[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 20]
[House]
[Pages 29586-29591]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



               THE PROBLEM OF ILLEGAL DRUG USE IN AMERICA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 1999, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) is recognized 
for 60 minutes.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor again tonight to talk 
about a subject that I have talked about many times on the floor of the 
House of Representatives, even last night until almost midnight, back 
here again tonight. But it is a topic of great personal concern to me 
and also one of my obligations as chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources of the House of 
Representatives. That is the problem of illegal narcotics and drug 
trafficking in the United States.
  I left off last night talking a bit about the problem that we are 
facing with illegal narcotics. If I may tonight continue a bit of that 
discussion, and then for my colleagues I would also like to spend about 
half of the time that is devoted to me tonight to talking about another 
project that I have been involved in and that is the United States 
Capitol Visitors' Center, a little bit different topic.
  But first I would like to complete some of the information that I 
dealt with last night. That is again a continuation of my report on the 
status of both our efforts to curtail drugs coming into the United 
States and eradicate drugs at their source.
  I have cited many times the scope of the problem that we face. It is 
monumental indeed for the Congress. The cost is a quarter of a trillion 
dollars a year to our economy. We have 1.8 million Americans behind 
bars and 70 percent of them are there because of drug-related offenses.
  What is sad about the situation that we have, not only the tragedy 
and deaths, and I have reported the most recent statistics are that 
15,973 deaths were reported from drug-induced causes in 1997, and that 
is compared to 11,703 in 1992. We have seen a dramatic

[[Page 29587]]

increase in deaths due to illegal narcotics in our country. And, 
unfortunately, a lot of those statistics, the death statistics are 
disproportionate among our young people.
  In my area in central Florida, we have a wonderful area, very 
prosperous. I represent the area from Orlando to Daytona Beach in 
central Florida. In Orlando, we have now had some 60 heroin overdose 
deaths in a little more than a year. Many of those, again, among young 
people. Taking the best of our young citizens and destroying their 
lives. It is a very tragic situation.
  Headlines in our local newspaper recently blurted out that heroin 
overdose and drug deaths now exceed homicides in central Florida, a 
very sad commentary, and one unfortunately that is being repeated 
across the United States.
  One of those, and I will cite the impact of illegal narcotics, but 
actually one of the groups in our society that suffers most are 
minorities. They bear an incredible brunt of terror that is rained by 
drug abuse on them. And I have some recent statistics that just came 
out from the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. Drug use 
increased 5.8 percent in 1993 to 8.2 percent in 1998 among young 
African-Americans. So if we want to talk about the impact of illegal 
narcotics, the death and destruction I will describe, it starts, 
unfortunately, among some of those who can least afford that impact. 
And here with the African-American youth, drug abuse use has 
dramatically increased.
  The 1998 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse also indicated drug 
use increased from 4.4 percent in 1993 to 6.1 percent in 1998 among 
young Hispanics. I also read some recent statistics about the dropout 
rates and those who drop out the highest from our schools, the recent 
information we have received show, of course, minorities, particularly 
black and Hispanics.

