[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 19]
[House]
[Pages 26875-26876]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED 
 AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2000--VETO MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF 
                THE UNITED STATES (H. DOC. NO. 106-148)

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Tancredo) laid before the House the 
following veto message from the President of the United States:

To the House of Representatives:
  I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 2670, the 
``Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000.''
  This legislation should embody the continuing commitment of this 
Administration on a broad range of fundamental principles. First and 
foremost amongst these tenets is the notion that the United States of 
America should be the safest country in the world. Our families must 
feel secure in their neighborhoods. Since 1993, the progress realized 
toward that end has been impressive and must not be impeded.
  Moreover, America must continue to lead the community of nations 
toward a safer, more prosperous and democratic world. This guidepost 
has for generations advanced the cause of peace and freedom 
internationally, and an erosion of this policy is untenable and 
unacceptable at this critical moment in history.
  This great Nation serves as example to the world of a just and humane 
society. We must continue to lead by our example and maintain a system 
that vigorously protects and rigorously respects the civil rights of 
individuals, the dignity of every citizen, and the basic justice and 
fairness afforded to every American.
  Unfortunately, this bill fails to uphold these principles.
  Specifically, and most notably, the bill fails to adequately fund the 
proposed 21st Century Policing Initiative, which builds on the success 
of the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program. I requested 
$1.275 billion in new appropriations, and this bill provides only $325 
million. To date, the COPS program has funded more than 100,000 
additional police officers for our streets. The 21st Century Policing 
initiative would place an additional 30,000 to 50,000 police officers 
on the street over the next 5 years and would expand the concept of 
community policing to include community prosecution, law enforcement 
technology assistance, and crime prevention. Funding the COPS program 
required a bipartisan commitment, and it paid off; recently released 
statistics show that we have the lowest murder rate in 31 years and the 
longest continuous decline in crime on record. I strongly believe we 
must forge a similar commitment to support the COPS program's logical 
successor.
  The bill would also threaten America's ability to lead in the world 
by failing to meet our obligation to pay our dues and our debts to the 
United Nations. This is a problem I have been working with the Congress 
to resolve for several years, but this bill fails to provide a 
solution.
  Though the bill does include adequate funds to support our annual 
contribution to the United Nations regular budget, it conditions the 
funding on separate authorizing legislation, continuing an unacceptable 
linkage to an unrelated issue. For this reason, because of additional 
provisions, and because the bill is inconsistent with provisions agreed 
to by the authorizing committees, the bill would still cause the United 
States to lose its vote in the United Nations. It would undercut 
efforts that matter to America in which the U.N. plays an important 
role, from our fight against terrorism and proliferation, to our 
efforts to promote human rights, the well-being of children, and the 
health of our environment. It would undermine our ability to shape the 
U.N.'s agenda in all these areas and to press for reforms that will 
make its work more effective. All this is unacceptable. Great nations 
meet their responsibilities, and I am determined that we will meet 
ours.
  In addition, the bill includes only $200 million for International 
Peacekeeping Activities, a reduction of almost 60 percent from my 
request. The requested level of $485 million is necessary to meet 
anticipated peacekeeping requirements in East Timor, Sierra Leone, the 
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, and Eritrea. In each of 
these places, the United States has worked with allies and friends to 
end conflicts that have claimed countless innocent lives and thrown 
whole regions into turmoil. In each case, the U.N. either has been or 
may be asked to help implement fragile peace agreements, by performing 
essential tasks such as separating adversaries, maintaining cease-
fires, enabling refugees to go home, training police forces, and 
overseeing civilian institutions. In each case, as in all U.N. 
peacekeeping missions, other countries will pay 75 percent of the cost 
and provide virtually all the military personnel.
  It is clearly in America's national interest to support an 
institution through which other countries share the burden of making 
peace. Refusing to do our part would be dangerous and self-defeating. 
It could undermine fragile peace agreements that America helped forge, 
and spark new emergencies to which we could only respond later at far 
greater cost. It would leave America with an unacceptable choice in 
times of conflict and crisis abroad: a choice between acting alone and 
doing nothing.
  The bill includes a number of provisions regarding the conduct of 
foreign affairs that raise serious constitutional concerns. Provisions 
concerning Jerusalem are objectionable on constitutional, foreign 
policy, and operational grounds. The actions called for by these 
provisions would prejudice the outcome of the Israeli-Palestinian 
permanent status negotiations, which have recently begun and which the 
parties are committed to concluding within a year. The bill also 
includes a provision that could be read to prevent the United States 
from engaging in diplomatic efforts regarding the Kyoto protocol. 
Applying restrictions to the President's authority to engage in 
international negotiations and activities raises serious constitutional 
concerns. Other provisions that should be deleted from the bill because 
they would unconstitutionally constrain the President's authority 
include provisions on Haiti, Vietnam, and command and control of United 
Nations Peacekeeping efforts. My Administration's objections to these 
and other language provisions have been made clear in previous 
statements of Administration policy regarding this bill.
  This bill does not contain a needed hate crimes provision that was 
included in the Senate version of the bill. I urge the Congress to pass 
legislation in a timely manner that would strengthen the Federal 
Government's ability to combat hate crimes by relaxing jurisdictional 
obstacles and by giving Federal prosecutors the ability to prosecute 
hate crimes that are based on sexual orientation, gender, or 
disability, along with those based on race, color, religion, and 
national origin.
  The bill freezes the funding level for the Legal Services 
Corporation. Adequate funding for legal services is essential to 
ensuring that all citizens have access to the Nation's justice system. 
I urge the Congress to fully fund my request, which provides an 
increase of $40 million over the FY 1999 enacted level. Also, funding 
for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

