[Senate Report 105-28]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                        Calendar No. 83
105th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE

 1st Session                                                     105-28
_______________________________________________________________________


 
          FOREIGN AFFAIRS REFORM AND RESTRUCTURING ACT OF 1997

                                _______
                                

                 June 13, 1997.--Ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


 Mr. Helms, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted, under 
  authority of the order of the Senate on June 12, 1997, the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                     ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

                         [To accompany S. 903]

    The Committee on Foreign Relations having had under 
consideration an original bill to consolidate the foreign 
affairs agencies of the United States, to authorize 
appropriations for the Department of State and related agencies 
for the fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and to provide for reform 
of the United Nations, and for other purposes, reports 
favorably thereon and recommends the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page

Purposes of the bill.............................................     2
  I. Reorganization of United States Foreign Policy Apparatus.........2
 II. Foreign Relations Authorization..................................3
III. United Nations Reform............................................6
Committee action.................................................     7
Section-by-section analysis......................................     9
Cost estimate....................................................    50
Evaluation of regulatory impact..................................    51
Minority views...................................................    56
Additional views.................................................    52
Changes in existing law..........................................    57
                          Purposes of the Bill

    The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1997 is 
intended to:
    1. provide for the reorganization of the Department of 
State to maximize the efficient use of resources, eliminate 
redundancy in functions, and improve the management of the 
State Department and to strengthen the coordination of United 
States foreign policy by clarifying the leading role of the 
Secretary of State in the formulation and articulation of 
United States foreign policy. To achieve this goal the bill 
would abolish the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and the 
International Development Cooperation Agency by October 1, 
1998, and the United States Information Agency by October 1, 
1999. The bill would require the transfer of the legislative, 
public affairs, and press affairs functions of the Agency for 
International Development by October 1, 1998, to the Department 
of State. Further, the bill requires that the Administrator of 
AID serve under the direct authority of the Secretary of State 
and that the Secretary be given ultimate authority to 
coordinate U.S. development and economic assistance programs.
    2. authorize funding for Department of State, U.S. 
Information Agency, and other foreign affairs programs for 
Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999. The bill authorizes funding for the 
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency for Fiscal Year 1998.
    3. mandate reforms at the United Nations that must be met 
during the next three years and authorizes the payment of U.S. 
arrearages to the U.N. during that same time period;
    4. assist congressional efforts to balance the United 
States federal budget by 2002.

         I. Reorganization of the U.S. Foreign Policy Apparatus

    On April 18, 1997, the President issued a statement 
supporting the consolidation of the United States' foreign 
affairs agencies which ``...brings to an end bureaucracies 
originally designed for the Cold War, streamlines the Executive 
Branch's policy-making process, and enhances our nation's 
ability to meet the growing foreign policy challenges of the 
21st century.''
    It should be noted that the Committee approved legislation 
in 1995 that would have accomplished the President's recently 
stated goal of reorganizing our foreign policy apparatus, but 
the bill was vetoed by the President. Nonetheless, the 
Committee welcomes the recent support of the President to 
reform, revitalize and reorganize the United States' foreign 
affairs apparatus. Our nation's foreign affairs structures 
facilitate a ineffective dichotomy--which the nation cannot 
afford--between programs and policy.
    This year, the Committee on Foreign Relations--with broad 
bipartisan support--developed legislation which closely mirrors 
the President's plan to reorganize and streamline America's 
foreign policy apparatus and which should bring greater 
coordination and coherence to our nation's foreign policy.
    Much has been said and written about the epochal changes 
the world has seen in the past seven years. Over the past half-
century America met the test of the Cold War and prevailed 
through enormous application of spirit and treasure. The 
threats and opportunities of the next fifty years will be 
vastly different, both qualitatively and quantitatively. Less 
and less will the United States be able to rely on the buffers 
of geography for insulation from emerging international 
threats. Consequently, our ability to protect U.S. interests 
through our presence and programs overseas will have 
unprecedented bearing on this nation's future well-being and 
prosperity.
    The present U.S. foreign affairs structures were, in the 
main, developed to meet the specific challenges imposed upon 
our nation by the Cold War. The new security challenges of the 
post-Cold War world, and a pressing need to rationalize 
expenditures, require that the U.S. modify yesterday's 
institutions to preserve a vigorous capability to advance U.S. 
interests overseas.
    During the past four decades, in response to the wisdom and 
perceived needs of the day, such key foreign policy functions 
as public diplomacy, foreign assistance and arms control have 
been spun off into separate bureaucracies. A constellation of 
foreign policy satellite agencies emerged, the bureaucracies 
expanded and many United States national interests require 
action now to reintegrate and rationalize these increasingly 
disparate foreign policy functions in the U.S. government. 
Operations must be streamlined to provide coherent and cost-
effective support of vital U.S. interests overseas for 
tomorrow's challenges.
    Under this new structure, the Secretary of State will be 
given the tools necessary to build and maintain a foreign 
policy apparatus responsive to the national need and more 
efficient in its use of resources.
    This bill abolishes the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency 
(ACDA), the United States Information Agency (USIA), and the 
International Development Cooperation Agency (IDCA). The bill 
also transfers into the Department of State certain functions 
of the Agency for International Development.
    In sum, this bill will fully integrate essential functions 
currently performed by ACDA and USIA into the Department of 
State. In addition, certain functions of the Agency for 
International Development and the International Development 
Cooperation Agency will be transferred to the Department of 
State. These functions comprise a broad range of foreign policy 
tools, and are relevant to the extent they serve clear national 
interests and to the extent they are directly responsive to the 
Secretary of State and the President. This reorganization seeks 
to make programs substantially more responsive to policy, 
ensuring that foreign affairs resources are expended wisely in 
support of the national interest.

