[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 26 (Thursday, March 1, 2001)]
[House]
[Pages H614-H619]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    PROBLEMS WITH ILLEGAL NARCOTICS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simmons). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 3, 2001, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon and this evening I would like 
to talk about our problems with illegal narcotics. We have a new 
President. We have a new Congress.
  I have recently, as of 2 weeks ago, been named chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources that 
deals with both the authorizing and the oversight on the narcotics 
question. Today I would kind of like to lay out where we are likely to 
head this year and some of the fundamental issues that we will be 
addressing.
  This subcommittee has been headed by former Congressman Bill Zeliff, 
by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), the Speaker of the House, 
by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), and we have been working 
together since the Republicans took over Congress to put an aggressive 
plan together with how to deal with drug abuse in America.
  What we saw in 1992 to 1994 was such a dramatic rise in drug abuse in 
America that since 1994 we would have to have a reduction of 50 percent 
among young people to get back to where we were in 1992. We had been 
making steady progress for over a decade, but two events, in my 
opinion, set the whole chart in the wrong direction.
  One was we cut our interdiction budget and let the drugs pour into 
our country, which gave a cheaper supply on the street in more purity 
and potency to the illegal narcotics.
  Secondly, the messages were sent in our culture, including at the top 
of our political structure, that hey, I did not inhale, kind of joked 
around about drug abuse. We saw such a dramatic rise.
  Let me repeat that, in 2 years drug abuse in America soared so much 
in 1992-1994 that among young people it would take a 50 percent 
reduction to get back to where it was the first 2 years of the Clinton 
administration.
  Let me explain a couple of things, because I am going to talk more in 
detail tonight about interdiction. We just had a delegation, a 
congressional delegation, that went to an antinarcotics conference in 
Bolivia. We were there for several days, as well as in South America 
and the former landing operations that we have now to replace Panama. 
And I am going to get into that in more detail as we get into this 
discussion of the issue.

  Because of Plan Colombia, we had, I believe, 5 congressional 
delegations, most from the Senate in Colombia, including ours, in the 
last district work period, because we have had a lot more focus in the 
United States on what is happening down in Colombia, not only in 
Congress, but the movie Traffic that is currently a nominated movie for 
the Oscars.
  West Wing, the TV show, in the last couple of weeks featured a 
question of lost Americans in Colombia and the attention to the subject 
has soared. Before I get into the details of Plan Colombia, it is 
important to lay out a more comprehensive approach.
  Mr. Speaker, we have to eradicate the drugs at the source. We have to 
work to interdict it. We need to work to arrest and prosecute those who 
are dealing and using it. We need to work with prevention. We need to 
work with treatment.
  That is, in fact, what we do in the budget. Frequently, those who 
would attract those who are trying to fight illegal narcotics say all 
we are concerned about is Plan Colombia. The efforts in interdiction 
total $2.2 billion, or 17 percent of the Federal budget, and 
interdiction cannot be done by State and local governments.
  We do not want the State of Indiana that I represent going and 
sending P-3 customs planes to get intelligence in the air. We do not 
want the State of Mississippi sending out boats to interdict in 
international waters. That is a Federal role.
  International aid is $.9 billion, or another 5 percent. So total, the 
international aid interdiction totals 17 percent.
  Domestic law enforcement from the Federal level aid is 51 percent of 
our budget, $9.8 billion. What we are doing in domestic law enforcement 
is almost three times as much as what we do in the international arena. 
That is only the Federal Government.
  The State and local government also have even larger expenditures in 
law enforcement, the result of drug abuse in America.
  In demand reduction, because sometimes we would think when we hear 
debates on the House floor that Plan Colombia, which is $1.2 billion, 
just dwarfs that. Why do we not spend it in treatment? Why do we not 
spend it in prevention.
  We spend $3.8 billion Federal dollars in treatment and $2.5 billion 
in prevention, or $6.3 billion, or over twice as much as we spend in 
interdiction. The reason that is important to note here is only the 
Federal Government can do international interdiction. State and local 
governments and the private sector do most prevention and treatment 
programs.
  The amount of dollars that we spend in prevention and treatment far 
dwarfs anything we spend in interdiction. It is just that only Congress 
can do international interdiction, whereas we have many, many State and 
local government and private sector programs in addition to this 
category at the Federal level being over twice the amount as 
interdiction international.
  Let me give my colleagues some more examples, because every once in a 
while somebody will say to me, whether we are down in Central and South 
America or here, why are we so focused on interdiction and why are we 
not more focused on prevention and treatment?
  Mr. Speaker, I also serve on the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce, and I have worked with the drug free and safe schools 
program. I also have an amendment currently, arguably the most 
unpopular amendment in the college campuses in America, where I said if 
you were convicted of either dealing or using illegal narcotics when 
you had a student loan, you would lose your loan for one year unless 
you go through a treatment program and tested clean twice.
  If you are caught a second time, you lose your loan for 2 years, 
unless you go through a treatment program and tested clean twice. The 
third time, you cannot get a loan, which is pretty generous.
  The goal here is to get people into treatment and to prevent people 
from getting onto drugs in the first place. If you are a dealer, by the 
way, that is not quite as generous a policy, it is two times.
  The reason that is important is because those who say they really 
want prevention and treatment often criticize that amount as well. It 
seems like they want to criticize interdiction, but they also do not 
want actual accountability to people who abuse drugs, even if it means 
they will be led into a treatment program.
  Rolling Stone magazine, I guess the current issue, attacks me again. 
They attacked me in the fall for this amendment saying somehow this is 
depriving, I guess, drug abusers and drug users of a tax-subsidized 
college education.
  Thirdly, we have sponsored legislation which I carried through 
committee, and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) drafted, on 
community prevention grants. We have several of these in my district. 
This sometimes can be used for groups like Pride in Noble County, which 
is in my district. It can be used for other community drug prevention 
programs.