                              {time}  1930

  Then if we look at their history of drug use, whether it is 
marijuana, cocaine, or other drugs, they have unusually high 
percentages of drug use. So we see double tragedy.
  What is also interesting is, not only the use, but also the arrests 
of traffickers. I have a recent report just out last week, and this is 
in the Dallas Morning News. It says, arrests of traffickers under age 
18 are expected to climb to 512 this year, up 58 percent since 1997, 
according to the United States Customs Service.
  So, not only do we have increased use, not only do we have increased 
deaths, but our traffickers now under the age of 18, this is a shocking 
statistic, are up 58 percent in 1 year, according to the United States 
Customs.
  Now, one of the things that I have tried to do in helping to 
coordinate our national drug policy is to look at where illegal 
narcotics are coming from and then to see if we can stop those illegal 
narcotics from coming into the United States.
  I have cited before that the war on drugs basically closed down in 
1993 with the taking of office of President Clinton. He focused most of 
his efforts and resources on treatment, treatment expenditure, and 
dollars increased almost 40 percent from 1993 to current levels. Even 
in the new majority, we have increased treatment during the past 
several years of our majority.
  But what happened again in 1993 is the Drug Czar's office was slashed 
from 120 to some 20 individuals working there. We now have that back 
up. It is probably in the 150 range.
  I might say, one of the better things the President has done and 
probably the major accomplishment that he has achieved, and I will give 
him credit for that, is the appointment of General Barry McCaffrey, who 
has done an excellent job in restarting our war on drugs.
  But basically, when one cuts interdiction, use of the military, use 
of the Coast Guard by some 50 percent in just a few years, which the 
Democrat majority did, when one cuts the source country programs that 
effectively stop the production and growth of drugs in their source, 
one has a serious problem when one sends the wrong message by 
appointing a national health officer like Joycelyn Elders, and one can 
almost trace the increase in drug use among our youth from those 
appointments and from those bad decisions.
  Last night, I went through the history of some of the problems that 
we have had. I have done that before. I have also used this chart 
before. This chart shows, again, if one just wants to look at it, where 
illegal narcotics are coming from. They start in Colombia. Some 60 to 
70 percent of the heroin and cocaine is now produced in Colombia. If 
one looked at 1992, 1993, most of the cocaine was produced in Peru and 
Bolivia. It is now coming from Colombia. It is actually being produced 
there.
  In fact, the programs that have been initiated and the new majority 
has undertaken in Peru and Bolivia show about 60 percent decrease in 
coca production, cocaine production in Peru, and about 50 percent in 
Bolivia, and both of them making great strides to eradicate.
  But the problem we have had is the policy of stopping information 
flowing to Colombia, stopping arms and assistance to the national 
police, who have undertaken the war on drugs there, stopping all U.S. 
aid for a period of time has left the production fields wide open.
  Now since 1993, the country of Colombia has the distinction of, not 
only being the largest cocaine producer, and it was not on the charts 
some 6 or 7 years ago, hardly any opium was grown there, poppies grown 
there or opium produced, and now is producing some 65 to 70 percent of 
the heroin coming into the United States. We know that for a fact 
because we can trace it just almost as accurately as DNA practically to 
the fields where it is grown.
  So this is the traffic pattern. Heroin and cocaine are being produced 
now in Colombia, coming through Mexico. In fact, the cartels, many 
cartels, not the same cartels, Medellin and others that we had in the 
past, are now operating with Mexican officials.
  I will talk a little bit about the high level contact group that we 
had this morning, a meeting in Washington with officials, high 
officials of Mexico. I think this was the seventh meeting. We had the 
Attorney General of Mexico and the foreign minister of Mexico and other 
high ranking officials of Mexico meet with Members of Congress. I will 
get into that.
  But this is basically our trafficking pattern. So we know that the 
two biggest sources of hard illegal narcotics, and I have talked about 
heroin and cocaine, are Colombia, Mexico.
  Mexico also has the distinction of giving us another gift which is an 
incredible amount of methamphetamine. We have conducted hearings, and I 
cited this this morning to the visiting ministers that, indeed, showed 
that methamphetamine is coming from Mexico and entering our heartland.
  We have had sheriffs and local law enforcement officials from 
Minnesota, Iowa, California, other areas that they could trace the 
methamphetamine which is now epidemic in some of those areas right back 
to Mexican dealers. But this is the traffic pattern. This is what we 
have to deal with.
  First, let me talk a little bit, and I have touched briefly on this 
yesterday, about Colombia. I want to make certain that people know 
exactly what has gone on with Colombia.
  I cited some general figures last night that were the result of a 
closed door meeting, the second one we have held in 2 weeks with 
officials of the United States Department of State, the Office of 
International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Matters, and also with the 
Department of Defense, both charged with executing the policy that the 
Congress has adopted and dealing with the appropriations and programs 
that we have authorized to deal with both Colombia and the trafficking 
situation of these hard narcotics coming into the United States.
  Well, yesterday, I spoke in general terms, and we have now been able 
to look specifically at the money that has already been appropriated, 
both in the fiscal year from 1998, October 1, through September of this 
year, 1999. For that year, Colombia was appropriated $321 million.
  Many Members of Congress and the media have all cited Colombia as 
being