                  II. Foreign Relations Authorizations

    Division B of the ``Foreign Affairs Reform and 
Restructuring Act of 1997'' authorizes appropriations and 
activities for the Department of State and related agencies for 
fiscal years 1998 and 1999. For these two fiscal years, 
respectively, the bill authorizes $6,070,879,000 and 
$5,919,371,000. The President requested $6,153,378 for fiscal 
year 1998.

                          department of state

    For the Department of State, the bill authorizes 
$4,733,759,000 and $4,627,961,000 for fiscal years 1998 and 
1999, respectively. The President requested $4,807,390,000 for 
fiscal year 1998. The following are subtotals within this 
amount.
    For Administration of Foreign Affairs, the bill authorizes 
$2,739,596,000 and $2,767,239,000 for fiscal years 1998 and 
1999, respectively. The President requested $2,739,796,000 for 
fiscal year 1998.
     For International Commissions, the bill authorizes 
$44,222,000 and $44,222,000 for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, 
respectively. The President requested $45,162,000 for fiscal 
year 1998.
    For Related Appropriations--namely the Asia Foundation--the 
bill authorizes $8,000,000 and $8,000,000 for fiscal years 1998 
and 1999, respectively. The President requested $8,000,000 for 
fiscal year 1998.
    For Refugees, the bill authorizes $700,000,000 for fiscal 
years 1998 and 1999, respectively. The President requested 
$700,000,000 for fiscal year 1998.

                    united states information agency

    The bill authorizes $1,076,120,000 and $1,069,410,000 for 
fiscal years 1998 and 1999, respectively. The President 
requested $1,077,788,000 for fiscal year 1998.

           united states arms control and disarmament agency

    The bill authorizes $39,000,000 and $0 for fiscal years 
1998 and 1999, respectively. The President requested 
$46,200,000 for fiscal year 1998. The bill reported by 
Committee includes no funding for Arms Control and Disarmament 
Agency (ACDA) for the second fiscal year since it provides for 
ACDA's abolition and consolidation within the Department of 
State prior to the start of fiscal year 1999.

                              peace corps

    The bill authorizes $234,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
1998 and 1999. The President requested $222,000,000 for fiscal 
year 1998.

