[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 11983-11988]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                  THE PROBLEM OF DRUG ABUSE IN AMERICA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 6, 1999, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor again tonight to talk 
about the problem of drug abuse in our Nation and the tremendous toll 
that illegal narcotics have taken across our great land.
  It is getting so that almost every family, certainly every community 
across the United States, can today claim that they are victimized by 
illegal narcotics trafficking in their communities and their schools, 
among their family members. The statistics are really mind-boggling and 
do not make the front page of today's newspaper, Mr. Speaker, but 
indeed they are dramatic.
  Last year, over 14,000 Americans died in drug-related deaths. That is 
only the tip of the iceberg, because now we find that many thousands 
more that were killed in other accidents and suicides and other causes 
of death are not counted in that toll. In fact, the figure is much, 
much higher.
  I said before on the floor of the House when we had the terrible 
tragedy at Columbine with a number of students and faculty who were 
killed in that tragedy, that we have multiple Columbines across our 
Nation every day. They are sometimes in the silent but violent deaths 
of our young people through the use of illegal narcotics.
  Today heroin has become the drug of choice, and it is destroying 
lives by the thousands. I come from Central Florida and represent the 
area from Orlando to Daytona Beach, a relatively peaceful area. But 
Central Florida now has had such an epidemic, particularly among our 
young people, of deaths from illegal drugs and overdoses, that a recent 
headline in the Orlando Sentinel said that illegal drug overdoses now 
exceed homicides in Central Florida. That is how severe the problem is 
in my district.
  That is one reason why I chose to accept the Speaker's appointment as 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice Drug Policy and Human 
Resources. I had the great privilege and opportunity to serve in the 
last Congress with the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), someone 
who folks are just learning more about, who is the Speaker of the House 
of Representatives.
  When the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), the gentleman I refer 
to, served as chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security 
Criminal Justice and International Affairs, I served with him and at 
his side. I had the privilege of watching the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Hastert) bring together a consensus in this Congress and in the 
House of Representatives to re-start the war on drugs. You must 
remember, and I will detail that in just a few minutes, that the war on 
drugs basically stopped with the election of this President and his 
taking office in 1993. I will talk more about that in a minute.
  But, again, someone who restarted our national effort now leads the 
House of Representatives, and I am very proud to have served with him 
in that effort during the past several years as the new majority gained 
control here in the House of Representatives.
  The record of death and destruction across our land we were very much 
aware of when we took control of the House of Representatives and we 
saw the change from the Reagan and Bush administration, where we saw a 
decline year after year in drug use and drug deaths across the Nation. 
What should be astounding is that since we really had this new policy 
with this new administration, that the figures began to really go off 
of the charts. In fact, I brought a chart tonight to illustrate the 
problem that we had.
  Remember what I said just a minute ago. If you look at this chart for 
a minute you will see these different lines of drug use illustrated in 
color. You see that drug use was on the decline. This shows that from 
1989 on down to the 1992-93 period here, where the Reagan-Bush 
administration ended their efforts, the ``just say no'' campaign, the 
eradication, the enforcement efforts stopped, and a policy of working 
primarily on treatment, treating the wounded in this battle began. We 
saw the increases in drug use that these colored lines represent in 
almost every area.
  Only in the last 2 years, again under the leadership of Speaker 
Hastert as Chair, have we seen any leveling off, but we still see 
incredible figures, particularly among our young people in illegal 
narcotics usage.
  Let me give you one figure. Since 1993, again when this 
administration took control, changed the policy, the figure is this; 
that we have had an 875 percent increase in heroin usage by our teens. 
I think if we looked at the charts we would see a dramatic increase in 
the deaths of our teens. If we look at those more than 14,000 deaths I 
cited, many of them are among our young people who are now being 
victimized by very potent illegal hard narcotics that are coming in in 
an unprecedented stream.
  The cost of this whole drug debacle is immense to this country and to 
the Congress. Right now we are working in our subcommittee to try to 
coordinate the expenditures of $17.9 billion directly into the war on 
drugs. That is only the tip of the iceberg, because we spend around a 
quarter of a trillion dollars in a year. When you take in 
incarceration, the cost of our judicial

