[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 112 (Friday, August 3, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8887-S8888]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXPORT ADMINISTRATION ACT
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have been very concerned for several
months about the Senate not taking action on the Export Administration
Act. It is so important to this country that we keep up with the
technology that is available and sell it overseas.
I called the President's Chief of Staff yesterday and said it
appeared the House was not going to act on the bill. They had simply
given us an extension until November. That really does not help very
much. So I asked the President's Chief of Staff, Andrew Card, if we can
get a letter from the President indicating how important this was and
that he would use whatever Executive powers he had at his control
during this period of time when we are in a situation where companies
cannot sell what they need to sell, and the President fulfilled that
responsibility. I appreciate it very much.
Condoleezza Rice said among other things:
I am pleased that the Senate plans to take up S. 149 on
September 4, 2001. Because the current Export Administration
Act will expire on August 20, 2001, the President is prepared
to use the authorities provided him under the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act to extend the existing dual-use
export control program. As you know, IEEPA authority has
previously been used to administer our export control
programs. Since a new EAA will provide us the strongest
authority to administer dual-use export controls,
particularly as related to enforcement, penalties for export
control violations, and the protection of business propriety
information, we support swift enactment of S. 149.
Mr. President, this statement says a great deal. As I indicated, I am
very appreciative.
To maintain America's technology superiority, the United States must
modernize outdated export controls on information products and
technology. Reform of the export control system is critical because
restricting access to computing power is not feasible and no longer
serves the national interest. It needlessly undermines technological
preeminence of America's information technology industry without
accomplishing any significant national security objective.
The continued use of MTOPS, a standard design by the United States
Government to regulate the export of information technology is outdated
given today's technological and economic realities and the global
economy.
Under current law, the President of the United States is required to
use an antiquated metric, called MTOPS, which means millions of
theoretical
[[Page S8888]]
operations per second, to measure computer performance and set export
control thresholds based on country tiers. This is the intelligence
information we have in various countries.
The conclusion could not be clearer. MTOPS are increasingly useless
as a measure of performance. MTOPS cannot accurately measure
performance of current microprocessors or alternative supercomputing
sources clustering. This makes MTOPS-based hardware controls
irrelevant. The best choice is to eliminate MTOPS.
Eliminating MTOPS will ensure America's continued prosperity and
security in the networked world. It will ensure Government policies
that promote U.S. global economic, technological, and military
leadership.
Eliminating MTOPS will remove unnecessary and unproductive layer of
regulation that no longer serves a meaningful national security purpose
and will help level the playing field for American companies that
compete in the global economy.
President Bush, the Department of Defense, the General Accounting
Office, and the Defense Science Board all recently concluded that MTOPS
is an ``outdated and invalid'' metric and that the current system is
simply ineffective. Repeal of NDAA language would give the President
the flexibility to develop a more modern, effective system.
This is a bill good for America, and when we come back, I will urge
my colleagues to quickly move this legislation.
I again express my appreciation to the President of the United States
and his Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice for giving us this
information. We will, with their approval, move on this legislation as
soon as we get back.
This letter was sent to the majority leader, Senator Daschle. I ask
unanimous consent it be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
The White House,
Washington, August 2, 2001.
Hon. Thomas A. Daschle,
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Leader: Thank you for your efforts to advance the
Senate's consideration of S. 149, the Export Administration
Act of 2001. This bill has the Administration's strong
support.
I am pleased that the Senate plans to take up S. 149 on
September 4, 2001. Because the current Export Administration
Act (EAA) will expire on August 20, 2001, the President is
prepared to use the authorities provided to him under the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to extend
the existing dual-use export control program. As you know,
IEEPA authority has previously been used to administer our
export control programs. Since a new EAA will provide us the
strongest authority to administer dual-use export controls,
particularly as related to enforcement, penalties for export
control violations, and the protection of business
proprietary information, we support swift enactment of S.
149.
I look forward to continuing to work with you on these
important national security issues.
Sincerely,
Condoleezza Rice,
Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs.
Mr. REID. 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. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________