                  FY 1998-99 AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION: STATE, USIA, ACDA AND PEACE CORPS                  
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                FY 1997      FY 1998      FY 1998      FY 1999  
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                               Approp.'s     Request     Cmte. Mark   Cmte. Mark
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Department                                                                                                
  Administration of Foreign Affairs:                                                                            
    Diplomatic & Consular Prog..............................    1,725,300    1,746,977    1,746,977    1,764,447
        [fee authority]                                                                                         
    Salaries & Expenses.....................................      352,300      363,513      363,513      367,148
    Capital Investment Fund.................................       24,600       64,600       64,600       64,600
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................    2,102,200    2,175,090    2,175,090    2,196,195
                                                             ===================================================
    Inspector General.......................................       27,495       28,300       28,300       28,300
    Representation Allowances...............................        4,490        4,300        4,100        4,100
    Protect. For. Missions/Officials........................        8,332        7,900        7,900        8,000
    Sec. & Maint. of U.S. Missions..........................      389,320      373,081      373,081      376,811
    Emergencies in Dip. & Cons. Serv........................        5,800        5,500        5,500        5,500
    Repatriation Loans......................................        1,256        1,200        1,200        1,200
    Institute of Taiwan.....................................       14,490       14,490       14,490       14,600
    Foreign Service Retirement..............................      126,491      129,935      129,935      132,533
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................    2,679,874    2,739,796    2,739,596    2,767,239
                                                             ===================================================
  International Commissions:                                                                                    
    Int'l Bound. & Water Comm./US-Mex.                                                                          
      Salary................................................       15,490       18,490       18,200       18,200
      Construction..........................................        6,463        6,463        6,463        6,463
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................       21,953       24,953       24,663       24,663
                                                             ===================================================
    Int'l Bound. & Water Comm./US-Can.......................          606          785          785          785
    Int'l Joint Commission..................................        3,181        3,225        3,225        3,225
    Border Env. Coop. Commission............................        1,703        1,650        1,000        1,000
    Int'l Fisheries Commission..............................       14,549       14,549       14,549       14,549
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................       41,992       45,162       44,222       44,222
                                                             ===================================================
  International Organizations:                                                                                  
    International Conferences...............................       10,000        4,941        3,941        3,500
    International Organizations.............................      892,000      969,491      938,000      900,000
    International Peacekeeping..............................      302,400      240,000      200,000      205,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................    1,204,400    1,214,432    1,141,941    1,108,500
                                                             ===================================================
  Arrears:                                                                                                      
    International Operations................................            0       54,000       54,000           --
    Peacekeeping Operations.................................       50,000       46,000       46,000           --
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................       50,000      100,000      100,000        --\1\
                                                             ===================================================
  Related Appropriations:                                                                                       
    Asia Foundation.........................................        8,000        8,000        8,000        8,000
                                                             ===================================================
  Refugees:                                                                                                     
    Migration & Refugee Assist..............................      650,000      650,000      650,000      650,000
    Emergency Mig. & Ref. Assist............................       50,000       50,000       50,000       50,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................      700,000      700,000      700,000      700,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      STATE TOTAL...........................................    4,684,266    4,807,390    4,733,759    4,627,961
                                                             ===================================================
United States Information Agency                                                                                
  Programs and Activities:                                                                                      
    International Information Programs......................      441,375      434,097      427,097      427,097
    Technology Fund.........................................        5,050        7,000        5,050        5,050
    Educ. & Cultur. Exchange Programs                                                                           
      Fulbright Programs....................................           --           --       99,236       99,236
      Other.................................................           --           --      100,764      100,764
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................      185,000      197,731      200,000      200,000
                                                             ===================================================
    Nat'l Endowment for Democracy...........................       30,000       30,000       30,000       30,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................      672,920      677,328      662,147      662,147
                                                             ===================================================
  Broadcasting:                                                                                                 
    Int'l Broadcasting Activities...........................      325,000      366,750      331,168      331,168
    Radio Free Asia.........................................           --           --       20,000       20,000
    Broadcasting to Cuba....................................       25,000           --       22,095       22,095
    Radio Free Iran.........................................           --           --        2,000        2,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................      350,000      366,750      375,263      375,263
                                                             ===================================================
    Radio Construction......................................       35,490       32,710       37,710       31,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................      385,490      399,460      412,973      406,263
                                                             ===================================================
  Trust Funds:                                                                                                  
    Eisenhower Exch. Fellowship.............................          600          600          600          600
    Israeli Arab Scholarship................................          400          400          400          400
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..............................................        1,000        1,000        1,000        1,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      USIA TOTAL............................................    1,059,410    1,077,788    1,076,120    1,069,410
                                                             ===================================================
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency:                                                                            
    ACDA....................................................       41,500       46,200       39,000            0
                                                             ===================================================
Peace Corps:                                                                                                    
    Peace Corps.............................................      220,000      222,000      234,000      234,000
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      GLOBAL TOTALS:........................................                                                    
      State Dept., USIA, ACDA, Peace Corps..................    6,005,176    6,153,378    6,082,879    5,931,371
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ $475 million in FY 1999 and $244 million in FY 2000 for U.N. arrears package.                               

                       III. United Nations Reform

    The United Nations was originally created to help nation-
states facilitate the peaceful resolution of international 
disputes. However, the United Nations bureaucracy has 
proliferated; its costs have spiraled; and its mission has 
expanded beyond its mandate. This legislation attempts to 
address these problems.
    This legislation authorizes payment of arrears only after 
specific reform benchmarks have been met by the United Nations 
and its specialized agencies. The Committee's plan does not 
micromanage how the United Nations should downsize and 
eliminate its overlapping programs and activities. Just a 
cursory review of the organizational chart of the United 
Nations and its agencies, funds, and programs makes it clear 
that downsizing is required and must be addressed by the U.N. 
Secretary General and the member states. There are many 
proposals for restructuring the U.N. bureaucracy, including a 
widely-circulated proposal from the Nordic countries to reform 
the development and the humanitarian assistance programs of the 
U.N. This legislation leaves flexibility on these issues but 
requires that there be a procedures for sunsetting antiquated 
and dysfunctional programs.
    The core of this legislation is directed at curbing 
spending. It makes a clear statement as to how much the 
Congress is willing to pay and the conditions under which it is 
willing to authorize spending for the United Nations and its 
affiliated agencies.
    The United States Constitution places the authority to tax 
United States citizens and to authorize and appropriate those 
funds solely in the power of the United States Congress. The 
requirement in Article 17 the United Nations Charter that 
member states approve a budget to be borne by the members of 
the United Nations in no way creates a ``legal obligation'' on 
the United States Congress to authorize and appropriate the 
amounts requested by United Nations of the United States to 
meet the United Nations annual budget.
    This legislation makes clear how much the United States 
Congress is willing to pay by capping the assessed 
contributions to international organizations at $900,000,000 
per year.
    This legislation mandates a reduction in the U.S. share of 
the assessment to 20 percent. Had this assessment scale been in 
place during the past five years the United States would have 
saved the American taxpayers at least a half billion dollars in 
assessed contributions to the United Nations and its 
specialized agencies. The legislation also requires a decline 
in the budgets at the three largest specialized agencies: the 
Food and Agriculture Organization, the International Labor 
Organization, and the World Health Organization.
    Another key reform in this legislation is a requirement 
that the United States seek and obtain reimbursement for all 
assistance to the United Nations for peacekeeping operations, 
unless the President notifies Congress that to do so without 
reimbursement serves an important national interest. The 
President will be required to seek authorization of the 
Congress on all resources to fund United Nations peacekeeping 
efforts. The legislation also makes clear that the United 
States will no longer engage in large-scale United Nations 
peacekeeping operations. As $533.306 million of the ``arrears'' 
contained in this package are from the UNPROFOR mission in the 
former Yugoslavia, the savings from this provision are 
eminently clear.
    Division C does not contain every reform that Congress 
would have wanted from the U.N. The plan is, however, the 
result of months of bipartisan meetings and negotiations 
between this Committee, the appropriating committees, the 
leadership of both the Senate and House, and the 
Administration. It is a consensus package that provides basic 
reforms and much-needed curbs on spending.