[[Page 11984]]

system, the social cost, welfare for these drug victims and narcotics 
users leave a trail of social disruption that is unbelievable, not to 
mention the pain to their loved ones and families.
  So that is a little bit of the direct toll and cost in dollars and in 
lives, and, as I said in Central Florida we have had just a dramatic 
increase in deaths, particularly among our young people.
  In our prisons across this land we have almost 2 million incarcerated 
citizens and other individuals there. Seventy percent of them are there 
because of drug-related offenses. Our U.S. Attorneys tell us that 
statistics, our Federal Marshals, our DEA agents, and even in 
conducting hearings in my local community, our local sheriffs told us 
that 60 to 70 percent of those individuals behind bars at public 
expense are there because of drug-related offenses.
  So if we look at the crime in this country, we can directly relate 
it, 60 to 70 percent of it, to illegal narcotics.
  One of the interesting myths of this whole drug problem is that 
people behind bars are there for casual use or for possession, and that 
is simply not the case. I just reviewed a report from the Commissioner 
for Crime and Enforcement in the State of New York, and they had a very 
revealing report which in fact indicated that very few individuals are 
there for mere possession. Almost all the individuals in that State 
prison system that are there because of drug-related offenses are there 
because they were selling substantial quantities, participating in the 
act of a felony, when they were under the influence of illegal 
narcotics. So many of the crimes are not victimless. Most of them have 
victims and are felonies and serious offenses against our community.