[[Page 29588]]

now one of the top, after I think Israel and Egypt, maybe the third 
highest recipient of United States foreign assistance. That is the 
total figure that is bantered about. But, actually, it is $321 million.
  Part of our subcommittee's responsibility and Members of Congress' 
responsibility is to see if that money has been properly expended, if 
the money is expended, or obligated, and where the money was utilized.
  My particular role as chairman of the Subcommittee on Criminal 
Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources is to review the progress 
that has been made. Now, there are some myths about the $321 million.
  First of all, $30 million was in a regular appropriations for that 
year. The Congress knew that there were problems cropping up. This is, 
in fact, nothing new.
  If I may, let me bring to the floor here just a sampling of some of 
the hearings that we have conducted. When I say we, the new majority 
which took over in 1995 on the international narcotics problems. We 
have conducted some 16 hearings. These are some of the transcripts of 
the hearings.
  We knew there was a problem in Colombia. We knew the administration 
had a policy and a program that really would create difficulty for the 
United States, and we pay for those policy mistakes in the end. Four of 
these hearings specifically have dealt, since 1996, with Colombia. So 
we have carefully monitored this situation. We provided some $321 
million for Colombia to try to stop the disaster we saw looming there.
  I might say that, when I came into office in 1993, from 1993 to 1995, 
there was one hearing done on national drug policy, one hearing in the 
first 2 years of the Clinton administration when the other side 
controlled the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, exactly one 
hearing. That was only conducted after I circulated a letter and I 
believe we had 130 Members of the House, Republicans and Democrats, 
requesting that we review the drug policy.
  The drug policy at that time, as I said, was a disaster as adopted by 
the Congress again controlled by the other side, and was a disaster as 
far as the execution by the administration which cut off assistance, 
resources going to Colombia, which has now turned into our major big 
problem.
  But I do not want the American people or the Congress to think the 
new majority has not had their hand on the ball or been working on the 
issue. Here is part of the evidence.
  In addition to hearings, we did put our money where our mouth is. I 
said this $321 million. Thirty million dollars was a regular 
appropriation that we would have given in that regular fiscal year. 
Additionally, there was a supplemental of $232 million. I want these 
figures that we have reached, for the Record, stated properly, $232 
million in a supplemental appropriation.
  We knew the problem was coming. We were trying to stop it and cut it 
off at the pass. We also knew that aid had been kept by the 
administration from Colombia, and the problem was festering.
  Of the $232 million, in our closed door hearings, we found that we 
have, in fact, expended some $40 million of those dollars, $42 million 
to be exact, to Peru and Bolivia. If one subtracts $42 million from 
$232 million, we are down to $190 million.
  Now, again, this is from a $321 million appropriation. Of the $190 
million that was to go to Colombia, our closed door meeting with the 
State Department and Department of Defense revealed that less than half 
of the money has actually gotten equipment or resources to Columbia. So 
we are down to $190 million. We may be somewhere in the range of $90 
million to $95 million in equipment that actually got to Colombia.
  Now, for years, we have known that Colombia was becoming a producer 
of heroin, a producer of cocaine. They were actually growing it. It was 
not just a transit country where this stuff was produced somewhere 
else.