  We also passed legislation to help businesses assist in how to work 
with drug testing and drug treatment programs that are within the civil 
liberties demands of any program.
  We cannot just randomly test people. We have to have an equal, fair 
process, multiple tests so you do not get sued. Your goal here is not 
to play gotcha. Your goal is to help the individuals, because as 
businesses invest in people and develop them, they need to figure out 
how to help them be productive and not mess up their lives.

[[Page H615]]

  The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstad) and others and I have 
cosponsored a bill to require drug and alcohol treatment as part of any 
health insurance plan. These are important to see, because tonight when 
I talk about interdiction, I am not saying there are not other aspects 
of the drug problem we have to deal with. We have to have a 
comprehensive approach.
  Our committee, in addition to the interdiction, part of the way we 
wound up with the authorizing is ONDCP gets its budget approval and 
authorizing from our committee. General McCaffrey is the head of that, 
and hopefully under this administration, the efforts and the gains we 
have made in the last few years will be continued, and we will not have 
any backup in the sense of downgrading the Drug Czar's office or of 
getting rid of drug certification.
  One important part, and I want to just take a minute, because this is 
another kind of hot issue being debated right now because of President 
Fox meeting with President Bush and President Pastrana meeting with 
President Bush, and that is what is the role of drug certification?
  Whenever we meet with Central and South American countries and other 
countries around the world, they are very concerned that we have a 
certification process here in Congress that can pass judgment on 
whether their countries are working on drug certification.
  They have a similar concern with human rights certification. If we 
drop drug certification, we certainly will be dropping human rights 
certification, too, because both things have the same rationale, and 
that is, we have certain standards on the money that we distribute that 
is passed through the government by the taxpayers of the United States, 
and we expect that the countries who get that aid or, for that matter, 
the drug certification is not tied to this directly, but it is 
something certainly to consider, is trade.
  If they want benefits from America, then we have a right to say that 
the American taxpayers want to make sure that they are helping us with 
our biggest domestic problem, and that they are helping in not using 
any of our funds for human rights violations.
  I hope that this administration, while working in a positive way with 
Mexico and the other South and Central American countries, will not 
drop the drug certification process or ask Congress to drop, because 
these would be bad signals, much like the bad signals that were sent 
out at the beginning of former President Clinton's administration. We 
do not want to have bad signals come out here at the beginning of 
President Bush's administration, even if that would not be his direct 
intent.
  There are some difficulties. I admit that there are difficulties. For 
example, in the President's budget, do we keep the drug free and safe 
schools, or do we block grant more funds to give State and local 
schools more of an opportunity to make the decisions what they want to 
spend it on? Because if we do, in fact, only create five grant 
categories, as is potentially going to come in the President's 
education bill, that means we could be eliminating the only prevention 
program that we fund through the Federal Government, or the primary 
one, which is safe and drug free schools. That will be a difficult 
question that we have to address.
  Secondly, we have in the faith-based question in the new faith based 
office, how do you deal with the fact that many of the most effective 
drug abuse programs, for example, Teen Challenge, Victory Life Temples 
in Texas, many of the most effective programs in America are religious-
based, and how do we make sure that people who are not comfortable with 
the religious orientation, religious content-driven curriculum have 
alternatives because we cannot force and should not force anyone into a 
program that they do not agree with, yet those programs are very 
effective because it can change somebody's heart. You can often get 
them off drugs; otherwise, they often learn just how to scam the 
system.
  We also have to face a very difficult fact; not only has it been hard 
to eliminate drugs at the source country level, but quite frankly, the 
results and the facts on everything from drug courts, which I support, 
to drug treatment programs, which I support, to drug free schools 
programs, which I support, have mixed effectiveness records as well. 
Sometimes it is a amount of dollars.
  If your drug treatment program is not long enough, the person does 
not get completely rehabilitated. Sometimes it is dollars at the 
schools levels. Their dollars are so little about all they can get done 
is passing out rulers or pencils.
  We have to figure out how to make the dollars effective. There are 
other reasons why they are not as effective either. We have to look at 
those. Are they targeting the right people? Is the message something 
that actually appeals to kids or do the messages appeal more to adults?
  Then another big question that was tackled under General McCaffrey as 
Drug Czar was a media campaign. We had a national media campaign that 
looked in lump sum like a lot of dollars, but compared to what people 
were getting hit with in the movies and on television and, in 
particular, in rock music, it was a little tiny dribble in a huge 
ocean, and was our ad campaign very successful in changing people's 
attitudes, and how do we do that.
  A lot of the questions that we are going to deal with in treatment 
and prevention are also very difficult. It is not just that what is 
happening in Colombia is difficult and what is happening in law 
enforcement is difficult, it is also difficult in prevention and 
treatment.
  Some people say, well, it is just hopeless. We should just give up. 
We cannot eliminate drug abuse.
  I happen to believe that the core problem is sin, because as long as 
people are going to sin, which they always will, it is going to be very 
difficult to eliminate it. Even if we do not accept that premise and 
want to say well, the problems are family breakup, their lack of 
economic opportunity, there is self-esteem problems, all of which are, 
to a degree, true, and certainly they are mostly intractable problems.