                            Committee Action

    Prior to the Committee consideration of the ``Foreign 
Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1997'', the Committee 
on Foreign Relations held a number of hearings on the 
International Affairs budget, reorganization of the U.S. 
foreign policy apparatus, and on the need for reform at the 
United Nations.
    Hearings on these issues are as follows:
    January 8, 1997 - At the nomination hearing of the 
Honorable Madeleine K. Albright, Secretary of State, Secretary 
Albright testified concerning reorganization of the State 
Department and reform at the United Nations.
    January 29, 1997 - At the nomination hearing of the 
Honorable Bill Richardson, U.S. Representative to the United 
Nations, Ambassador Richardson testified before the Committee 
on issues relating to the United Nations reform efforts.
    April 18, 1997 - During the nomination hearing for Mr. 
Thomas R. Pickering to be Undersecretary of State for Political 
Affairs, Ambassador Pickering discussed reorganization of the 
Department of State.
    The Subcommittee on International Operations held three 
hearings at which representatives of three Federal Agencies 
testified. These hearings focused primarily on efforts by the 
committee to reorganize and streamline U.S. foreign policy 
bureaucracies, and on the President's Fiscal Year 1998 
International Affairs Budget Request:
    February 27, 1997 - the Honorable Patrick F. Kennedy, 
Acting Undersecretary for Management, Department of State, 
testified on the State Department's ``Administration of Foreign 
Affairs'' FY 1998 Budget.
    March 6, 1997 - the Honorable Joseph D. Duffey, Director, 
United States Information Agency, and Mr. Kevin Klose, 
Associate Director for Broadcasting, U.S. Information Agency, 
presented the President's FY 1998 Budget Request for the U.S. 
Information Agency and International Broadcasting.
    March 13, 1997 - the Honorable Princeton N. Lyman, Acting 
Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization 
Affairs, and the Honorable John D. Holum, Director, U.S. Arms 
Control and Disarmament Agency, testified on the FY98 Budget 
Requests for International Organizations and Conferences, U.S. 
contributions to the United Nations, and Arms Control and 
Disarmament Agency.
    The Subcommittee on International Economic Policy held 
hearings dedicated to oversight of U.S. assistance programs and 
to the reorganization of A.I.D:
    February 26, 1997 - the Honorable J. Brian Atwood, 
Administrator, Agency for International Development, testified 
on the President's budget request and on issues related to 
reorganization on the Agency.
    On June 12, 1997, the Committee on Foreign Relations 
considered an original committee bill, the ``Foreign Affairs 
Reform and Restructuring Act of 1997,'' which was ordered 
reported favorable to the Senate floor on June 12, 1997. A 
majority of the members were present and voted in the 
affirmative, 14 to 4, to report the bill favorably.

                      Section-By-Section Analysis

         DIVISION A--CONSOLIDATION OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AGENCIES

                      Title I--General Provisions

Sec. 101. Short title.

    Section 101 states that this division may be cited as the 
``Foreign Affairs Agencies Consolidation Act of 1997.''

Sec. 102. Purposes.

    Section 102 establishes that the purposes of this division 
are to strengthen the coordination of United States foreign 
policy and the leading role of the Secretary of State in the 
formulation of such policy; to consolidate and reinvigorate the 
foreign affairs functions of the United States within the 
Department of State; to ensure that programs critical to the 
promotion of United States national interests be maintained; to 
assist congressional efforts to balance the budget; to ensure 
that the United States maintains effective representation 
abroad within budgetary restraints; and to encourage United 
States foreign affairs agencies to maintain a high percentage 
of the best qualified, most competent United States citizens 
serving in the United States government.

Sec. 103. Definitions.

    Section 103 defines the terms used in this division: 
appropriate congressional committees, federal agency, function, 
office, transferee agency, and transferor agency.

Sec. 104. Report on budgetary cost savings resulting from 
            reorganization.

    Section 104 requires the Secretary of State to submit to 
the Committees on Foreign Relations and Appropriations of the 
Senate and the Committees on International Relations and 
Appropriations of the House of Representatives periodic reports 
describing the total anticipated and achieved cost savings, in 
both budget authority and in outlays, related to reorganization 
of the foreign affairs agencies. The initial report is required 
90 days after enactment of this legislation, with subsequent 
reports every 180 days thereafter until September 30, 2001.
    The Committee expects that these reports will contain 
detailed information regarding cost savings from reductions in 
personnel, administrative and program consolidation, sales of 
real property, termination of property leases, coordinated 
procurement and from other reorganization.