[[Page 26876]]

(EEOC) is frozen at the enacted level. This level would undermine 
EEOC's progress in reducing the backlog of employment discrimination 
cases.
  Similarly, inadequate funding is provided for the United States 
Commission on Civil Rights and the Civil Rights Division of the 
Department of Justice. The bill does not fund my requested $13 million 
increase for the Civil Rights Division, including increases for law 
enforcement actions related to hate crimes, the Americans with 
Disabilities Act, and fair housing and lending. I ask the Congress to 
restore requested funds for these law enforcement enhancements.
  The bill contains adequate funding for the decennial census, but I 
oppose language that could inhibit the Census Bureau's ability to 
actually conduct the census. The bill would require the Census Bureau 
to obtain approval from certain committees if it chooses to shift funds 
among eight functions or frameworks. This approval process would impose 
an unnecessary and potentially time-consuming constraint on the 
management of the decennial census. It is imperative that we move 
forward on the census; this legislation could impede it.
  The United States has recently entered into the U.S.-Canada Pacific 
Salmon Agreement. The agreement ends years of contention between the 
U.S. and Canada regarding expired fishing harvest restrictions and 
provides for improved fisheries management. This bill includes 
extraneous legislative riders that would hinder the implementation of 
that important Agreement. These riders would prohibit the application 
of the Endangered Species Act to Alaskan salmon fisheries and would 
change the voting structure of the Pacific Salmon Commission, the 
decision-making body established by the Agreement. In essence, the 
voting structure rider would prevent the Federal Government from 
negotiating agreements that balance the interests of all States. In 
addition to the riders, the bill provides only $10 million of the $60 
million requested to implement the Salmon Agreement. Similarly, funding 
for the Salmon Recovery Fund falls far short of that needed to work 
cooperatively with the States of Washington, Oregon, California, and 
Alaska and with Treaty Tribes to help them mount effective State-based 
plans to restore Pacific coastal salmon runs. These shortfalls together 
would severely inhibit our ability to recover this important species.
  In addition, the enrolled bill does not provide my request for a 
number of other environmental programs, including my Lands Legacy 
Initiative, Endangered Species Act activities, the Clean Water action 
Plan, and the Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the 
Environment program. The additional funds required to bring these 
programs to my requested levels are small compared to the benefits they 
provide to our natural resources.
  The bill does not include $100 million in new funding for the Drug 
Intervention Program, which would have provided critical assistance to 
State and local governments developing and implementing comprehensive 
systems for drug testing, drug treatment, and graduated sanctions for 
drug offenders. These resources are critical to reducing drug use in 
America.
  The bill does not provide additional requested funding to the Justice 
Department for tobacco litigation. Smoking-related health expenses cost 
taxpayers billions of dollars each year through Medicare, veterans' and 
military health, and other Federal health programs. The Department of 
Justice needs the $20 million I requested to represent the interests of 
the taxpayers, who should not have to bear the responsibility for these 
staggering costs.
  This bill would also hurt our Nation's small businesses. The level 
provided for the Small Business Administration's (SBA's) operating 
expenses would inhibit my Administration's ability to provide service 
to the Nation's 24 million small businesses. The bill also fails to 
provide sufficient funds for the Disaster Loan program within the SBA. 
Without additional funding, the SBA will not be able to respond 
adequately to the needs arising from Hurricane Floyd and other natural 
disasters. In addition, the bill does not include funds for my New 
Markets Initiative to invest in targeted rural and urban areas.
  The bill fails to include a proposed provision to clarify current law 
and protect taxpayer interests in the telecommunications spectrum 
auction process. Currently, $5.6 billion of bid-for-spectrum is tied up 
in bankruptcy court, with a very real risk that spectrum licensees will 
be able to retain spectrum at a fraction of its real market value. The 
requested provision would maintain the integrity of the Federal 
Communications Commission (FCC) auction process while also ensuring 
speedy deployment of new telecommunications services. The bill would 
also deny funds needed by the FCC for investments in technology to 
better serve the communications industry. Also, the bill does not 
provide sufficient funds for the continued operations of the FCC. The 
Commission requires additional funds to invest in technology to serve 
the communications industry more effectively.
  In conference action, the rider was added that would amend the 
recently-enacted Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act to 
expand the prohibition of discrimination against individuals who refuse 
to ``prescribe'' contraceptives to individuals who ``otherwise provide 
for'' contraceptives (all nonphysician providers) in the Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Program. As an example, this language could 
allow pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraceptive prescriptions. 
This action violated jurisdictional concerns and is also unacceptable 
policy.
  The bill underfunds a number of high-priority programs within the 
Department of Commerce. My Administration sought an additional $9 
million to help public broadcasters meet the Federal deadline to 
establish digital broadcasting capability by May 1, 2003. The bill 
would provide less than half of last year's funding level for the 
Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office. The bill also fails to fund 
the Department's other programs to protect critical information and 
communications infrastructures. The Congress must restore these funds 
if the Department is to continue performing its important and emerging 
role in coordinating activities that support our economic and national 
security.
  The bill does not include any funds to reimburse Guam and other 
territories for the costs of detaining and repatriating smuggled 
Chinese aliens. These entities deserve our support for assisting in 
this interdiction effort.
  I look forward to working with the Congress to craft an 
appropriations bill that I can support, and to passage of one that will 
facilitate our shared objectives.
                                                  William J. Clinton.  
  The White House, October 25, 1999.

                              {time}  1730

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Tancredo). The objections of the 
President will be spread at large upon the Journal, and the message and 
bill will be printed as a House document.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the message, 
together with the accompanying bill, be referred to the Committee on 
Appropriations.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________