                              {time}  1615

  We cannot in the Federal Government say every family has to stay 
together. We have to make sure that every single person gets a job. We 
cannot pass a law to say that your self-esteem must be high. Obviously 
we cannot do that, but we need to work towards those things.
  Mr. Speaker, we know that 70 to 85 percent of all crime in America is 
alcohol and illegal narcotics related. We hear about so-called 
victimless crime where someone is thrown in a jail for using a small 
amount of marijuana. I would like to see those cases; there are not 
very many. The bulk of crime that is drug related is robbery, assault, 
to get money or it is because the illegal narcotics has been an enabler 
and have resulted in child abuse, spouse abuse, rape, you name the 
problem. 70 to 85 percent of those problems are drug and alcohol 
related. It is clearly the biggest at least enabler problem that we 
have in this country.
  Do we just give up? People say Congress has spent a lot of money, and 
has not eliminated drug abuse. Do we just give up. We have been 
spending money trying to eliminate child abuse since America was 
founded. Do we just give up? We have been trying to eliminate spouse 
abuse. Do we just give up? We have been trying to eliminate rape in 
America. Do we just give up? Of course not.
  If you think that the drug war is something that takes 12 months or 
24 months, you do not understand the nature of the problem. This is a 
problem that comes up every time young people are born, move into 
elementary and into junior high years, start to be exposed to the 
temptations, you have a whole other market that has to be reeducated 
and relearn why drug abuse is a problem. Just like racism and child 
abuse and spouse abuse, it is a never-ending problem that sometimes we 
get more control over and sometimes we get less control over, and we 
need to work on getting control of this.
  There is a fad in America of ``medicinal'' use of marijuana, implying 
that there is anything in marijuana that is good, rather than it has 
one subcomponent in it that can be helpful in alleviating vomiting when 
you take certain things for cancer, that that component can be isolated 
and used other ways. Much like there is probably one good component in 
arsenic, there is

[[Page H616]]