      Title II--United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

                     chapter 1--general provisions

Sec. 201. Effective date

    Section 201 establishes that the effective date of the 
abolition of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency shall take 
effect on the earlier of October 1, 1998, or the date of 
abolition of ACDA pursuant to the reorganization plan described 
in section 601 of this Act.

             chapter 2--abolition and transfer of functions

Sec. 211. Abolition of the United States Arms Control and 
            Disarmament Agency

    Section 211 abolishes the United States Arms Control and 
Disarmament Agency (ACDA). By incorporating ACDA's arms control 
expertise in a new, more efficient State Department, this 
provision will ensure more efficient use of resources and will 
give arms control a more comprehensive purview. After all, the 
effectiveness and desirability of arms control and 
nonproliferation measures depend upon their consideration 
within the broader foreign policy context. By making arms 
control and nonproliferation decisions the personal 
responsibility of the Secretary of State, this division will 
give these matters a voice at the most senior level of the 
Administration. It will also ensure that arms control and 
nonproliferation proposals are made in a manner which 
reinforces and advances United States foreign policy and--above 
all else--national security objectives.
    The elimination of ACDA, as part of the larger 
reorganization of the United States' foreign affairs apparatus 
to face the post- Cold War environment, has been endorsed by 
five former Secretaries of State, from Henry Kissinger to James 
Baker, III. This can be attributed to their confidence that 
ACDA's abolition will not only streamline and strengthen arms 
control, but also will reduce waste, duplication, and needless 
bureaucratic turf battles.
    For the past generation, ACDA has had primary 
responsibility for the preparation, conduct and management of 
United States participation in all international negotiations 
and implementation fora in the field of arms control and 
disarmament. In more recent years, ACDA has also been given 
primary responsibility, on occasion, for the preparation, 
conduct and management of United States participation in 
international negotiations and implementation fora in the field 
of nonproliferation, such as with the indefinite extension of 
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Further, ACDA has 
been an important participant in interagency evaluation of 
nonproliferation research and development programs.
    This does not mean, however, that ACDA has been the only 
voice for arms control in the Federal Government. Arms control 
functions are spread throughout the Executive branch. ACDA is, 
in fact, a relatively small agency. There are more than 3,100 
arms control experts in more than 25 offices throughout 15 
departments and agencies of the Federal Government. Fewer than 
8 percent of them work for ACDA.
    ACDA owns an even smaller piece of the arms control budget. 
The annual arms control budget of the United States government 
totals over $1 billion, ranging from expenditures on treaty 
implementation to the funding of unclassified, private sector 
arms control research. Nor is ACDA the sole repository of arms 
control negotiation and treaty verification experience. Thus 
there may well be further grounds to rationalize and streamline 
the United States arms control process to meet the needs of the 
emerging international security environment.

Sec. 212. Transfer of functions to Secretary of State

    Section 212 transfers to the Secretary of State all 
functions of the Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament 
Agency (ACDA) and all functions of ACDA and any offices or 
components of ACDA.
    The Committee expects this transfer of functions to raise 
the status of arms control in the interagency process. ACDA's 
own Inspector General stated in August, 1995, that "Once arms 
control became important presidential business...Secretaries of 
State and Defense and national security advisers became the 
dominant figures in arms control." He further found that arms 
control and nonproliferation policy is often subordinated to a 
secondary role given ACDA's perceived lack of inter-agency 
status. The Inspector General noted that, ``If differences 
[between ACDA and other agencies] are not worked out there [at 
the working level], chances are the policy position of other 
organizations with higher perceived interagency status and 
decision-making impact will prevail'' and that ``the ACDA 
Director will only be as effective as the President and 
Secretary of State desire.''
    In sum, the Committee finds that the Departments of State 
and Defense have, in fact, set the terms of the post-Cold War 
arms control debate. They have done so, however, often without 
bearing the responsibility for ensuring that all avenues for 
prudent arms control and nonproliferation measures are 
explored. Instead, this responsibility seems to have been 
shunted off upon a smaller agency whose views are freely 
solicited, and too often freely ignored.
    The effectiveness and desirability of arms control and 
nonproliferation measures depend upon their consideration 
within the broader foreign policy context. By making arms 
control and nonproliferation decisions the personal 
responsibility of the Secretary of State, this section will 
give arms control a voice at the most senior level of the 
Administration. It will also create accountability at the 
highest level for ensuring that these matters are given due 
consideration.
    The Committee is particularly concerned that 
nonproliferation imperatives have at times been subordinated to 
such other considerations as trade and commercial benefits. In 
the cases of the decontrol of supercomputers and the release of 
56-bit encryption technology for sale overseas, the 
Administration ignored the arguments of ACDA and other 
nonproliferation experts. These two decontrols risk a decrease 
in U.S. intelligence collection capabilities and an increased 
design and fabrication capability for advanced weapons systems 
in other countries (such as China, which has purchased nearly 
50 such computers over the last two years and is reportedly 
alleged to have diverted some of that technology to undeclared 
uses). The Committee will expect the Secretary of State to put 
national security objectives ahead of economic considerations 
in fulfilling the requirements of this section, and thus to 
give nonproliferation a stronger voice at the most senior level 
of the U.S. decision-making process.
    Merging ACDA into the State Department will not downgrade 
arms control; to the contrary, it will integrate arms control 
more effectively into the other facets of foreign policy. In 
directing the absorption of ACDA by the U.S. Department of 
State, the Committee intends, as it does in other aspects of 
this reorganization, that the Secretary of State continue to 
assert a strong, leading role in all aspects of U.S. foreign 
policy. Further, the Committee expects to see consistent and 
forceful leadership by the Secretary in pursuing arms control 
and nonproliferation matters which further United States 
interests. The Committee does not intend, however, that this 
reorganization be interpreted as any warrant for the Department 
of State to replicate arms control implementation or compliance 
functions already performed elsewhere (such as by the On-Site 
Inspection Agency of the Department of Defense).