                              {time}  1945

  And we know that the most effective way to get the coca, which grows 
in higher altitudes, and poppies, was with helicopters and to spray 
that or to go after the narcotraffickers who circle and protect in 
Colombia the growth of these illegal crops.
  It is unbelievable, but to date we still do not have in Colombia but 
three of the Blackhawk helicopters of the six that Congress authorized. 
And the funding for those helicopters, and these helicopters are about 
$16 million apiece, assumed most of the $90-some million, the three of 
six that were delivered. Now, this is unbelievable, but they confirmed 
to us yesterday that the three helicopters, the Blackhawks that have 
been delivered, basically cannot be used. They are not equipped with 
armor, and they do not have ammunition.
  Of course, part of the $90 million, and we are down from $300 million 
that was supposed to get to Colombia, part of that was for ammunition. 
Helicopters are needed to fight and to eradicate; and these 
helicopters, of course, need ammunition. We have been begging, we have 
pleaded, we have sent letters, we have tried to get ammunition to the 
Colombian National Police who are engaged in fighting the 
narcotraffickers and going after these illegal narcotics producers. It 
is absolutely unbelievable to report to the House of Representatives 
and the Congress and the American people that the ammunition and the 
many guns that we requested years ago, I am told, were delivered 
November 1. Today is November 10. Yesterday morning no one could 
confirm either from the State Department or the Department of Defense 
if the ammunition had arrived.
  So we have, again, less than half of this smaller amount being made 
available to Colombia. In addition, we have other obligations, where we 
have requested helping in the rebuilding of narco bases, 
narcotrafficker bases, where we launch operations from, or the 
Colombians, rather, launch operations from. We still do not have 
contracts complete for construction of some of these bases, money that 
has been appropriated now for well over a year, money in the budget.
  In fact, from 1998, we went back to see if equipment which had been 
promised to the Colombians out of our surplus accounts had been 
delivered. In 1998, about 90 percent has gotten to Colombia, 10 percent 
had not. In 1999, the President made a commitment to provide what is 
called Section 506, I believe it is, which is surplus equipment to 
Colombia. And we found that, with great fanfare, the administration was 
giving millions in surplus goods to Colombia to fight the war on drugs; 
yet to date, nothing has been delivered. And that is as of the end of 
the fiscal year which ended the end of September. We are now into the 
fiscal year 1999-2000.
  This is a remarkable record of nonaccomplishment. I know now why the 
administration has not formally brought a $1.5 billion, somewhere 
between a $1 billion and $2 billion package to the Congress. First, I 
am sure they did not want to be embarrassed with this information being 
made public; that indeed they have missed the opportunity to get this 
situation under control with the resources that have already been 
allocated. So we have millions of dollars that have not been expended, 
and we have money that has been expended down there with equipment that 
is not capable of being utilized.
  It is a very sad situation, a sad commentary on the ability of 
bureaucracy to move. I do not think it is purposeful at this point. I 
know it was purposeful in the past to block equipment and resources to 
Colombia, but the results are incredible. Over a million people have 
been displaced, 300,000 have been displaced, more than in Kosovo and 
more than in Bosnia. Three hundred thousand in one year, a million 
there, over 30,000 dead, over 4,000 Colombian police, members of 
congress, members of their supreme court, and officials that have been 
slaughtered in the meantime. And the equipment still is not there. It 
is a very sad commentary.
  The money that Congress appropriated and the House asked for these 
programs, again without direct involvement of U.S. military other than

[[Page 29589]]