probably one good chemical component in most things. But marijuana is 
not medicinal. Marijuana is no different than any other cigarette 
except that it is more potent and more dangerous than other cigarettes.
  Mr. Speaker, for example, that kind of fad and the legalization fad, 
today in Washington we have an assistant health minister from the 
Netherlands bragging on C-SPAN earlier today and other places about how 
great the Netherlands program has been. Anybody who has heard of the 
drug Ecstacy in America and knows how it is ripping apart, starting on 
the East Coast and moving into the West gradually, and see what it is 
doing to individuals and young kids in our country, thank the 
Netherlands.
  Their legalization program have made them the home port for the 
entire world for synthetic drugs. They can talk about how great their 
legalization program has worked, but they are the exporters causing 
problems in my hometown, and yet they have the nerve to tell the world 
how great their legalization program is working.
  Mr. Speaker, I wanted to go through the demand focus before I move 
into Plan Colombia. First, on this chart let me illustrate a couple of 
fundamental points about the drug question. We have a hearing tomorrow 
morning at 9:30 where we are going to have General Pace, the head of 
SOUTHCOM, the military command structure of our Department of Defense 
that has the area south of Mexico and in South America with Randy 
Beers, who is the narcotics chief in the State Department, and also Mr. 
Marshall, who is the director of the DEA to talk about Plan Colombia in 
particular.
  We know where the drugs come from, and we know where they come into 
the United States. That said, it is still hard to get control of it. 
Colombia, Peru just to the south and Bolivia, the Andean region, 
constitute basically 100 percent of the cocaine that comes into 
America, almost all of the heroin that is currently in America with the 
exception of some Asian heroin in the West, and most of our high-grade 
marijuana in America. So we know where it comes from and how it gets 
here.
  It comes through the western Caribbean, through the eastern Pacific, 
often then up through Mexico, occasionally up increasingly through the 
Caribbean corridor which has gone down as low as 38 percent, as high as 
58 percent, it depends where the pressure is. Now, if you look at this, 
it gets harder as the drugs move from the source country. And 
understand Colombia, Bolivia and Peru are not little countries. They 
are together about the same size as the United States, so it is still a 
large area to cover. As they move into whole Caribbean Sea and the 
eastern Pacific and can come into the United States from any direction, 
and much of it also goes to Europe and Asia, it becomes more difficult 
as we move from those countries.
  The next thing is that in Colombia, it is also clear that coca and 
heroin poppy are not grown everywhere in the Andean country. While they 
can be grown in other places, it tends to be that the coca is 
concentrated near the equator with a certain elevation, and you can get 
better yields and better grades in some parts of these countries. 
Furthermore, the heroin poppy basically needs a high temperature, lots 
of humidity, that is why the Equator, at 8,000 feet or above. So within 
these countries, they can only go basically in some places. 
Furthermore, in those countries they do not want to be where there are 
population centers or roads because then it is easier for the military 
and the police to get them.
  In Colombia there are two basic regions where the coca is grown. What 
has happened over the last few years for those who say that this is a 
hopeless battle, Bolivia at one point, because of the Chapare and 
Camiri areas being such a great area to grow coca, once produced 30 to 
50 percent of the coca production. It is now down to less than 10 with 
their President committed it getting it zero in the next few years 
through working with alternative development.
  In Peru that used to be producing 30 to 40 percent, they made 
dramatic efforts to reduce it in Peru. Now, the instability of their 
current governmental situation leads the vulnerability back towards 
Peru. Ecuador, which is right up and right near the big cocaine area of 
Colombia, has not had the same level of growing of coca for a number of 
reasons. But they are very worried that this may spread to them along 
the Putamyo River.
  Now, there are a number of reasons. One is the road system is a 
little more developed in the areas, that there is so much instability, 
and Ecuador has never been a target, five Presidents in 5 years. The 
tradition has been more in Colombia partly for access to the United 
States.
  Let me illustrate one other thing. What is our compelling national 
interest in this? I have been going on about 70 to 85 percent of our 
crime in America being related to drug abuse. But it is more than just 
that.
  Panama here, for those who are historians realize that this really is 
Colombia and was made Panama when Colombia would not take our offer 
when we wanted to build the canal there.
  The narcotraffickers and others, these circles represent areas where 
the different terrorist groups have taken over part of Colombia have 
moved into the southern part of Panama and are in danger of threatening 
and shutting off or at least gaining control of the Panama Canal.
  We have had our military kicked out of Panama. We cannot have our 
AWACS and our other spy planes which we were doing to interdict 
traffickers for the last few years, we cannot fly them out of Panama 
anymore. So we are busy building forward landing locations, one here in 
Ecuador, one over here in Aruba and Curacao. We have refueling stops up 
here in Honduras and in El Salvador because we have had to scatter 
around.
  But what that means is right now some of our spy planes because we 
so, in my opinion, botched the Panama Canal situation, that we are 
having to come down from Puerto Rico or way in the United States and 
spending so much time trying to get a plane down there that they can 
fly around a little bit and then head back.
  Now, in the Netherlands Antilles, we have had some usage of their 
fields, but we do not have an AWACS down there. Plus, quite frankly, 
the last administration diverted most of our intelligence capabilities 
over to the Balkan area.
  Now the reason that becomes important, as I said, there is a trade 
nexus here. There is a drug nexus here. But this area is our choke-
point on oil. Seventeen percent of America's oil comes from the Lake 
Maracaibo Venezuela area.
  Colombia and Ecuador and Venezuela together supply more oil to 
America than the Middle East. We have had our attention diverted into 
every skirmish and every terrible human rights crisis in the world, and 
we are not watching in our own hemisphere. Our trade choke-point, the 
agriculture products that come from the Midwest and down and go to Asia 
come through here.
  We are not watching our energy choke-point. We whine if gas hits 
$1.50. What if we lose this area to the narcotraffickers and they have 
a gun to our head and gas goes to $4 or $5 a gallon. What happens to 
the pickup makers in my district? What happens to people who drive 
trucks? What happens to the people who make RVs? What happens to the 
people who build boats? Ask the question, What are we going to do if we 
have this area fall under the narcotraffickers? We have a compelling 
national interest in these areas.
  I want to respond, too, to two other things. One is in Plan Colombia. 
One would think from hearing much of the debate that Plan Colombia is 
predominantly a military exercise.