Sec. 213. Under Secretary for Arms Control and International 
            Security

    Section 213 establishes within the Department of State the 
position of Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and 
International Security. The Under Secretary shall assist the 
Secretary of State and the Deputy Secretary of State in issues 
related to arms control and international security policy and 
shall, subject the direction of the President, to attend 
meetings of the National Security Council on arms control and 
nonproliferation issues.
    The Committee expects that the Department of State will 
maintain the technical and policy expertise that ACDA has 
developed in arms control and nonproliferation verification, 
compliance and law. The ACDA personnel to be absorbed by the 
Department of State--most, if not all, of whom will work under 
the new Under Secretary for Arms Control and International 
Security--will bring into the Department this expertise. The 
Committee expects that this resource will be preserved through 
personnel policies that encourage the recruitment, retention 
and use of such skilled personnel on arms control and 
nonproliferation matters. To this end, the Department of State 
should view expertise in arms control, nonproliferation and 
international security matters as a specialized career path 
that can lead to senior positions in these fields.
    However, just as the Committee expects the Department of 
State to retain arms control experts, it also expects the 
Department of State to eliminate redundant, non-mission related 
positions. Further, the Under Secretary should place high 
priority on recruiting and retaining arms control experts with 
backgrounds in the hard sciences and should ensure that the 
experts are given necessary library and computing resources. 
Regrettably, ACDA's Inspector General has concluded that ``ACDA 
managers have not considered it necessary to increase the 
proportion of scientific or technical specialists on its 
staff...'' and that ACDA has an ``instinct to duplicate policy 
expertise already found in other agencies, as well as a 
disinclination to give higher priority to scientific 
expertise...'' The Committee expects the Under Secretary to 
rectify this problem.
    The efficient conduct of arms control and nonproliferation 
negotiations and implementation regimes often requires that 
expert personnel travel overseas, sometimes on short notice and 
sometimes for extended periods of time. The Committee expects 
that the State Department, in assuming the functions formerly 
assigned to ACDA, will maintain the ability of the Under 
Secretary to dispatch expert personnel overseas as needed to 
pursue U.S. objectives in negotiations or compliance fora. 
However, the Committee also intends that the Under Secretary be 
attentive to opportunities to streamline and reduce the size 
and operations of U.S. arms control delegations 
overseas.Finally, effective leadership on arms control and 
nonproliferation matters also often requires that personnel 
handle very sensitive national security information. Access to 
such information may frequently depend, in turn, upon the 
willingness of personnel to accept security strictures that are 
more common to defense and intelligence agencies. The Director 
of ACDA has had independent authority to set and maintain 
security standards for ACDA employees. This authority will 
revert to the Secretary of State. To the extent that ACDA 
security standards or procedures may be more stringent than 
those applied to the rest of the Department of State, the 
Committee expects the Secretary to maintain such security 
standards or procedures as the Under Secretary may determine 
are necessary for the Department of State to maintain and 
enhance its leadership role on arms control and 
nonproliferation matters.

Sec. 214. Reporting requirements

    Section 214 delegates to the Under Secretary of State for 
Arms Control and International Security responsibility for the 
preparation of arms control compliance reports formerly 
assigned to the ACDA Director under sections 37 (on 
verification aspects of arms control agreements) and 51 (on the 
annual ``Pell Reports'' regarding arms control compliance) of 
the Arms Control and Disarmament Act of 1961, as amended. The 
Committee considers it vital that the Under Secretary remain 
able to present an independent analysis of verification and 
compliance aspects of arms control agreements and also, 
therefore, that the Under Secretary be able to call upon expert 
personnel in these areas who will not feel obligated to 
downplay verification or compliance issues because of any 
potential impact of such issues upon overall U.S. relations 
with another country. The Committee expects the Under Secretary 
to vigorously reject any pressures to downplay his analysis or 
conclusions regarding arms control violations.