training, we have not provided what we said we were going to provide. 
And the situation continues to mushroom out of control, with this 
entire region being destabilized now, with incursions up into Panama. 
And, as I said before, this region of South America produces 
approximately 20 percent of our daily oil supplies.
  When the administration wants to get our military equipment somewhere 
and they make their minds up to do it, it does not take them long. 
According to the Department of Defense, it took the Clinton 
administration 45 days to move 24 helicopters to Albania for an 
undeclared war. According to the Department of Defense, also, it has 
taken the Clinton administration over 3 years to get three Blackhawk 
helicopters to Colombia in a war we have all declared on drugs. And 
what is incredible is those three helicopters, which consumed most of 
the money that we have given to Colombia, those three helicopters are 
basically inoperable. They do not have protective armor, and they do 
not have the ammunition to engage in any type of counternarcotics 
activity, and they cannot confirm when that ammunition will arrive.
  The Blackhawk helicopters were promised to the Colombian National 
Police in 1996, and they finally arrived in Colombia November of 1999. 
It is sort of a sad commentary, and this has had a dramatic impact on 
our society. Remember the 15,700 deaths in 1 year which are drug 
related, and there are thousands of others, tens of thousands of 
others, but those are the hard deaths we can attribute. From 1992 to 
1999 we have lost between 80 and 100,000 Americans in an undeclared war 
on our people with narcotics coming from this region.
  So that is a little bit of an update on the Colombian situation. 
There is a brighter figure just released yesterday, and I must applaud 
President Pastrana, because even though he has had a very difficult 
time in the peace process and also trying to bring this situation which 
he inherited last year as the new president of Colombia under control, 
he is trying to put words into action. I understand that their Senate 
voted just yesterday, or this week, to extradite one Jaime Orlando 
Lara, who is a major drug kingpin figure. He will be extradited to the 
United States, and I understand there may be another one to follow. So 
Colombia, even though it is under siege, is taking initiatives. And it 
is unfortunate that they have almost lost their country; but, indeed, 
they are taking continued action to bring this situation under control.
  Some of my colleagues may have read that as many as 10 million 
Colombians took to the streets in the last few weeks to express their 
outrage about this war and the havoc that has reigned upon Colombia, 
and it is in our national interest, both because of the impact of the 
illegal narcotics, the death and destruction to our society, and also 
as an ally in this hemisphere to help. It is unfortunate, though, and 
it is almost unbelievable that the actions that Congress has taken in a 
positive fashion to assist this country are really stymied by 
bureaucracy, by inaction, by lack of will on the part of this 
administration.
  So I guess it is fitting in this budget ending here, as we try to 
provide funding for all of our programs, that the administration sort 
of hides in a corner and does not bring this issue forth. I can see 
why. I can see it being very embarrassing for them to come in and ask 
for a billion dollars of taxpayer money and not have been a good 
steward of the $321 million that was appropriated to get this situation 
under control. So it is sad indeed that we face this situation. 
Hopefully, through the hearing process, through Members on both sides 
of the aisle trying to prod the administration, we can get resources to 
turn this situation around.
  I mentioned yesterday that this morning I would be attending a high-
level working group of United States and Mexican officials. And as I 
said, this is about the seventh of these meetings. I took our 
subcommittee down to Mexico City; and we met, I believe it was in 
January or February, after taking the position of chair of the 
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources, and 
we met with some of these same officials in Mexico. I said at that 
meeting with the Mexican officials in Mexico City that I was very 
disappointed with the actions that they had taken to date, and speaking 
about the previous year, 1998, and a decrease in the seizures of 
heroin, a decrease in the seizures of cocaine, a lack of action on the 
signing of a maritime agreement, a lack of action on extraditing 
Mexican drug kingpins, a lack of action in allowing our DEA agents, a 
limited number, in protecting themselves in their country, and a lack 
of action in enforcing some of the laws that had been passed by the 
Mexican officials.
  We had a rather testy meeting, and I must say that I asked them how 
they could sit idly by and watch their country be lost to drug 
traffickers and not do anything. I did not use exactly those words but, 
fortunately, that session was also behind closed doors. But I let them 
know our concern about the lack of action on those issues. And at the 
request of the Congress, we had passed resolutions asking for their 
assistance specifically on all of those items.
  I must report again that this morning I did have a little bit more 
complimentary attitude toward Mexican officials. They have begun the 
process of getting some of their act together, going after drug 
traffickers, cooperating more with U.S. officials. It is not a level of 
cooperation that I would like to see, but the seizures are up this 
year, and we must give credit where credit is due. They are good 
neighbors, have been good neighbors, and we have, I think, through our 
trade policy, extended incredible generosity with NAFTA, which has 
taken jobs out of the American market and provided jobs and opportunity 
to Mexico and Mexican citizens. When Mexico was in incredible financial 
shape we also helped Mexico, backing them up with loans, their country; 
and we backed them in international finance organizations.
  So some progress has been made. I expressed concern in two areas this 
morning in our meetings. Several of those areas are as follows:

                              {time}  2000

  First of all, the latest information I have from our Drug Enforcement 
Agency is that heroin production, and we have had a problem of course 
with production in Colombia, the other country that we have had a 
problem with production, very limited production back into the 1980s, 
black tar heroin coming out of Mexico, which several years ago was at 
14 percent of all the heroin seized in the United States we know came 
from Mexico. We know because of this signature heroin program we can do 
an analysis of the heroin and tell us almost to the field in the 
country where it came from.
  So we know that several years ago we had 14 percent, up from a single 
digit to double digit, of heroin produced in America. What is scary is 
that within 1 year it has jumped from 14 percent to 17 percent, the 
latest information that I received this week. That is a 20 percent 
increase in production.
  So I ask their cooperation and will reiterate requesting their 
cooperation in going after the production of heroin.
  The other thing that we see of course is methamphetamine, 
methamphetamines that are in our country. And we have done that through 
our hearings and investigations right to Mexico. Mexico is now the 
leading producer of methamphetamines coming into the United States. We 
need their cooperation.
  The other area in addition to those two big problem areas is the 
corruption of officials and cracking down on money laundering. If you 
can trace the money in illegal narcotics, you can find out who is 
involved.
  Unfortunately, some of the information we have received is absolutely 
startling and I have cited on the House floor and we had in our 
subcommittee testimony from one former Customs agent that one Mexican 
general was attempting to invest in the United States 1.1 billion 
American dollars. And we know that is from drug profits.
  We know that corruption has really destroyed families, officials in 
Mexico. Former President Salinas and his