  Now, I would like to insert into the Record two parts from the U.S. 
support for Plan Colombia from the U.S. Embassy document. And I have 
marked the pages, and I will insert that.
  I want to read a couple of the highlights. We are spending 25 million 
to establish a human-rights task force. So it is 25 million to 
establish a human-rights task force, 7 million to strengthen human-
rights institutions, 4 million to enhance protection of human-rights 
workers, 15 million to witness and judicial security and witness 
protection in human-rights cases, 2.5 million in child soldier 
rehabilitation, 1.5 million in human-rights monitoring, support for 
U.N. human-rights offices another million.

[[Page H617]]

  Then we are also investing in their governing capacity and reform to 
judicial system; for prosecuting or training, 4 million; for how to 
training judges, 3.5 million; how to train public defenders, 2 million; 
how to create the houses of justice, 1 million; policy reform criminal 
code, 1.5 million; policy reform enabling environment, 1 million.
  We also have different programs on asset forfeiture, on countering 
organized financial crime, on prison security, on judicial police 
training academy, on multilateral case initiatives, and a whole series 
of things.
  I wanted to point that out because what we realize here is our drug 
consumption, America has literally nearly destroyed one of the oldest 
democracies in South America, a democracy as old as America. The narco-
terrorists represent a public support percent of 4 percent. The number 
of people in American prisons is approximately 1.5 percent. With one 
family member, they would represent 3 percent of our population.
  This is not a rising up of a dissident movement in a country. These 
are people who predominantly are terrorists, funded by our drug habit 
in America that have undermined their governmental structure.
  Now, as we work with trying to get control of the country, enable 
their structures to work again, and anybody who saw the movie ``Clear 
and Present Danger,'' while it was a fictitious movie based on a 
fictitious book by Tom Clancy, I asked former Ambassador Morris Busby, 
who was ambassador at the time that so many of those judges were 
killed, whether the movie was accurate. He said not completely. I died 
in the movie.
  It was basically accurate in the sense of nearly one-third of their 
judges were killed. Their police departments in many of these countries 
are terrorized because of the weaponry and the dollars that the 
dissident groups have.

                              {time}  1630

  Now, that said, I am also going to insert some marked pages here from 
Plan Colombia, a document from President Pastrana in Colombia, for the 
Record. Let me read this paragraph:
  ``In short, the hopes of the Colombian people and the work of the 
Colombian government have been frustrated by drug trafficking, which 
makes it extremely difficult for the government to fulfill its 
constitutional duty. A vicious and pervasive cycle of violence and 
corruption has drained the resources essential to the construction and 
success of a modern state.''
  President Pastrana has set aside a demilitarized zone for the FARC. 
The right wing terrorists are now into narcotics and almost as large as 
the FARC, but there is a demilitarized zone where the president is 
trying to work with the peace process so at least those who have been 
concerned about land reform and other issues in Colombia have the 
ability to separate themselves from the narcoterrorists. He is working 
at that. But we have grave concerns that it has become a launching area 
and a protection area under the guise of a DMZ for the other areas.
  Now, in trying to reestablish all those dollars I said for criminal 
justice reform and for legal reform, first there has to be order and 
the crops have to be eradicated; and then they can do the alternative 
development, which gives people an alternative to illegal narcotics.
  Now, in addition to that, I worked with the gentleman from Alabama 
(Mr. Callahan) in last year's foreign operations where the University 
of Notre Dame, the Kellogg Institute, the Ford Foundation and others 
have put together a human rights center for Colombians who fled, often 
with $1 to $2 million prices on their head. Many of their top writers, 
many of their top people in the movie industry, people in all forms of 
cultural life in Colombia have gravitated to the University of Notre 
Dame because of Catholic ties and because of this center; and we need 
to help keep their culture together. This is an old democracy being 
destroyed in large part because of our drug consumption.
  Now, they have to fight the battle there. A part of Plan Colombia I 
ask to insert is very clear. They have asked us for help. If they are 
not willing to do the fighting on the ground, if they are not willing 
to work to rebuild their institutions, there is not much we can do 
here. We have been through that before. But when people like the 
Colombian National Police, where they have had 30,000 police officers 
killed as they battled illegal narcotics, how can we not help them? The 
bullets being shot at them are coming predominantly with American and 
European money. All the battle is because in the soaring into Colombia, 
most of which has occurred in the last 5 to 8 years, is because of our 
habits.
  Now, if we can help them, and that is all they are asking, is will we 
help them financially; they will do the fighting, they will do the 
rebuilding, but can we help them financially, our answer should be, 
since we have at stake our energy, or kids' and families' lives on the 
street with drug abuse and our trade, our answer should be, yes, what 
can we do. We should thank them for being willing to risk their lives 
to help fight our battles.
  My colleagues can also see in the President's budget additional funds 
for the Andean region. Because if we are successful working with 
Colombia and giving them the resources with which to fight this battle, 
the narcotraffickers are not just going to give up. They will endanger 
other countries in the zone. As we heard the vice president of Bolivia 
so articulately say, what we need to do is convince people. People do 
not want to deal in narcotics that destroy people's lives; but we have 
to give them an alternative life-style to say, look, at least decent 
living can be made in other things. To some degree that means 
infrastructure questions; to some degree it means helping them with 
marketing, with training and different things so that they do not go 
back into narcotrafficking.