Sec. 215. Repeal relating to Inspector General for United 
            States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

    Section 215 repeals Section 50 of the Arms Control and 
Disarmament Act relating to the Arms Control and Disarmament 
Agency Inspector General.

                    chapter 3--conforming amendments

Sec. 221. References

    Section 221 states that any reference in any statute, 
reorganization plan, executive order, regulation, agreement, 
determination, or other official document or proceeding to the 
United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency or the 
Director or other official of ACDA shall be deemed to refer 
respectively to the Department of State or the Secretary of 
State or other official of the Department of State.

Sec. 222. Repeal of establishment of ACDA

    Section 222 repeals Section 21 of the Arms Control and 
Disarmament Act relating to the establishment of the Arms 
Control and Disarmament Agency.

Sec. 223. Repeal of positions and offices

    Section 223 repeals Sections 22, 23, 24, and 25 of the Arms 
Control and Disarmament Act relating to the Director, Deputy 
Director, Assistant Directors, and to bureaus, offices, and 
divisions of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.

Sec. 224. Compensation of officers

    Section 224 makes technical and conforming amendments to 
Title 5 U.S.C., sections 5313, 5314, 5315, and 5316 regarding 
the compensation of officials of the Arms Control and 
Disarmament Agency.

              Title III--United States Information Agency

                     chapter 1--general provisions

Sec. 301. Effective date

    Section 301 establishes that the effective date of the 
abolition of the United States Information Agency (USIA) shall 
take effect on the earlier of October 1, 1999, or the date of 
abolition of USIA pursuant to the reorganization plan described 
in section 601 of this Act.

            chapter 2 --abolition and transfer of functions

Sec. 311. Abolition of United States Information Agency

    Abolishes the United States Information Agency upon the 
effective date of this title.

Sec. 312. Transfer of functions

    Section 312 transfers to the Secretary of State all 
functions of the director of the United States Information 
Agency (USIA) and all functions of USIA and any offices or 
components of USIA.

Sec. 313. Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy

    Section 313 creates within the Department of State an Under 
secretary for Public Diplomacy whose responsibilities include 
assisting the Secretary of State in the formation and 
implementation of United State public diplomacy policies, 
including international cultural and educational exchange 
programs, information, and international broadcasting.

Sec. 314. Abolition of Office of Inspector General of United 
            States Information Agency and transfer of functions

    Section 314 abolishes the Office of the Inspector General 
and transfers its personnel and functions to the Department of 
State's Inspector General's office, and makes technical and 
conforming amendments.

Sec. 315 Interim transfer of functions

    Section 315(a) requires that the functions of the Office of 
Public Liaison and the Office of Congressional and 
Intergovernmental Affairs of the U.S. Information Agency be 
transferred to the Secretary of State.
    Section 315(b) requires that this section take effect on 
the earlier of October 1, 1998, or the date of the proposed 
transferof these functions as required by the reorganization 
plan described in section 601 of this Act.

                 chapter 3--international broadcasting

Sec. 321. Congressional Findings and Declaration of Purpose

    Section 321 sets forth findings regarding the importance of 
U.S. sponsored international broadcasting. It repeats three 
findings set forth in the United States International 
Broadcasting Act of 1994 (Title III of the Foreign Relations 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1994-1995), and add a fourth 
regarding the importance of international broadcasting as an 
instrument of U.S. foreign policy.

Sec. 322. Continued Existence of the Broadcasting Board of 
            Governors

    Section 322 provides for the retention of the Broadcasting 
Board of Governors as an entity described in Section 104 of 
Title 5 of the United States Code. The current members of the 
Board will remain in place and serve out their terms of office.
    The Broadcasting Board of Governors (hereafter ``the 
Board'') was established by the United States International 
Broadcasting Act of 1994 (Title III of the Foreign Relations 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1994-1995, P.L. 103-236). In 
that Act, Congress consolidated all U.S.-sponsored 
international broadcasting--the Voice of America, Radio and TV 
Marti, Worldnet TV, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and Radio 
Free Asia--under the direction and supervision of one governing 
board. The Board is part of the United States Information 
Agency, although in essence it is a self-contained unit within 
the Agency.
    The provision would not alter the consolidation achieved in 
1994, but would prevent the Board and the international 
broadcasting entities from being merged into the State 
Department, where the credibility and journalistic integrity of 
the broadcasters would be threatened. The rationale for having 
an arms-length distance from State is two-fold: (1) to provide 
``deniability'' for the State Department when foreign 
governments voice their complaints about specific broadcasts; 
and (2) to provide a ``firewall'' between the Department and 
the broadcasters to ensure the integrity of the journalism.
    Of course, no one denies that these entities are funded by 
the United States government. But the concepts of 
``deniability'' and ``firewall'' have meaning. In truth, the 
State Department will be able to deny responsibility for a 
specific broadcast--because it will have denied itself the 
ability to affect the content of that broadcast. It can do so 
because the ``firewall'' will have operational meaning. 
Whenever a foreign government complains to a U.S. diplomat that 
a broadcast is inconsistent with U.S. foreign policy 
objectives, that diplomat can plausibly deny that the broadcast 
is ``not my department,'' and refer their counterpart to the 
Board. The Board, in turn, will exercise its oversight duties 
to investigate the matter, and take steps to influence overall 
broadcast policy, but the journalists themselves will be 
shielded from political interference by State Department 
officials.
    All this is not to say that these entities are not 
important instruments of U.S. policy. It should go without 
saying that they are--and should remain so. The broadcasting 
agencies would continue to serve the foreign policy needs of 
the U.S. government: (1) a senior official of the State 
Department--the new Under Secretary of State for Public 
Diplomacy--would be a permanent voting member of the Board (as 
the USIA Director is now); (2) the VOA mission of telling 
America's story would remain intact, as would the VOA Charter; 
(3) the Secretary of State would provide foreign policy 
guidance and would be consulted about the addition or deletion 
of language services; (4) the statutory requirements requiring 
that the broadcasts be consistent with the broad foreign policy 
objectives of the United States would remain intact; and (5) 
the radios would continue to have the capability to provide 
surge capacity to support U.S. foreign policy objectives during 
crises abroad.
    But the Committee believes strongly that the credibility of 
the journalism practiced by the various broadcast services 
would be at risk by placing these services inside the 
Department of State. This concern has been expressed by several 
former Directors of the Voice of America, from both Republican 
and Democratic Administrations, who wrote that ``the direct 
involvement of the State Department in international 
broadcasting would prove detrimental to both institutions as 
well as seriously damage the credibility of our broadcast 
services.''
    The section also provides that the Inspector General of the 
Department of State will exercise the same authorities that it 
now has with regard to that Department. The section states, 
however, that the Inspector General ``shall respect the 
professional independence and integrity of all broadcasters'' 
covered by this bill.

