[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 12]
[House]
[Page 17165]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 17165]]

                        NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Tancredo). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, this past Friday, President 
Clinton gave a major foreign policy speech at Georgetown University 
announcing his decision not to move forward with the plan to deploy a 
national missile defense. It took the President 7 years and 8 months of 
his administration to finally make a speech about missile defense. He 
did not make a speech after 26 young Americans came home in body bags 
because we could not defend against a low complexity Scud missile.
  He did not make a speech after in January of 1995 the Russians almost 
responded with an attack on the U.S. because they misread a Norwegian 
rocket launch, an attack that we could not defend against; and he did 
not make a speech 2 years ago after the North Koreans test-fired their 
three-stage missile which the CIA now claims can hit the U.S. directly. 
But he did make a speech this past Friday.
  I was not surprised, because his position has been consistent with 
both he and Al Gore for the past 8 years. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I could 
respect the President if he would have come out publicly and simply 
said, ``I disagree with the Congress and the American people. I don't 
support missile defense and will not during my administration move 
forward.'' That is what he has done for 8 years. In fact, the day that 
my bill came up on the House floor for a vote just a year ago he wrote 
a letter to every Member of the House opposing the bill, saying please 
vote against it. Yet 103 Democrats joined 215 Republicans in giving a 
veto-proof margin to move this country forward. So the President did 
what he does so frequently. He used a political game and pretended that 
he really was for missile defense.
  Mr. Speaker, again I could respect him if he simply said that he 
opposed missile defense as he did in that letter to every Member a year 
ago in March. But, instead, the President of the United States in his 
speech before Georgetown University publicized around the world last 
Friday told half-truths, misrepresented factual information and, Mr. 
Speaker, sadly he just downright lied.
  Mr. Speaker, beginning tomorrow, at a speech before the National 
Defense University, I will respond to the President factually, I will 
respond to his specific words, and I will show the American people how 
this President and this Vice President have chosen to ignore the 
reality of the threats that are emerging. I will focus on four key 
areas the President focused on: The emergence of the threat, the arms 
control record of this administration, the Russian and world response 
to missile defense, and the technology readiness, because those are the 
issues the President spoke to, and I will take apart word by word 
taking the opportunity to define ``is'' as the President defines 
``is,'' and I will show the American people that again this President 
and this Vice President just do not get it.
  This Congress voted overwhelmingly with veto-proof margins in the 
House and the Senate to move forward. And this President, in a typical 
election-year maneuver the Friday before Labor Day, before he was to 
travel to the U.N. this week, chose to give the American people bad 
information.
  The American people deserve to hear the other side. Beginning 
tomorrow, I will give the other side and through a series of special 
orders over the next several months will outline for the American 
people the factual response to President Clinton's falsehoods that he 
outlined at Georgetown this past Friday.

                          ____________________