[[Page 29590]]

brother Raoul Salinas were heavily involved, hundreds of millions of 
dollars transferred to banks. We know that money came from their 
complicity with and cooperation with drug lords.
  If Mexico would cooperate with us rather than give us a hard time, as 
we had in operation Casa Blanca, which was a major Customs operation, 
the largest probably in the history of the U.S. Customs, hundreds of 
millions of dollars of money laundered with dozens of banks and bankers 
involved. And when we uncovered it and we had told Mexican officials, 
some that we could trust, about it, Mexican officials a year ago 
threatened to arrest our U.S. Customs officials and did not cooperate.
  Some of that has changed. But until Mexico makes up its mind that it 
is going to get this situation under control, enforces laws that their 
national legislature has passed, they passed some good laws, but not 
enforced them, and then go after corruption.
  I heard Senator Sessions from Alabama speak this morning. He was a 
former prosecutor and he said, ``I put in jail local officials and 
judges and others in the United States who dealt in illegal narcotics 
and profiting from them,'' and he asked Mexican leaders to do the same. 
And until they get that corruption under control, we will continue to 
have that problem.
  And still Mexico is the source of 50 to 60 percent of the cocaine 
coming into the United States, almost 300 metric tons of cocaine 
consumed in the United States. Fifty to 60 percent of that, as we know, 
comes from Mexico. We know now that Mexico is the source of 17 percent 
of the heroin seized last year by law enforcement. We know that Mexico 
is the leading smuggler of methamphetamine and also the base ingredient 
of methamphetamine, as well as marijuana.
  Unfortunately, as I said, in 1988 heroin seizures were down some 56 
percent, cocaine seizures were down 35 percent. But the latest 
statistics we have, the information is that those seizures are up due 
to cooperation with the United States officials.
  So we still have lacking a maritime agreement, no progress on a 
maritime agreement, although some more cooperation with our maritime 
officials. But Mexico continues to be the source of so much of the 
illegal narcotics coming into the United States and the center of 
corruption.
  The former DEA administrator came before our subcommittee and also 
had testified and stated publicly something that I think bears 
repeating tonight, and that is Tom Constantine. He has since left that 
office and been replaced just recently by Donny Marshall, a very 
capable assistant in the DEA office and I think a very good appointment 
who will do a good job in trying to follow in the footsteps of Tom 
Constantine.
  But Tom Constantine, speaking about Mexico, said this, and let me 
quote the former DEA administrator. ``In my lifetime, I've never 
witnessed any group of criminals that has had such a terrible impact on 
so many individuals and communities in our nation.''
  He said that, despite promises by Mexico to wage ``total war'' on 
drug smugglers, no major drug traffickers had been indicted, drug 
seizures had dropped significantly, and the total number of arrests 
declined.
  He cited part of the problems. To date, Mexico still has not 
extradited one major Mexican national drug kingpin. He cited what 
Colombia has done in the last few hours leading the way. Mexico needs 
to follow and show their drug traffickers what they fear the most, and 
that is extradition to face justice in the United States.
  One of the issues that has come up in the high-level working group 
and concerns me is the question of replacing the United States 
certification process as provided by law.
  Having been involved with Senator Hawkins and others in the 
development of this law back in the mid 1980s, and I have a copy of it 
here, the law is a simple law. It basically says that each year the 
President and the Department of State must certify what countries are 
doing to assist the United States in stopping in their own country and 
stopping the production and also the trafficking of illegal narcotics.
  A certification must be made to the Congress that those actions are 
taking place, those cooperative actions. That is done to make those 
countries eligible for benefits of the United States.
  It started out as foreign aid. If a country was in the cooperating, 
they were not to get foreign aid. And it seems natural to get a benefit 
if the United States foreign assistance, cash, that there should be 
some level of cooperation, especially when the inaction or lack of 
action or an ally's part or country's part results in death, 
destruction, devastation in the United States. A simple law, not very 
complicated.
  We even provided a waiver such as in countries like Colombia where 
the administration had concerns about human rights, about other 
activities to grant a waiver.
  Unfortunately, the administration has not properly applied this law. 
They should have decertified Mexico last year when they had a decrease 
in seizures, when they had a lack of cooperation, when they threatened 
to arrest our Customs officials. And they certified Mexico. They should 
have been decertified and granted a waiver in national interest.
  In addition to foreign aid, these countries also get financial 
assistance, backing in international organizations. The law is quite 
clear that it says, under this law, if they are decertified, the 
executive director of each multilateral development bank will vote 
after March 1 of each year against any loan or utilization of funds.
  Now, Mexico does not receive any foreign aid per se, but they receive 
tremendous trade and financial benefits by the United States. And it is 
unfortunate that now there is a move to destroy the certification 
process. And I was concerned and still am concerned that even officials 
from this administration would like to transfer that certification for 
being eligible for benefits of the United States to some third party or 
international group.
  I will fight that with every breath here. I did not think anyone 
should have the ability to determine eligibility for United States 
benefits other than representatives of the sovereign United States, 
that being the Congress, the President, executive branch.
  This concerns me about attempts to thwart the intent of the 
certification law. Let me tell my colleagues, they have never seen 
action in their life by any of these countries until they are faced 
with threat of decertification for not cooperating. Even in Mexico we 
saw incredible action just before the question of certification came 
before the administration and then before the Congress and we suddenly 
saw all this cooperation. And it has also been a good handle for the 
country to have on soliciting the support of these countries that are 
the producers of this deadly illegal narcotic substance.