                              {time}  2000

  So we have an incredible problem, but we have also incarcerated 
almost 2 million Americans at great cost to the taxpayers because of 
this problem.
  Let me say that, again, the war on illegal narcotics, the war on 
drugs, died in 1993 with the election of this President and with a 
majority on the Democrat side that controlled both the House of 
Representatives, the other body, and the White House from 1993 to 1995.
  Sometimes people come to me and say the war on drugs is a failure. I 
say, yes, the war on drugs is a failure because it died. It not only 
died, it was killed in 1993. In fact, what this administration did was 
dealt a death blow to the real effort started under the Reagan 
administration.
  I know because back in the early eighties I worked with Senator 
Hawkins from Florida when we had a cocaine problem and a drug problem. 
Under her leadership and under the leadership of the Reagan 
administration, they began a series of legislative initiatives to stop 
drugs at their source, to have tough interdiction of drugs as they came 
from their source, to involve the military and the Coast Guard and 
other resources in getting drugs before they got to our border, 
stopping drugs at our border, and then tough enforcement across the 
land.
  We know that works. The statistics prove that that works. 
Unfortunately, this administration abandoned those policies in 1993. In 
1993, and these are facts, this is not partisan rhetoric, but the other 
side with Democrat control in the White House and the Congress, they 
stopped many of the eradication programs, the source country problems.
  I will tell the Members, if they want to have the most effective way 
to stop hard drugs at their source, they have source country 
eradication programs, where we have those countries become involved in 
alternative crop production, where we have tough enforcement, and where 
we have eradication of the growth of illegal narcotics. Again, at their 
source is most cost-effective. There is no question about it.
  This administration, the Democratic-controlled Congress, killed those 
programs in 1993, or severely crippled them. What happened is we saw 
more and more production.
  In 1993, the administration took the first steps towards really 
cutting the military, not just as we see today and we are trying to 
make up for, and the many deployments in Kosovo, in Bosnia, on and on, 
military exercises. But they basically, under the guidance of President 
Clinton, took the military out of the war on drugs and really changed 
their mission. It was not their mission to help stop drugs once they 
came from the source; again, stopping the source, eradication programs, 
country programs, and then stopping the military involvement, then also 
cutting the Coast Guard dramatically.
  The President led the effort to cut the Coast Guard. That 
particularly affected my district and the State of Florida, because we 
had a rush of heroin and cocaine come through Puerto Rico, and Puerto 
Rico is really guarded. It has a coast all the way around, and it is 
guarded by the Coast Guard.
  The cuts in the Coast Guard dramatically increased the flow of heroin 
and cocaine and other illegal drugs into Puerto Rico, which is of 
course part of the United States, and the entry-way. And with no 
protection, those drugs started coming back into Florida in incredible 
quantities. The deaths we see in central Florida and throughout the 
State of Florida, again exceeding homicide, are drug-related, and those 
drugs we can trace coming through that trail.
  Then of course the President made a horrible decision in appointing 
Jocelyn Elders, the infamous now fortunately ex-Surgeon General who 
said, just say maybe. When we have a mixed message coming from the 
White House, when we have a mixed message coming from the chief health 
officer of the United States to our young people, our young people are 
not dumb, they pick this up. They get the message that maybe, just say 
maybe; or if I had it to do over again, I would inhale; or kids, do it 
if it feels good.
  That message went across this land. Fortunately, that Surgeon General 
has been replaced, and we do not have a Nancy Reagan or leadership at 
the national level really to bring this message of ``just say no'' and 
what drugs can do to our young people.
  Those direct actions, and again, this is not political rhetoric but 
those factual actions took place, and they resulted in, again, this 
chart we see and the dramatic rise of young 12th grade use here we see 
by this chart, but also in drugs by numerous strata of young people; 
again, not just in 12th graders. That is what we are suffering from 
today.
  Stopping illegal narcotics, hard narcotics coming into this country 
is not a rocket scientist's venture, really. It requires a simple 
review of where narcotics are coming from. Let me get another chart up 
here, if I may.
  We know where illegal drugs are coming from. This is very interesting 
because DEA has produced this chart, and this chart is 1997 heroin 
signature program results. This is an interesting program because 
technology is so amazing. Just like we can trace DNA to individual 
human beings, we can trace and DEA can trace through their labs in this 
case heroin, and they can tell almost the field that it came from and 
certainly what country of origin, or where it came from.
  This little pie chart shows that 75 percent of the heroin came from 
South America in 1997. We know that from sampling seizures across the 
land. We know that 6 percent came from Southeast Asia; I am sorry, 5 
percent from Southeast Asia, 6 percent from southwest Asia, and 14 
percent from Mexico.
  This is a very interesting chart because it tells us where the source 
of most of the death and destruction to my communities and many 
communities across the land is coming from. That is heroin, 1997.
  Let me tell the Members an absolutely startling statistic. If we took 
this chart back to 1993 or 1992, there was almost zero heroin coming 
from South America, almost none in South America 6 years ago, at the 
beginning of this administration. How did we get 75 percent of the 
heroin coming into the United States in 6 years? It is simple. It is 
through the policy of this administration. This administration for 6 
years blocked any aid or assistance to the country of Columbia in the 
way of

[[Page 11985]]