  I do not believe they have a moral claim on us. I do not believe 
anybody who grows illegal narcotics or deals in illegal narcotics has a 
moral claim on the United States that says we must give them money. But 
I believe it is in our self-interest to help them, or they in fact will 
grow coca and will deal it. So it is in our self-interest to do so. 
Plus, I believe it is our moral charity that says, look, certainly they 
would not be doing this illegal activity if we were not consuming it. 
So we are going to help them.
  But there is a difference from the cocaleros, the people who grow the 
coca, demanding a moral right to X amount of money in their life-style. 
We do not tell the kids on the street who are making $300 for 10 
minutes' working as a lookout that if they go to McDonald's that they 
can earn $300. But we do have an obligation in America to try to make 
sure that people have a decent education; that there are economic 
opportunities for all Americans and that they can make it if they work 
at it. But they are not going to make $300 for 10 minutes as a lookout.
  Some of these countries seem to be thinking that we are going to 
replace their cocaine income. No, what we want to do is, through trade 
policies and through helping them and their countries, get enough of an 
income that a mother and dad can support their kids with an acceptable 
life-style, where they are not hungry, where they have a shelter above 
their heads, where they can learn to read and write and have the 
potential to advance themselves. And to some degree we owe it to them 
because we have moved and fueled this narcotics effort.
  So I thank my colleagues for giving me this opportunity today. As I 
say, we have a hearing tomorrow on Plan Colombia. We have money in the 
current President's budget, and this will be a hot debate over the next 
few months. As our colleagues who have just been down there, with many 
more going in a couple of weeks, and as the national media focuses on 
this issue, we will hear lots more about it. I intend to come down to 
the House floor and continue to stress the overall Andean package, of 
which Plan Colombia is part. It is part of a comprehensive approach to 
drug abuse, which is our number one source of crime in America, 70 to 
85 percent, according to every sheriff and prosecutor in the country. 
And also it is a threat to our energy and economic trade in America and 
our very economic system.
  Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record those articles I referred to 
earlier.

[[Page H618]]

  Alternative Economic Development and Resettlement--Facts and Figures

       Alternative Development (Voluntary Eradication): US $30M.
       Assists farmers growing coca on small plots (three hectares 
     or less) to obtain a licit income from agricultural, 
     forestry, or livestock production and marketing.
       The activity concentrates in three areas: (1) technical 
     assistance in production, processing and marketing of licit, 
     alternative products; (2) social infrastructure, such as 
     schools and health clinics, and productive infrastructure, 
     such as access roads and agro-industry; and (3) strengthening 
     of local producer, community and government entities to 
     eliminate illicit crops.
       Environmental Programs: US $2.5M.
       Protects Colombia's globally important biological 
     diversity. By introducing economic alternatives to 
     deforestation for communities living on the edges of 
     protected areas, these programs offset ecological damage done 
     by coca and poppy production in the Colombian Amazon and 
     protect watersheds.
       Support to Affected Municipalities: US $12M.
       Encourages participation by municipalities in deciding 
     investment priorities, on agreeing how to use social 
     development funds, and in establishing oversight and 
     monitoring procedures. This program will assist approximately 
     100 municipalities that have been involved in illicit crop 
     eradication and that are aiding displaced persons.
       Assist Internally Displaced Persons--Small Infrastructure 
     Projects: US $22.5M.
       Up to 50 municipalities are being identified in northern 
     Colombia where support for displaced persons can be 
     established. Medium term support for displaced persons is 
     being implemented in cooperation with international 
     organizations through grants for public infrastructure 
     projects such as schoolrooms, water systems, road and bridge 
     constitution and repair, and market shelters. The communities 
     themselves select the projects, provided they meet criteria 
     for participation in the development of municipal decisions, 
     transparency in financial management, and active 
     participation in alternative development or other governance 
     activities. Approximately 100,000 displaced persons will 
     benefit from these programs.
       Alternative Development (Small Infrastructure Projects for 
     existing Communities): US $10M.
       Unless a community is able to improve its social and 
     economic situation it is likely to return to illicit crop 
     cultivation even after it has completed an eradication 
     effort. These funds provide public infrastructure projects 
     such as schoolrooms, water systems, road and bridge 
     construction and repair, through municipal governments to 
     provide the conditions in which communities continue to raise 
     licit crops.
       Alternative Development in Southern Colombia: US $10M.
       Provides technical assistance and material support to 
     municipal governments and local NGOs to strengthen local 
     social services including education, health, and potable 
     water. The program also provides agricultural extension 
     services, agricultural inputs and marketing support. In 
     exchange, some 2,000 farmers, through farmer associations, 
     sign agreements voluntarily to abandon coca production. The 
     entire Alternative Development zone, comprising eight 
     municipalities in southern Colombia and 18,000 families, will 
     benefit from this program.
       Emergency Assistance in Southern Colombia: US $15M.
       This program provides temporary food and shelter assistance 
     for up to six months to families displaced by conflict and 
     coca eradication in southern Colombia.
       USAID Operating Expenses for Managing these programs: US 
     $4M.
       Total U.S. Plan Colombia support for alternative 
     development and displaced persons: US $106M.
                                  ____