                              {time}  2015

  Again, a little update on that issue, and we will continue to follow 
it; I will continue to oppose that.
  Just in closing on the Mexico issue, I have a November 6 Reuters 
report about what death and destruction Mexico has experienced with 
this horrible situation that they have allowed to really get out of 
control. It said, this past week a lawyer for Mexico's most notorious 
drug cartel was shot to death by two gunmen who riddled his body with 
at least 43 bullets in the northwestern border town of Tijuana. This 
particular article says that Baez, I believe is his name, Mr. Baez 
became murder victim number 552 in Tijuana this year and that 
authorities believe that 65 percent of the killings have been drug 
related. This particular individual, Mr. Baez, became the third member 
of his family to be executed in the past 2 years following his sister, 
Yolanda Baez, and his nephew, Efren Baez.
  If Mexico does not get this situation under control in addition to 
losing the Baja Peninsula, the Yucatan Peninsula, they will lose their 
country and their sovereignty. Just ask anyone in Colombia who has seen 
the death, devastation, destruction, and displacement of people in that 
country, and

[[Page 29591]]

now the situation with the United States and others trying to bail them 
out of their situation.
  Mr. Speaker, from the subject of illegal narcotics which does not 
often put a smile on my face to the final 10 minutes, I wanted to first 
just pay a moment of tribute to veterans. I will not be in the District 
in time for veterans celebration, but every American should pay 
particular attention and honor tomorrow, Veterans' Day. Veterans Day 
started out, I believe, at the end of World War I, on the 11th hour, 
the 11th day; and in my home communities from Daytona Beach to Orlando, 
we will have a series of wonderful ceremonies to honor veterans, at 
Woodlawn Cemetery in Orlando. David Christianson, the most decorated 
Vietnam hero, will be the featured speaker.
  In Port Orange, one of the young high school groups there will be 
having a flag retiring ceremony. In De Land, a beautiful community, 
tomorrow afternoon at 3, they will be having a parade through the 
community to honor our veterans and so on throughout central Florida.
  I would like to spend a moment to pay tribute to our veterans to whom 
we owe so much. I spent Monday on my way back to Washington visiting 
the Bill Chappell clinic in Daytona Beach and went around and talked to 
each of the veterans that was there on an unannounced visit to see how 
their care was and how they were being taken care of as far as patients 
in the veterans facility. I am pleased that almost all of them were 
very satisfied with the care.
  I pay also particular tribute to those who do care for our veterans 
in our hospitals and clinics across the country. The most important 
responsibility under this Constitution is indeed our national security. 
The reason for which this country came together was for national 
security. We must pay honor and tribute and respect to those veterans 
who are among us and also who are not with us who we remember on 
Memorial Day, but tomorrow we remember those who again have served this 
Nation. So we salute all of our veterans, not only in Florida's Seventh 
Congressional District from Orlando to Daytona Beach, but across this 
great land. That is one little tribute that I wanted to pay.
  The other item that I wanted to conclude with is some good news for 
the House of Representatives and the American people. Finally, after 
more than a decade, we have completed the first step in making a 
reality a visitors center for the American people when they visit our 
great Capitol. The Capitol has a rich history. It goes back to being 
located here in 1790 by an act of Congress. Congress was sort of 
vagabond before that, met in Philadelphia, New York, Annapolis, 
Harrisburg and a dozen different locations. Finally, in 1790, they 
decided to come here.
  They decided to begin construction in 1793 of the Capitol and it was 
to be two wings, the Senate wing here, actually sort of turned out like 
most government projects, it was running behind schedule and 
overbudget; and they decided just to build this one wing which is the 
