[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 101 (Thursday, July 19, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7957-S7958]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. Dodd (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr. Sessions):
  S. 1197. A bill to authorize a program of assistance to improve 
international building practices in eligible Latin American countries; 
to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that 
will improve building safety in Latin America, increase the cost-
effectiveness of our disaster relief assistance, and, most importantly, 
save lives. As many of us know, throughout the last decade, the people 
of Latin America have been the victims of numerous natural disasters 
that have resulted in death, property damage, and destruction. Indeed, 
in the last three years the continent has been ravaged by Hurricane 
Mitch, earthquakes in El Salvador and Peru, and horrendous rains and 
mudslides. These disasters have exacted a tremendous toll on the 
region, causing over 12,000 deaths, $40 billion in damage, and numerous 
injuries.
  The cost to rebuild following these disasters is prohibitive and 
places a tremendous burden on the already struggling emerging economies 
of Latin America. To mitigate this cost, the United States has 
frequently released disaster relief funds to help affected countries 
recover the injured, maintain order, and rebuild their infrastructure. 
For example, the combined assistance released by the United States 
following Hurricane Mitch and the recent earthquakes totals over $1.2 
billion. I fully support these appropriations, and believe that we have 
a duty to assist our neighbors and allies when they are confronted with 
natural disasters. I do, however, believe that we can make this 
assistance more cost-effective in the long run, while saving lives.
  As I stated, I fully support offering U.S. monetary assistance to 
rebuild following natural disasters. However, because much of Latin 
America does not utilize modern, up-to-date building codes, much of 
this assistance goes to waste. For example, following the earthquakes 
in El Salvador in 1986, the United States provided $98 million dollars 
to rebuild that country. Most of the reconstruction was done by local 
Salvadoran contractors, and these structures were not built to code. 
Now, 15 years later, following the most recent earthquakes in El 
Salvador, the United States offered over $100 million dollars in aid. 
Had reconstruction in 1986 been done to code, undoubtedly the cost of 
the most recent earthquake would have been lower in both monetary value 
and lives.
  To remedy this problem, and encourage safe, modern building practices 
in countries that need them the most, I introduce today, with my 
colleagues Senator Lieberman and Senator Sessions, the Code and Safety 
for the Americas, CASA Act. The CASA Act would authorize the 
expenditure of $3 million over two years from general foreign aid funds 
to translate the International Code Council family of building codes, 
which are the standard for the United States, into Spanish. 
Furthermore, it would provide funding for the International Code 
Council's proposal to train architects and contractors in El Salvador 
and Ecuador in the proper use of the code. By educating builders and 
providing them the necessary code for their work in their own language, 
it is only a matter of time before we will begin to see safer buildings 
in the region, and a return on our investment. The United States spent 
over $10 million in body bags, temporary tent housing, and first aid 
alone following the recent earthquake in El Salvador. For a 
comparatively modest sum, $3 million, we can reduce the need for this 
type of aid by attacking the problem of shoddy building before it 
begins.
  In addition, after this program has been implemented in El Salvador 
and Ecuador, it could easily be replicated in other Latin American 
countries at low cost, requiring only funding for the training program. 
While we want to start this program on a small scale, I am confident 
that other countries will request similar training programs in the 
future. In fact, other countries have already asked to be considered 
for a future expansion of the program. The Inter-American Development 
Bank and UN have expressed interest in this idea, and are potential 
candidates to provide partial funding of any future expansion. Given 
this interest, it is highly likely that, in the future, a public-
private partnership can be constructed to expand this program to Peru, 
Guatemala, and the rest of Spanish-speaking Latin America. Also, we 
cannot forget the valuable contributions that American volunteer 
organizations such as the International Executive Service Corps can 
make to this program in the long-run.
  This legislation is supported by architects, contractors, and public 
officials both in the United States and in Latin America. Students of 
architecture in Latin America want to be taught proper standards and 
code application, and local governments have requested the code in 
Spanish. So, this is not a case of the ``ugly'' America imposing its 
will on Latin America. We have been asked to share this lifesaving code 
with our Southern neighbors and, indeed, the number of requests from 
different countries has been staggering.
  In short, this legislation will save lives, lessen the damage caused 
by future disasters, and illustrate our good will toward our Latin 
American allies while proving to be cost-effective for the United 
States through decreased aid following future disasters. For a detailed 
analysis of the problem, and this solution, I wish to draw my 
colleagues attention to an article by Steven Forneris, an American 
architect living in Ecuador, that appeared in ``Building Standards'' 
magazine. In it, Mr. Forneris argues the value of this proposal from 
his position at the front lines in Ecuador. He clearly and eloquently 
outlines why Latin America needs building code reform, and why it is in 
the best interests of the United States to involve itself in this 
endeavor.
  The CASA Act is common-sense legislation that will dramatically 
improve the lives of citizens of our hemisphere, and represents a real 
chance for American leadership in the Hemisphere at very little cost. I 
hope that my colleagues will join me in this humanitarian effort.
  I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Forneris' article be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

              [From Building Standards, March-April 2001]

             Is It Wrong To Ask for Help on Building Codes?

