here at home. Rather than 
answer all of these criticisms, I want to take a few moments to address 
what I believe have been misconceptions about the process.
  The first point I want to make is to remind my colleagues why 
Congress required certification in the first place. It arose because we 
believed that doing something here and overseas about the drug problem 
was in the national interests. The public agreed. I might add the 
public has not changed its mind. I don't believe that we ought to do so 
either.
  Most of the drugs available in the United States today come from 
overseas. They are produced overseas and smuggled to this country. That 
production is illegal. It is illegal in international law. It is 
illegal in the domestic laws of all the countries where these drugs are 
produced. It is illegal to smuggle the drugs. Here and abroad. The 
consequences of that smuggling--illegal drugs on our streets--are felt 
in homes and neighborhoods and schools all across this country.
  I continue to believe that it is in our interest to stop that 
production and flow. I own that we have an obligation to expect 
countries to abide by international law, bilateral agreements, and 
their own legal codes on drug production and trafficking. I believe 
that it is not just a quirk of U.S. interest to expect that we and 
others commit ourselves to stopping this illegal production and trade. 
In fact, I believe that we have a moral obligation to stop these 
activities. In order to do that, we need a clear, knowable process that 
holds ourselves and other countries to account for what we do to help 
stop this production and trade.
  Drug dealers do more harm to this country every year than all the 
terrorists put together have done in the past 10 years. Let me ask my 
colleagues, would you seriously offer to ignore or suspend the 
requirements that we have put in place that hold others to an 
international standard of conduct on stopping terrorism? Human rights? 
I think not. But that is one of the things being proposed for how to 
deal with international drug certification. I do not propose that we be 
any less committed to stopping illegal drugs internationally than we 
are when other important concerns are involved, and I ask my colleagues 
to support this view.
  I also would point out that this is no time to carve out special 
exemptions for any one country or region. We remain collectively 
responsible to act responsibly on this issue. That means every one of 
us.
  My second point on why we have the certification process is to note 
congressional intent. We passed the law 15 years ago to make stopping 
illegal drug production and transit a national priority. I do not 
believe that most members of Congress nor the majority of the U.S. 
public believe that it is time to change that. Drug trafficking and 
threats from major criminal organizations have grown worse not better. 
Our third largest foreign assistance program is to help Colombia deal 
with problems arising from trafficking and the thugs that promote it. 
Is it really time to say we no longer regard international drug 
trafficking as a national priority? I happen to believe that it is not.
  I would also note that we have had repeated demonstrations in the 
past several years of the effectiveness of certification in securing 
improved international cooperation. Administration officials have 
testified repeatedly as to its effectiveness and utility. It has also 
given us needed leverage in specific cases to make important progress. 
I for one am unwilling to undo a process that has paid such dividends.
  On the other hand, I am aware that the certification process has 
raised a number of concerns here and abroad in the past few years. 
While I do not think that the solution in response to these concerns is 
to suspend the process, I do have a suggestion that I believe will 
help. Hence the bill Senator DeWine and I send to the desk.
  Briefly what this proposal does is to simplify the current 
methodology. At present, we have a three-step certification process: 
the President can certify a country as fully cooperating, decertify a 
country as failing to cooperate, or decertify with a national interest 
waiver. This aspect of the process has been the main source of 
contention. It has led some to believe that it forces the 
Administration to be less than candid about some countries that might 
be on the list. It has also complicated our relations with important 
allies.
  What this proposal does is to go to a decertification only standard. 
This is similar to what we do with terrorism and human rights. In other 
words, the default position is that all countries are doing the right 
thing on meeting international drug control standards. The only 
countries singled out for consideration are those whose actions are 
clearly outside a reasonable assessment of accountability as defined in 
current law.
  Our bill simplifies a complex process and focuses attention on the 
bad guys. It gives the President more flexibility. In doing so, we keep 
accountability. We keep a useful process in place. We avoid unnecessary 
complications with friends and allies doing the responsible thing. We 
maintain necessary reporting on international efforts. We keep our eye 
on a critical issue.
  The provision also sunsets in three years unless Congress acts to 
keep it. That means we have a chance to drive it around the block, kick 
the tires, and see if it's a lemon or not.
  I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this bill and I ask 
unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 376