Protecting Human Rights, Improving Governing Capacity and Reforming the 
                   Judicial System: Facts and Figures


                              human rights

       Establish Human Rights Task Forces: US $25M.
       Strengthen Human Rights Institutions: US $7M.
       Enhance Protection of Human Rights Workers: US $4M.
       Witness and Judicial Security and Witness/Judicial Security 
     in Human Rights Cases: US $15M.
       Child Soldier Rehabilitation: US $2.5M.
       Human Rights Monitoring: US $1.5M.
       Support for U.N. Human Rights Office: US $1M.


    improving governing capacity and reform to the judicial system.

       Prosecutor Training: US $4M.
       Oral Accusatory Public Trials and Training of Judges: US 
     $3.5M.
       Public Defenders: US $2M.
       Casas de Justicia: US $1M.
       Policy Reform--Criminal Code: US $1.5M.
       Policy Reform--Enabling Environment: US $1M.


            additional support for colombian law enforcement

       Asset Forfeiture/Money-Laundering Task Force/Anti-
     corruption program/Asset Management Program/Financial Crime 
     Program Counter-narcotics Investigative Units: US $15.OM.
       Countering Organized Financial Crime: US $14M.
       Prison Security: US $4.5M.
       Judicial Police Training Academy: US $3M.
       Multilateral Case Initiative: US $3M.
       Banking Supervision Assistance and Revenue Enhancement 
     Assistance: US $1.5M.
       Maritime Enforcement and Port Security: US $2.5M.
       Train Customs Police and Customs and Training Assistance: 
     US $3M.
       Military HR & Legal Reform: US $1.5M.
       Anti-Kidnapping Strategy: US $1M.
       Army JAG School: US $1M.
       Total U.S. Plan Colombia support for protecting human 
     rights, improving governing capacity and reform to the 
     judicial system: US $119M.
                                  ____

