[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 10]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 13753-13754]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



         INTRODUCTION OF THE EXPORT ADMINISTRATION ACT OF 2001

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 18, 2001

  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise together with my distinguished 
colleague from Arizona, Jeff Flake, to introduce the Export 
Administration Act of 2001.
  My colleagues, it is high time for the Congress to responsibly 
legislate export controls. We have not done so properly since the end 
of the Cold War, when the raison d' etre for the Export Administration 
Act of 1979, of preventing the proliferation of sensitive dual-use 
technologies to the Soviet Union, ceased to exist.
  As went the Soviet Union, so went the threat of an all-pervasive, 
mind-focusing totalitarian threat to the United States. So, also, went 
the very multilateral non-proliferation system, CoCom, that effectively 
helped keep a lid on that Soviet threat.
  Now, new threats are upon us--cyber warfare, the potential for 
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and terrorism. It is 
incumbent upon this Congress to update this legislation in a manner 
that effectively can address those threats and in a manner that can 
effectively restrict dual-use exports that may threaten the United 
States.
  Indeed, the key single criteria for this renewal, it seems to me, is 
whether those export controls that we legislate can actually protect 
Americans.
  As a matter of principle, before enacting export restriction 
legislation, both Congress and the Administration must ensure that the 
affected exports in fact can be effectively restricted. I doubt anyone 
would responsibly suggest that legislating an unworkable control 
achieves any worthwhile goal or makes any sense.
  Other important criteria need to be determined:
  Would this bill sensibly update the outdated 1979 law? That is, would 
it recognize that nation-states and other global actors, technology and 
the threats to the United States have changed significantly since the 
end of the Cold War?
  Would it enhance America's economic prosperity without sacrificing 
America's national security?
  And would it provide the Executive Branch with all the legal 
authority and the flexibility it needs to protect the American people? 
Put another way, would it unduly tie the hands of the Administration in 
a way that could obstruct its constitutional duty to provide for the 
national defense?
  I have taken a hard look at S. 149, which would update the Export 
Administration Act. After a careful review, I believe this bill, as 
reported by the Senate, satisfactorily addresses the criteria I 
outlined above and enhances America's economic prosperity without 
sacrificing America's national security.
  It would protect Americans by ensuring that the national security 
agencies in the Executive Branch may be used to identify any actual or 
looming threats to our national security. In addition to the Commerce 
Department, the Defense Department, State Department and intelligence 
community are at the immediate disposal of the President of the United 
States and can signal at any time to the administration the need to 
restrict any export.
  The Enhanced Control provision of Title Il and the Deferral Provision 
of Title III would provide the President with the authority to control 
any export he may see an urgent need to control, notwithstanding any 
other provisions in the bill--including mass market status or foreign 
availability or set-asides.
  There is a glaring need, however, that I believe must be addressed by 
Congress. The Wassenaar Arrangement for that replaced CoCom is simply 
inadequate to address multilateral nonproliferation concerns. While the 
Soviet Union is no longer with us, nuclear proliferation concerns are 
real and present. Simple periodic reports on dual-use exports are 
clearly insufficient to address these concerns.
  I want to commend Chairman Hyde and Ranking Member Lantos and their 
staffs for holding hearings and briefings on export administration and 
their very hard work on this issue. But now it is time to move forward 
with re-authorization, not re-extension.
  Officials from the Departments of Defense, State and Commerce have 
testified at the three hearings before the House International 
Relations Committee has held on this matter and all have signaled their 
support for passing the Export Administration Act of 2001, as reported 
by the Senate Banking Committee. The Administration has provided a 
clear and unambiguous position that titles two and three provide 
adequate authorities to the President with regard to export controls, 
notwithstanding any other provisions of law. I also look forward to 
working with the Administration on non-proliferation matters and 
building a better multilateral mechanism than the Wassenaar 
Arrangement.
  Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House International Relations 
Committee, I am keenly aware of the national security issues and 
threats that face our great country. As former Ranking Member in the 
last Congress of the

[[Page 13754]]

International Economic Policy and Trade Subcommittee, I came to better 
appreciate the advent and permanence of rapid technological change and 
its immediate effects on our national security and economic prosperity.
  These considerations have persuaded me of the importance of updating 
the Export Administration Act. I have concluded that passage of S. 149, 
as reported, is the prudent way ahead both to protect our national 
security and to enhance our economic prosperity. I am convinced this 
bill gets it right. The Administration support for this bill attests 
that it also believes this is the optimal way ahead. I commend the 
Administration for that because this truly must be a bipartisan effort.
  Mr. Speaker, the Congress must do its duty and act now to protect 
Americans and to enhance our economic prosperity. Let us act now to 
pass the Export Administration Act of 2001.

                          ____________________