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. THREE-YEAR MODIFICATION OF PROCEDURES RELATING TO 
                   ASSISTANCE FOR COUNTRIES NOT COOPERATING WITH 
                   UNITED STATES COUNTERDRUG EFFORTS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 8 of part I of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2291 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 490A. LIMITATIONS DURING FISCAL YEARS 2002, 2003, AND 
                   2004 ON ASSISTANCE FOR COUNTRIES NOT 
                   COOPERATING WITH UNITED STATES COUNTERDRUG 
                   EFFORTS.

       ``(a) Annual Identification of Countries Not Cooperating.--
     Not later than November 1 of 2001, 2002, and 2003, the 
     President shall submit to the appropriate committees of 
     Congress a report identifying each country, if any, that the 
     President proposes to be subject to the provisions of 
     subsection (f) in the fiscal year in which the country is so 
     identified by reason that such country--
       ``(1) is not cooperating fully with the United States in 
     achieving full compliance with the goals and objectives of 
     the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in 
     Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances;
       ``(2) is not taking adequate steps on its own to achieve 
     full compliance with the goals and objectives of the 
     Convention; or
       ``(3) is not taking adequate steps to achieve full 
     compliance with the goals and objectives of a bilateral 
     agreement with the United States on illicit drug control.
       ``(b) Countries Subject to Withholding of Bilateral 
     Assistance and Opposition to Multilateral Assistance.--
       ``(1) Identification.--Not later than March 1 of 2002, 
     2003, and 2004, the President shall submit to the appropriate 
     committees of Congress a report identifying each country, if 
     any, that shall be subject to the provisions of subsection 
     (f) during the fiscal year in which the country is so 
     identified under this subsection by reason of its 
     identification in the most recent report under subsection 
     (a).
       ``(2) Limitation on countries identified.--A country may be 
     identified in a report under paragraph (1) only if the 
     country is also identified in the most recent report under 
     subsection (a).
       ``(c) Considerations Regarding Cooperation.--In determining 
     whether or not a country is to be identified in a report 
     under subsection (a) or (b), the President shall consider the 
     extent to which the country--
       ``(1) has met the goals and objectives of the United 
     Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs 
     and Psychotropic Substances, including action on such matters 
     as illicit cultivation, production, distribution, sale, 
     transport, financing, money laundering, asset seizure, 
     extradition, mutual legal assistance, law enforcement and 
     transit cooperation, precursor chemical control, and demand 
     reduction;

[[Page S1522]]