helicopters, in the way of eradication equipment, in the way of 
ammunition, in the way of resources to stop cocaine and heroin 
production.
  Here we are talking about heroin. Again, it would be almost zero at 
the beginning of the Clinton administration, and it is 75 percent now 
coming from South America, and almost 99 percent of that is coming from 
Columbia. Six years ago there was almost none. So their policy, their 
direct policy has resulted in these startling figures.
  Mexico, which on this pie chart accounts for 14 percent, was also way 
down on the bottom. It was in single digits as far as Mexican heroin 
coming into the United States. In 6 years they have managed to make 
Mexico not only a trafficker and conduit and transit country, but they 
have also made Mexico a producing country rather than stopping it.
  Repeatedly this administration has certified Mexico as cooperating in 
the war on drugs. As required by Federal law, the President must 
certify whether this country is cooperating, any country is cooperating 
to stop the production and transiting of illegal narcotics. Certainly 
Members can see that production is up by this chart. Again, we would be 
in single digits in the early 1990s, and almost no heroin coming from 
that area.
  What is absolutely startling, and this chart does not show it, and 
this is just an unbelievable statistic, but 6 years ago there was 
almost no coca, no base for cocaine produced in Colombia, almost none. 
In 6 years, again the policy of this administration stopping aid, 
stopping resources, stopping equipment in the war on drugs from going 
to Colombia, Colombia is now the number one producer of cocaine in the 
world. So we have heroin and poppies growing in unprecedented amounts, 
heroin coming in in unbelievable quantities in these sources from 
Colombia. Most of this, again, is due to the policy of this 
administration.
  I do want to say that there is some hope on the horizon. Through the 
efforts of the gentleman from New York (Chairman Gilman), who chairs 
the Committee on International Relations, through the efforts of the 
full committee on which I serve, the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight, the gentleman from Indiana (Chairman Burton) and so many 
others, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), we have repeatedly 
requested, we have repeatedly helped appropriate, and again, through 
the tremendous leadership of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), 
who now presides over the House of Representatives, we have succeeded 
in getting the first equipment to Colombia.
  I participated with several of the committee chairmen recently in a 
ceremony at the Sikorsky Helicopter Division, where the Black Hawks are 
produced in Connecticut, in a contract and delivery ceremony. Soon 
those helicopters that will be able to get to the high altitudes to 
eradicate, to go after the drug traffickers at their source, will be 
there. We will see a dramatic decrease in the amount of heroin, the 
amount of cocaine coming into this country; a small amount of money, a 
great amount of results, stopping drugs where they are grown, where 
they are produced, and interdicting those illegal narcotics as they 
come from that source, not when they are on our streets, when it is the 
most difficult to get those.
  What I need to do tonight, Mr. Speaker, is show Members and the 
American people how we got into this situation. It is a direct policy 
of this administration and the Congress that was controlled by the 
other side.
  I wanted to also talk about the other primary source of illegal 
narcotics. In addition to the source country now becoming Colombia, and 
through the policy I described, this chart shows Mexico's statistical 
tables and it shows opium seizures, cocaine seizures. I believe the 
dark blue here shows the opium seizures for 1997. The red, the first 
column is opium seizures, down in 1998. The second is cocaine seizures, 
down in 1998.
  The next is the production. The red shows the yield in 1998 is up. 
Here is Mexico, our close ally that the United States and this Congress 
and this House of Representatives have done incredible deeds to assist. 
In financial trouble we have backed them and actually given them 
financial stability. In trade we have given them benefits as far as 
assistance. NAFTA, we gave them almost an open commercial border. We 
have lost thousands of American jobs to give to lower-paying Mexico 
jobs.
  We have done everything as a good ally, and what have they done? The 
law requires under certification that the President must certify a 
country as cooperating in helping to eliminate both the production and 
the trafficking of illegal narcotics. This administration, this 
president recommended to this Congress, and we have pending before us a 
recommendation, to certify Mexico.
  From 1997 to 1998, last year there were less seizures of heroin, 
there were less seizures of cocaine, actually reduced seizures in the 
country, and more production of illegal narcotics; in this case, 
heroin.