                         (By Stephen Forneris)

       I work in the field of architecture, part of the time in 
     the City of Guayaquil, Ecuador, and the other part of the 
     time in New York State. Like everyone involved in this 
     profession, one of my chief responsibilities is to guard the 
     health, safety and welfare of my clients. The architects I 
     work with in New York do this by following the International 
     Codes promulgated by the International Code Council (ICC). 
     When working as an architect myself in the small Latin 
     American nation of Ecuador, which simply does not have the 
     resources to develop a complete building code of its own, I 
     am left with a set of very limited and woefully inadequate 
     codes.
       Ecuador developed its current code 20 years ago by 
     translating portions of 1970s versions of the American 
     Concrete Institute ``Building Code Requirements for 
     Reinforced Concrete and the Uniform Building Code'' (UBC). 
     While a noble effort at the time, it is antiquated by today's 
     standards. The adopted provisions only address structural 
     design requirements and the code does not provide for any 
     general life-safety design concerns such as fire and egress. 
     In 1996, the president of Ecuador signed a bill to develop a 
     new code, but it will take years before it is fully complete 
     and will still only consider structural design requirements. 
     So what does this

[[Page S7958]]

     have to do with the United Nations or the U.S. Government?
       As part of its International Decade for Natural Disaster 
     Reduction program, the United Nation's Risk Assessment Tools 
     for Diagnosis of Urban Areas Against Seismic Disasters 
     (RADIUS) project conducted a study of Guayaquil. The RADIUS 
     team determined there to be a 53-percent chance that a 
     magnitude 8.0 or greater earthquake will strike within 200 
     miles of the city in the next 50 years. An estimated 26,000 
     fatalities would result, along with approximately 90,000 
     injuries severe enough to require hospitalization. 
     Projections indicate that up to 75 percent of the local 
     hospitals would be non-operational and 90,000 people left 
     homeless. Power would be out for up to three weeks, 
     telephones inoperable and roads impassable for two months, 
     running water cut off for three months, and sewage systems 
     unusable for a year. All told, damage from the tragedy is 
     expected to exceed one billion U.S. dollars . . . and 
     Guayaquil, which is situated in a zone of high seismic 
     activity that stretches from Chile to Alaska, is not even the 
     most vulnerable of Ecuador's cities.
       I watched news of the recent earthquakes in El Salvador and 
     India with apprehension, knowing that it is only a matter of 
     time before Guayaquil joins the ranks of these horrific human 
     disasters. My colleagues in New York and I are shocked at 
     what those poor people must be going through and are proud 
     that our government is doing its part to help. We are a kind 
     people at our core, and the U.S. Agency for International 
     Development (USAID) has given El Salvador $8,365,777 and 
     India $12,595,631 in assistance. I have to wonder, though, if 
     the U.S. government has been able to allocate nearly $21 
     million over the past few months for international disaster 
     relief, should it not be possible to get funding to mitigate 
     the effects of future disasters like these?
       In 1999, James Lee Witt, then director of the U.S. Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) stated: ``At FEMA, we're 
     working to change the way Americans think about disasters. 
     We've made prevention the focus of emergency management in 
     the United States, and we believe strong, rigorously enforced 
     building codes are central to that effort.'' In 1999, FEMA 
     signed an agreement with ICC to encourage states to adopt and 
     enforce the International Building Code (IBC). As the U.S. 
     government has turned to an aggressive program of domestic 
     prevention, it only seems logical to apply this philosophy 
     in its projects abroad.
       Guayaquil, and all of Latin America for that matter, needs 
     our help right now. The FEMA-endorsed International Codes 
     arguably provide the best mitigation for natural disasters 
     available in the world, and ICC representatives have informed 
     me that they have a team ready to translate them into 
     Spanish. If USAID is capable of providing such quick and 
     significant funding for plastic sheets, water jugs, hygiene 
     kits, food assistance, etc., why not consider funding 
     translation of the International Codes for a fraction of that 
     cost?
       In February of this year, The Associated Press reported 
     that USAID had agreed to provide an additional $3 million to 
     El Salvador for emergency housing. Less than a month later, 
     President Bush pledged $100 million more in aid, which El 
     Salvador's President Francisco Flores has stated will be used 
     to reconstruct basic infrastructure and housing in the 
     country. It is worth recalling that only 15 years ago the 
     U.S. government provided El Salvador reconstruction funds 
     totaling $98 million after a smaller earthquake. This brings 
     the total to more than $200 million in less than 20 years, 
     yet the people of El Salvador are no safer because their 
     homes still do not meet any of the generally accepted U.S. 
     building code standards.
       I have to wonder what kind of message we are sending to 
     developing countries? Have we created a ``disaster lottery'' 
     in which needed aid comes only after images of devastation 
     flash across the evening news? If so, South America alone 
     stands to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in disaster 
     relief over the next few years. In contrast, code 
     translation, certification and training would greatly reduce 
     the risk in the region for much less. What we need to do is 
     think about saving lives now. It is sad to think that it may 
     be easier to get coffins in which to bury the dead than the 
     building codes that would save many of those same people's 
     lives. It is my hope that the U.S. and United Nations, 
     motivated by compassion, foresight and simple economics, can 
     help provide all of Latin America with the truly vital and 
     life-protecting building codes the region urgently needs.


                               References

       Jaime Argudo. ``Radius Study'' IIFIUC Guayaquil Ecuador, 
     University Catolica de Santiago de Guayaquil, page 8.
       U.S. Agency for International Development website. 
     www.usaid.gov. 2/26/01.
       James Lee Witt, Director of U.S. Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency, remarks to the International Code Council, 
     9/13/99, St. Louis, MO.
       Julie Watson, ``El Salvador Seeks Aid after Quake'', 2/15/
     01. Reprinted with permission of The Associated Press.
       Sandra Sobieraj, ``Bush Promises Help For El Salvador,'' 3/
     2/01. Reprinted with permission of The Associated Press.
                                 ______