       ``(2) has accomplished the goals described in the 
     applicable bilateral narcotics control agreement with the 
     United States or a multilateral agreement;
       ``(3) has taken legal and law enforcement measures to 
     prevent and punish public corruption, especially by senior 
     government officials, that facilitates the production, 
     processing, or shipment of narcotic and psychotropic drugs 
     and other controlled substances, or that discourages the 
     investigation or prosecution of such acts; and
       ``(4) in the case of a country that is a producer of licit 
     opium--
       ``(A) maintains licit production and stockpiles of opium at 
     levels no higher than those consistent with licit market 
     demand; and
       ``(B) has taken adequate steps to prevent significant 
     diversion of its licit cultivation and production of opium 
     into illicit markets and to prevent illicit cultivation and 
     production of opium.
       ``(d) Omission for National Security Reasons.--
       ``(1) In general.--The President may omit from 
     identification in a report under subsection (b) a country 
     identified in the most recent report under subsection (a) if 
     the President determines that the vital national security 
     interests of the United States require that the country be so 
     omitted.
       ``(2) Notice to congress.--If the President omits a country 
     under paragraph (1) from a report under subsection (b), the 
     President shall include in the report under that subsection--
       ``(A) a full and complete description of the vital national 
     security interests of the United States placed at risk if the 
     country is not so omitted; and
       ``(B) a statement weighing the risk described in 
     subparagraph (A) against the risk posed to the vital national 
     security interests of the United States by reason of the 
     failure of the country to cooperate fully with the United 
     States in combatting narcotics or to take adequate steps to 
     combat narcotics on its own.
       ``(e) Congressional Action.--
       ``(1) In general.--The provisions of subsection (f) shall 
     apply to a country in a fiscal year if Congress enacts a 
     joint resolution, not later than March 30 of the fiscal year, 
     providing that such provisions shall apply to the country in 
     the fiscal year.
       ``(2) Covered countries.--A joint resolution referred to in 
     paragraph (1) may apply to a country for a fiscal year only 
     if the country was not identified in the report in the fiscal 
     year under subsection (b).
       ``(3) Senate procedures.--Any joint resolution under this 
     subsection shall be considered in the Senate in accordance 
     with the provisions of section 601(b) of the International 
     Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act of 1976 
     (Public Law 94-329; 90 Stat. 765), except that for purposes 
     of that section the certification referred to in section 
     601(a)(2)(B) of that Act shall be the applicable report of 
     the President under subsection (b) of this section.
       ``(f) Withholding of Bilateral Assistance and Opposition to 
     Multilateral Assistance.--
       ``(1) Bilateral assistance.--Commencing on March 1 of a 
     fiscal year in which a country is identified in a report 
     under subsection (b), or March 31 in the case of a country 
     covered by a joint resolution enacted in accordance with 
     subsection (e), fifty percent of the United States assistance 
     allocated to the country for the fiscal year in the report 
     required by section 653 shall be withheld from obligation and 
     expenditure.
       ``(2) Multilateral assistance.--Commencing on March 1 of a 
     year in which a country is identified in a report under 
     subsection (b), or March 31 in the case of a country covered 
     by a joint resolution enacted in accordance with subsection 
     (e), the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United 
     States Executive Director of each multilateral development 
     bank to vote, on and after that date, against any loan or 
     other utilization of the funds of such institution for the 
     country.
       ``(3) Multilateral development bank defined.--In this 
     subsection, the term `multilateral development bank' means 
     the following:
       ``(A) The International Bank for Reconstruction and 
     Development.
       ``(B) The International Development Association.
       ``(C) The Inter-American Development Bank.
       ``(D) The Asian Development Bank.
       ``(E) The African Development Bank.
       ``(F) The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
       ``(g) Appropriate Committees of Congress Defined.--In this 
     section, the term `appropriate committees of Congress' means 
     the following:
       ``(1) The Committees on Foreign Relations and 
     Appropriations of the Senate.
       ``(2) The Committees on International Relations and 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives.''.
       (b) Relationship to Current Certification Process.--Section 
     490 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2291j) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(i) Limitation on Applicability.--This section shall not 
     apply during fiscal years 2002, 2003, and 2004. For 
     limitations on assistance during those fiscal years for 
     countries not cooperating with United States counterdrug 
     efforts see section 490A.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 489(a)(3)(A) of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2291h(a)(3)(A)) is 
     amended by inserting after ``under section 490(h)'' the 
     following ``or, in 2002, 2003, and 2004, as otherwise 
     determined by the President for purposes of this section''.

     SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF MAJOR DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATIONS IN 
                   INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL STRATEGY 
                   REPORT.

       Section 489 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 
     U.S.C. 2291h), as amended by this Act, is further amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by adding after the flush matter at 
     the end of paragraph (7) the following new paragraph (8):
       ``(8) The identity of each organization determined by the 
     President to be a major drug trafficking organization, 
     including a description of the activities of such 
     organization during the 2 fiscal years preceding the fiscal 
     year of the report.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Major drug trafficking organization.--The term `major 
     drug trafficking organization' means any organization engaged 
     in substantial amounts of illicit activity to cultivate, 
     produce, manufacture, distribute, sell, finance, or transport 
     narcotic drugs, controlled substances, or listed chemicals, 
     engages in money laundering or proceeds from such activities, 
     or otherwise endeavor or attempt to do so, or to assist, 
     abet, conspire, or collude with others to do so.
       ``(2) Narcotic drug; controlled substance; listed 
     chemical.--The terms `narcotic drug', `controlled substance', 
     and `listed chemical' have the meanings given those terms in 
     section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
     802).''.
                                 ______