                              {time}  2015

  I showed my colleagues the other chart that showed how production has 
risen again repeatedly over the past 6 years, and it was in single 
digits. So this is the result of what we get from Mexico.
  Let me talk a little bit about Mexico, which is the source of 60 
percent of the illegal narcotics coming into the United States. We know 
that DEA, our Drug Enforcement Agency, has confirmed that. The hard 
narcotics, the heroin, the cocaine, the methamphetamine are coming in 
unbelievable quantities through our Mexican border.
  Now this Congress has, under the leadership of the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hastert), who brought to the floor several years ago a 
resolution asking Mexico to take certain actions. It has been now over 
2 years ago that we asked Mexico to take those actions, again, the 
source of 60 percent of the hard drugs, the death, the destruction, 
those 2 million people that are behind our bars in our prisons. We 
asked Mexico to help us.
  What did we ask for? We asked Mexico, first, to extradite to the 
United States Mexican nationals who are major drug traffickers, send 
them to the United States for prosecution. We have indicted them. We 
have requested their extradition. They are guilty of breaking the 
United States Federal law. We want to try them.
  We do not want them in a kangaroo court. We do not want the corrupt 
judicial system of Mexico to deal with them. We want to try them and 
bring them to justice. The biggest thing drug dealers fear in the world 
is being brought to justice in the United States, because they will pay 
a penalty for their crime here.
  To date, the Mexicans have not extradited the first Mexican national. 
Only after coming to the floor of the House repeatedly, only just 
before Memorial Day when I, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), 
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gillmor), and other leaders on the issue 
introduced a drug kingpin bill that will tie up the assets of these 
drug dealers did we start to see any action.
  Do my colleagues know what the Mexican Government did? They 
extradited in the last week one U.S. national who was on our list, one 
U.S. national, but to date, not one Mexican national. We have requested 
over 40 major Mexican national drug dealers to be extradited. Instead, 
what they did with the Masquez brothers just a few weeks ago, and 
before we introduced this bill, was to kick dirt in our face by judges 
in Mexico releasing the Masquez brothers, who are the kings of 
methamphetamine production and trafficking into the United States.
  So until we got tough just before Memorial Day, they kicked sand in 
our face, allowing the kingpins not to be extradited. Fortunately, some 
of the brothers are still held in prison there.
  But we will not give up till these 40 Mexican nationals, whom we know 
are involved, who have been indicted in the United States, on whom we 
have a request for extradition pending, some for 6, 7 years, are 
brought to justice.
  So we asked for extradition, and what did we get? Nothing to date. 
Zero,

[[Page 11986]]