       In short, the hopes of the Colombian people and the work of 
     the Colombian government have been frustrated by drug 
     trafficking, which makes it extremely difficult for the 
     government to fulfill its constitutional duty. A vicious and 
     pervasive cycle of violence and corruption has drained the 
     resources essential to the construction and success of a 
     modern State.
       We understand that reaching our objectives will depend on a 
     social and governmental process that may take several years--
     a time when it is critical to achieve a lasting consensus 
     within a Colombian society where people understand and demand 
     their rights, but are also willing to abide by their 
     responsibilities.
       In the face of all this, my government is absolutely 
     committed to strengthen the State, regain the confidence of 
     our citizens, and restore the basic norms of a peaceful 
     society. Attaining peace is not a matter of will alone. Peace 
     must be built; it can come only through stabilizing the 
     State, and enhancing its capacity to guarantee each and every 
     citizen, throughout the entire country, their security and 
     the freedom to exercise their rights and liberties.
       Negotiaiton with the insurgents, which my government 
     initiated, is at the core of our strategy because it is one 
     critical way to resolve a forty-year-old historic conflict 
     that raises enormous obstacles to creating the modern and 
     progressive state Colombia so urgently needs to become. The 
     search for peace and the defense of democratic institutions 
     will require long effort, faith and determination, to deal 
     successfully with the pressures and doubts inherent in so 
     difficult a process.
       The fight against drug trafficking constitutes another 
     important part of Plan Colombia. The strategy would advance a 
     partnership between consumer and producer countries, based on 
     the principles of reciprocity and equality. The traffic in 
     illicit drugs is clearly a transnational and complex threat, 
     destructive to all our societies, with enormous consequences 
     for those who consume this poison, and enormous effects from 
     the violence and corruption fed by the immense revenues the 
     drug trade generates. The solution will never come from 
     finger-pointing by either producer or consumer countries. Our 
     own national efforts will not be enough unless they are part 
     of a truly international alliance against illegal drugs.
       Colombia has demonstrated its absolute commitment and made 
     heavy sacrifices to forge a definitive solution to the 
     phenomenon of drug trafficking, to the armed conflict, human 
     rights violations and destruction of the environment caused 
     by drug production. Yet, in truth, we must acknowledge that 
     more than twenty years after marijuana cultivation came to 
     Colombia, along with increased cocaine and poppy cultivation, 
     drug trafficking continues to grow as a destabilizing force, 
     distorting the economy, reversing the advances made in land 
     distribution, corrupting society, multiplying violence, 
     depressing the investment climate--and most seriously, 
     providing increased resources to fund all armed groups.
       Colombia has been leading the global battle against drugs, 
     taking on the drug cartels and losing many of our best 
     citizens in the process. Now, as drug trafficking becomes a 
     more fragmented network, more internationalized, underground, 
     and thus harder to combat, the world continues testing new 
     strategies. More resources are being targeted for education 
     and prevention. We see the results in the increased 
     confiscation and expropriation of profits and properties 
     obtained from illegal drug trafficking. In Colombia, we have 
     recently launched operations to destroy processing 
     laboratories and distribution networks. We are improving and 
     tightening security and control of our rivers and airspace to 
     assure better interdiction, and we are exploring new ways to 
     eradicate illegal crops. The factors directly related to drug 
     trafficking--like money laundering, smuggling of chemicals, 
     and illegal arms trafficking--are components of a 
     multifaceted problem that must be dealt with across the 
     globe, wherever illicit drugs are produced, transported, or 
     consumed.
       Our success also requires reforms at the very heart of our 
     institutions, in particular, in our military forces to uphold 
     the law and return a sense of security to all 
     Colombians everywhere in Colombia. Strong, responsible, 
     responsive military and police forces committed to peace 
     and respect for human rights are indispensable to 
     consolidating and maintaining the rule of law. Also, we 
     need--and we are committed--to securing a modern and 
     effective judicial system sworn to defend and promote 
     respect for human rights. We will be tireless in this 
     cause, convinced that our first obligation as a government 
     is to guarantee that our citizens can exercise their

[[Page H619]]

     rights and fundamental liberties, free from fear.
       But Colombia's strategy for peace and progress also depends 
     on reforming and modernizing other institutions so the 
     political process can function as an effective instrument of 
     economic advancement and social justice. To make progress 
     here, we have to reduce the causes and provocations of 
     violence, by opening new paths to social participation and 
     creating a collective conscience which holds government 
     accountable for results. Here our strategy includes a 
     specific initiative to guarantee, within five years, full 
     access for all our people to education and an adequate 
     healthcare system, with special attention for the most 
     vulnerable and neglected. In addition, we plan to strengthen 
     local governments, in order to make them more sensitive and 
     responsive to the needs and will of our citizens. We will 
     also encourage active grassroots participation in our fight 
     against corruption, kidnapping, violence, and the 
     displacement of people and communities.
       Finally, Colombia requires aid to strengthen its economy 
     and generate employment. Our country needs better and fairer 
     access to markets where our products can compete. Assistance 
     from the United States, the European community and the rest 
     of the international community is vital to our economic 
     development. That development, in turn, is a critical counter 
     force to drug trafficking, because it brings alternative 
     legal employment, for individuals who might otherwise be lost 
     to organized crime or to the insurgent groups that feed off 
     drug-trafficking. We are convinced that the first step toward 
     meaningful worldwide globalization is to create a sense of 
     global solidarity. This is why Colombia is asking for support 
     from its partners. We cannot succeed without programs for 
     alternative development in rural areas, and easier 
     international access for our legitimate exports. This is the 
     only way to successfully offset the illegal drug trade.
       There are reasons to be optimistic about the future of 
     Colombia, especially if we receive a positive response from 
     the world community, as we work to create widespread 
     prosperity combined with justice. This will make it possible 
     for Colombians to pave the way to a lasting peace.
       The Spanish philosopher Miguel de Unamuno wrote: ``Faith is 
     not to believe in the invisible, but rather to create the 
     invisible.'' Today, a peaceful, progressive, drug-free 
     Colombia is an invisible ideal--but we are determined to make 
     it the reality of our future. With the full commitment of all 
     our resources and resolve, with the solidarity and assistance 
     of our international partners in the common fight against the 
     plague of drug trafficking, we can and will forge the new 
     reality of a modern, democratic, and peaceful Colombia, not 
     just surviving, but thriving in the new millennium as a proud 
     and dignified member of the world community.

                          ____________________