north wing towards Union Station. To get that done and to get the 
Congress here by 1800, which will be 200 years, they worked feverishly 
and abandoned plans for the House wing. And then in 1800, in December, 
the House located here. In 1807, they built the second wing. They were 
connected actually in between by a trellis for a number of years. And 
then in 1827 they built the center rotunda and the Capitol looked a bit 
like this.
  This is a pretty good picture. One of the oldest pictures, that first 
Capitol was designed first of all by Dr. Thornton who actually did not 
even get in the competition that the Congress had advertised for, came 
in late, but Thomas Jefferson and George Washington liked the design so 
much that they took his design even if it came in after the bids all 
closed. In 1827 we completed the Bullfinch Dome and the Capitol had 
these two wings and the rotunda in between.
  Today, we have the Capitol with the dome which was added in 1863 and 
the wings, the House wing in 1857, the Senate wing, the north wing, in 
1859. You can see the original first building, and then the House 
building, the connection, the changing of the center and the addition 
of this beautiful dome designed by Thomas Walters and the statue of 
freedom up on top, which was taken down recently, refurbished and put 
back, that was put up there in 1863.
  The other addition to the Capitol is the east front was redone. It 
was crumbling in the late 1950s, 1958 to I think 1962, that was taken 
off and redone. So they extended the east front of the Capitol.
  Not since that point have we enlarged the Capitol, and never to my 
knowledge have we really done anything specifically for the American 
people to accommodate them when they come to visit here. We have 
millions and millions of visitors who crowd the Capitol building.
  I am very pleased that we have completed work and approval; I served 
as a member of the Capitol Preservation Commission, on a Capitol 
visitors center. This was not my idea. It was started in the 1980s, 
late 1980s. I believe Vic Fazio, a Congressman from California, 
initiated some of the proposals that got into a partisan conflict; and 
it was derailed, although a study was done in 1991 to create a visitors 
center.
  This past week, the visitors center authorizing body, which is the 
Capitol Preservation Commission, 18 Members of the House and Senate 
authorized moving forward in the next phase the approval of some $12 
million for the center and reconfirmed that the visitors center will be 
in the east front, towards the Supreme Court and the Library of 
Congress.
  Everything will be located underground. It will not change the view. 
There will be three stories underground, if I can get this up here 
quickly. Two stories will be exhibition space, solely for visitors. 
There will be three auditoriums, one 550-seat, two 250-seat. Right now 
we really do not even have a place to bring folks in. In fact, folks 
stand out in line in rain, snow, sleet, whatever, subject to the 
elements.
  Two top stories will accommodate visitors, rest rooms, first aid 
facilities. Again, everything underground. It will not change any of 
the view of the Capitol building. The bottom level will be a service 
floor, goods and services will come in through a tunnel. The tunnel was 
planned sometime ago, and part of it exists now. Rather than having the 
trash and garbage and other service deliveries through the front door 
of the Capitol, that will all be done underground. Accommodations for 
our visitors trying to bring to life the Capitol, and also to make 
their visit more pleasant.
  We are just about at capacity. Plus we do not have assistance for 
those who are disabled, handicapped and others to get around the 
Capitol. This is one of the most exciting improvements ever to our 
Nation's Capitol, the symbol of freedom for the entire world and, of 
course, our Nation. It will make visits for students, for adults, for 
elderly, for infirm so much more pleasant.
  I am so pleased to have had the leadership of the House and Senate in 
this effort. I commend all those involved. It is an exciting project 
not only for the Congress but for the American people and the country.

                          ____________________