zip, nada. We asked for the enforcement of Mexican laws. Mexico passed 
laws, their National Assembly, but they did not enforce the laws. They 
have not enforced the laws.
  What did the Mexicans do to the United States after we made this 
request again, 2 years, this House of Representatives, what did they do 
last year? One, the most offensive thing that has ever taken place to 
our law enforcement officials, what they did is disrupt Operation 
Casablanca
  Operation Casablanca was a U.S. Customs sting operation which was to 
identify money laundered in the United States and through Mexican banks 
and Mexican banking officials; and our U.S. Customs officers led that 
effort. I know that we informed them of what was going on.
  Do my colleagues know what they did? The only reason for informing 
them was limited, because we can trust so few of the Mexican officials; 
most of them are corrupt from the policeman on the beat all the way to 
the office of the president. I will talk about that in just a minute.
  But what they did was threaten to arrest our Custom officials. We 
knew that hundreds of millions of dollars was being serviced through 
these Mexican corrupt bankers. They had the audacity and nerve to 
threaten our officials.
  Only until just before President Clinton went down to meet with 
President Zedillo did they back off of this threat, and only just 
before the question of certification by this administration came up did 
they back off of the threat of going after our Customs officials.
  So we asked for enforcement of the laws. What did they do? Again, we 
got dirt and dust kicked into our faces, and actually threatening our 
officials.
  We had asked over 2 years ago for our DEA agents, and we have a small 
number in Mexico, and we did have an incident where one of our agents 
was brutally and savagely murdered back in the 1980s, so we want our 
DEA agents to be able to protect themselves, and we want assurance of 
protection and, in some cases, to be able to carry arms. We still have 
been denied that right by the Mexicans to ensure the safety and 
security of our drug enforcement agents in that country.
  That was another request that we had. We asked that the drugs that 
are coming in from Colombia that are produced there in South America 
and transiting, the 60 percent of the drugs, hard drugs, coming into 
the United States be stopped at the southern border of Mexico; and that 
could be done by installing radar and other devices at the border. To 
date, zero, nothing has been done to comply with our request; and that 
request of this House of Representatives is over 2 years old. Again, 
the Mexicans have ignored a simple request of cooperation.
  Finally, signing a maritime agreement: We know if it is not coming 
over land, it is coming over water. The Mexicans still deny us a 
maritime agreement. They refused to sign a maritime agreement, to my 
knowledge, in the Caribbean, in Central, South America. Only one other 
country, Haiti, which is still in total disruption, even after we spent 
3-plus billion taxpayer dollars to improve their legislative, judicial, 
and law enforcement system, they have not been able to have their 
parliament meet and sign a maritime agreement or confirm one. But the 
Mexican Government still has refused to sign a maritime agreement with 
the United States.
  So here we are again, you know, with the situation. After the 
introduction of the bill that I described, major drug kingpins bill, 
which will go after the assets of these drug traffickers, we got a 
little attention of the administration. The Secretary of State, Mrs. 
Albright, was to go to Mexico. She was diverted to Kosovo.
  I believe they sent the Attorney General to Mexico over the weekend. 
We also, I believe, had our Drug Czar, who is doing the best job he 
can, General McCaffrey, under very difficult circumstances. Hopefully, 
in this high-level working group with the Attorney General, with other 
officers from Mexico, some additional progress will be made.
  But I can assure my colleagues in this Congress this House of 
Representatives will not sit idle until they begin an honest effort for 
enforcement, interdiction, cooperation on the agenda, items that are 
over 2 years old. So some action hopefully was taken this weekend. We 
do not know; it is not public yet. But we will continue to pressure 
Mexico because it is the source of so much of the illegal narcotics 
coming into the United States.
  We also know that in order to get from Peru and Bolivia and Colombia, 
where 100 percent of the cocaine and coca is produced now and where 75 
percent of the heroin comes from Colombia, we know that it must transit 
again by land either through Panama, through the isthmus, and those 
Central American countries, and/or through Mexico to get to the United 
States.
  Now, what is the policy of this administration relating to stopping 
drugs in Panama? This is an absolutely unbelievable scenario. What was 
started under the Carter administration to give away the Panama Canal 
and 10 billion American dollars in assets, 5,500 buildings is being 
sewed up into a neat package by the Clinton administration and given to 
the Panamanians, and at the same time, we have made one simple request. 
Could we please continue the drug surveillance flights from Howard Air 
Force Base in Panama, which cover the entire South American region, 
which cover the area that is producing the hard drugs that I have cited 
here? That was our question and request.
  Now how could a State Department bungle negotiations for a simple 
request like that with the Panamanian Government? I do not know. But, 
Mr. Speaker, the administration's State Department managed to bungle 
the negotiations for having our forward drug surveillance flights go 
out of Howard Air Force Base.
  They did that in an incredibly bungling fashion, and we were 
basically kicked out May 1. Since May 1, there has not been one drug 
surveillance flight over the drug-producing or drug-trafficking area of 
South America from Howard Air Force Base. The United States of America 
was kicked out of Panama. We closed Howard Air Force Base. We had 
15,000 drug surveillance flights last year from Howard Air Force Base 
covering the whole region.
  When I took over as chair of the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, 
Drug Policy, and Human Resources in January, we went down there to 
Panama. We met with folks. ``Can you negotiate?'' No, they did not 
think they could negotiate.
  ``If you cannot negotiate, can we move our forward surveillance drug 
operations to other areas?''
  ``Oh, yes, we will have it taken care of, Congressman Mica. Chairman 
Mica, it is going to be in place. It will all work out.''
  I am here to tell my colleagues that it is June 1, and May 1 is when 
we were kicked out. The two other operating locations that were chosen, 
one was in Mana, Ecuador, in Ecuador. The other was in Curacao and 
Aruba, Netherlands, and Antilles.
  From Mana, today is June 8, not one flight has taken off for 
surveillance in the drug-producing areas or drug-trafficking areas from 
Ecuador. There is only an interim agreement in place.
  Aruba and Curacao, we sent staff down there this weekend to examine 
what is going on. At best, we might be at 30 percent capacity of 
surveillance flights. So we have a gaping hole in our drug surveillance 
program, almost no flights taking off to cover that area either where 
drugs are produced or where drugs are trafficking.
  An incredible situation, incredibly bungled, as I said, by the State 
Department. Now the Department of Defense is scrambling, only with an 
interim agreement in Ecuador, and our staff reported to me on their 
return from Ecuador that that airfield may take $100 million to $200 
million to get it into working order.
  Now, is the United States of America going to invest, with an interim 
agreement that expires in September, any money, hard-earned taxpayer 
dollars, in a forward surveillance location and increasing and 
improving the infrastructure in that area when we have no

[[Page 11987]]

assurances of a permanent operating base?
  So they bungled it in Panama. They bungled it in Ecuador. Aruba is 
operating at maybe 30 percent of capacity, and a gaping hole again in 
our drug surveillance program.

                              {time}  2030

  So that really is where we are tonight in some of the war on drugs: 
Panama, a disaster. No forward operating bases. What that does, too, 
and what is sad about that is it denies countries that have been 
cooperating, like Peru and Bolivia, and now Colombia that is going to 
get additional equipment, it denies them the information they need to 
go after drugs at their source; it denies them the information they 
need to go after traffickers.
  Peru has had a very brave shootdown policy. They ask planes to 
identify themselves, and when they do not identify themselves and they 
try to scramble away, they shoot them down. And they have been provided 
intelligence and surveillance information by those forward operations, 
again out of Panama, that have been closed down.
  Now, it is easy for me to get up here and to criticize this 
administration, and I do not mean to do it in a partisan manner. I mean 
to do it in a factual manner. And, hopefully, we will not repeat the 
mistakes of this administration in this Congress or in the years ahead, 
because we know we can stop drugs at their source. We know we can 
interdict hard narcotics. We know if we give information to other 
countries and a little bit of assistance they can help us in a cost-
effective manner before that ever gets into our streets, into our 
communities, into our schools and becomes a tough task for law 
enforcement.
  But let me, as I conclude, just say again what the Republican 
Congress has done, what this new majority has done, and under the 
current Speakership. And again I must give full credit to the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), who is now the Speaker of the House, who 
chaired this responsibility and who I worked with in the last Congress, 
who brought together the source eradication programs that, again, were 
destroyed by a previously Democratically-controlled Congress and by 
this White House.
  Let me mention, Mr. Speaker, what just 2 years of effort in working 
with Peru and Bolivia have done. The cocaine production in those two 
countries is cut in half. In half. There has been tough enforcement. We 
must salute President Hugo Banzer, President of Bolivia, for his 
courageous efforts. We must help Bolivia, because Bolivia has committed 
in 2 years to eliminate that drug trafficking, and they have cut in 2 
years by 50 percent. So this is not a ``pie in the sky'' proposal. It 
is something we know we can do, and with very few bucks; with very few 
taxpayer dollars in assisting them.
  So, additionally, President Fujimori in Peru, with a tough 
enforcement, with a tough shootdown policy, with a tough eradication 
and a productive alternative crop program is making great progress in 
that country. So we know these programs will work.
  This Republican administration, again under the leadership of the 
current Speaker of the House, when he chaired the subcommittee, has 
helped us now get aid to Colombia. We are reversing a failed policy 
there. We will stop the production of heroin and poppy production in 
Colombia. We will eliminate major drug traffickers. We will give the 
Colombian National Police, that have done a courageous job, losing 
4,000 of their police officers in this battle, hundreds and hundreds of 
public officials have died in this war, we will give them the arms and 
the assistance and the aid, the resources to eradicate, to enforce and 
to interdict drugs cost effectively. And those Blackhawk helicopters 
are on their way. That is something we have done.
  And this Congress, this House and the American people will see a 
reduction in the amount of heroin coming into the United States. And 
also cocaine, which again they have turned in 6 years, Colombia, into 
the major producer of cocaine. Not just a processor or a transiter but 
the major producer. In 6 years they have managed to do that. We will 
start eliminating that through the policies of this new majority in the 
Congress.
  We have restored the cuts in the Coast Guard and we are dramatically 
increasing the assistance that the military provides in getting them 
back into the war on drugs. I know it was very nice for the Vice 
President to take the U-2s out of South and Central America in the war 
on drugs and bring them up to check on oil spills around Alaska. I know 
it was nice to divert the money for eradication programs of drugs at 
the source country, which President Clinton did, and put it in Haiti, 
which basically was more money down the tubes; but, in fact, we do know 
that getting the military involved in interdiction close to the source 
does work.
  We know that the Coast Guard protecting Puerto Rico and restoring 
their assets does a great job in protecting our coastlines, both of 
Puerto Rico and the United States, and we have brought them in 2 years 
back.
  We know that tough enforcement works. In the next week I will be 
holding hearings on legalization of illegal narcotics and 
decriminalization. There is a big wave across this country that we must 
look at decriminalization, make it a health problem, and we should not 
be tough on drugs and it will all work out.
  Mr. Speaker, it does not all work out. Look at the statistics in New 
York City. We can see since Mayor Rudy Giuliani has taken office what 
tough enforcement has done. The murders, which were at 2,000 when he 
took office, 2,000 murders in New York City a year, and most of them 
drug related, I would venture to say without any question, have been 
reduced by 70 percent. Just over 600 murders. From 2,000 to 600.
  It is safe to walk in New York City because Mayor Guiliani, through a 
tough enforcement policy, has stopped the violence, the crime, the drug 
trafficking and he has gone after these folks with a tough enforcement 
policy that works.
  Now, Tom Constantine, who unfortunately is leaving as the head of our 
DEA, and that is a very sad fact for this Congress and the American 
people, he produced this chart. This chart should be an eye opener for 
every Member of Congress and for every American. This shows the heroin 
addiction population in a city that decided to adopt a lackadaisical 
enforcement, a tolerant policy. In 1950, the population of Baltimore 
was over 900,000. In 1996, it was 675,000. In 1950, they had 300 heroin 
addicts in Baltimore. Listen to this. Three hundred heroin addicts. In 
1996, through a liberalized policy, they had 38,985 heroin addicts in 
Baltimore. This is what a liberalized policy gives us. And on the other 
hand, look at New York City; 2,000 murders down to 600 murders through 
tough enforcement, tough prosecution. So we know this policy works.
  Now, we are going to have a full hearing and we are giving all sides 
the opportunity to be heard in our hearings next week about this 
process of decriminalization, about tough enforcement, about 
legalization. And I try, as chairman, to be fair, so we will hear from 
everybody, but I believe that these statistics, these facts, are 
irrefutable.
  So this new majority on our side has started a program, and again I 
started to mention the things that we have done in replacing the 
military, the interdiction, the source country, getting the Coast Guard 
cuts restored, but we have also put in almost $200 million in the past 
year in education programs, which is matched by the private sector. So 
it is almost a half billion dollars in education. And we are putting 
our money where our mouth is so our young people and all Americans know 
the dangers of illegal narcotics.
  So we, again, I believe, are taking the right steps. They took the 
right steps under the Reagan and Bush administration. Education, 
enforcement, interdiction, eradication at the source, and treatment are 
important, but it cannot just be treatment. This cannot just be 
treating the wounded in a battle. If we went to war and we did not 
spend any money on armaments, any money on forward surveillance, any

[[Page 11988]]

money on eradication of the enemy, any money on ammunition, we would 
not have a war on drugs, we would not have a war. And if we only treat 
the victims in this war, it does not work. We have seen it does not 
work.
  So tonight, as I close, I ask for my colleagues' assistance to move 
together in a bipartisan cooperative effort. Mistakes were made in a 
bipartisan fashion, hopefully, we can make progress in a bipartisan 
fashion. It is my hope that we can get every Member on both sides of 
the aisle not to repeat the mistakes of the past and to move forward 
together. We know that these policies will work. They are tried, they 
are proven, they are tested.
  It is my hope that we can do that because I never want to talk to 
another mother or another father or another brother, another friend of 
a young person in my district who has died of a drug overdose. I talked 
about the cost, the people behind bars, and I talked about what 
Congress is going to have to appropriate, but we cannot restore a human 
being, a son or a daughter, to a parent who has lost that child in the 
war on drugs.
  So it is my hope that I will not have to make these speeches every 
week in my next term in Congress; that I will not have to come before 
the Speaker and the House and plead for their assistance in restarting 
the war on drugs.
  Mr. Speaker, although I have a few minutes left, I will yield back 
the balance of my time and pledge to be back here again next week.

                          ____________________