Sec. 323. Conforming Amendments to the United States 
            International Broadcasting Act of 1994

    Section 323 makes several conforming amendments to the 
United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994. 
Specifically, it makes the changes to the statute required to 
give the new Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy a 
seat on the Board.
    The section also makes several amendments to the 
authorities of the Board, as well as the principles and 
standards that the broadcasting should follow. These include an 
amendment requiring consultation with the Secretary of State on 
the additional and deletion of language services, a statement 
making clear that the Voice of America should continue to 
broadcast editorials presenting the views of the United States 
government, and the addition of several authorities made 
necessary by the creation of a separate government agency.
    Additionally, the provision changes current law to require 
that the Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau, 
which carries out the day-to-day operations of the broadcasting 
act, will be appointed by the President, by and with the advice 
and consent of the Senate. Under current law, the Director is 
appointed by the Chairman of the Board, with the concurrence of 
a majority of the Board.

Sec. 324. Amendments to the Radio Broadcasting to Cuba Act

    Section 324 makes several technical amendments to the Radio 
Broadcasting to Cuba Act to conform to the changes made by this 
title.

Sec. 325. Amendments to the Television Broadcasting to Cuba Act

    Section 325 makes several technical amendments to the 
Television Broadcasting to Cuba Act to conform to the changes 
made by this title.

Sec. 326. Savings Provisions

    Section 326 is a standard savings provision utilized when 
changes in government structure occur.

Sec. 327. Report on the Privatization of RFE/RL, Incorporated

    Section 327 requires a periodic report on the progress 
being made to fulfill the objective contained in Section 312 of 
the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994, which 
stated that is the sense of Congress that the ``funding of 
Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty should be assumed by the 
private sector not later than December 31, 1999.''

                    chapter 4--conforming amendments

Sec. 331. References

    Any reference in any statute or other official document or 
proceeding to the Director of the United States Information 
Agency or the Director of the International Communication 
Agency shall be deemed to refer to the Secretary of State, and 
any reference to USIA or the International Communication Agency 
shall be deemed to refer to the Department of State.

Sec. 332. Amendments to title 5, United States Code

    Makes technical and conforming amendments to title 5 of the 
United States Code relating to officers of the United States 
Information Agency.

333. Ban on domestic activities

    Section 333 exempts the Department of State from certain 
prohibitions in law relating to the domestic dissemination of 
certain foreign policy information.

  Title IV--United States International Development Cooperation Agency

                     chapter 1--general provisions

Sec. 401. Effective date

    Section 401 establishes that the effective date of the 
abolition of the International Development Cooperation Agency 
shall be the earlier of October 1, 1998, or the date of 
abolition of IDCA pursuant to the reorganization plan described 
in section 601 of this Act.

             chapter 2--abolition and transfer of functions

Sec.411. Abolition of United States International Development 
            Cooperation Agency

    Section 411(a) abolishes the International Development 
Cooperation Agency.
    Section 411(b) exempts the Overseas Private Investment 
Corporation and the Agency for International Development from 
this abolition.

Sec.412. Transfer of functions

    Section 412(a) transfers to the Secretary of State the 
functions of the Director of the International Development 
Cooperation Agency (IDCA) as described in subsection (d)
    Section 412(b) transfers to the Administrator of A.I.D. all 
functions of the IDCA Director relating to the Overseas Private 
Investment Corporation.
    Section 412(c) provides the authority to transfer to 
another federal agency or agencies as may be specified by the 
President in the reorganization plan submitted to Congress 
pursuant to section 601 of this division. If the President 
fails to submit the required reorganization plan, all other 
functions of IDCA shall be transferred to the Secretary of 
State.
    Section 412(d) states that the functions transferred to the 
Secretary of State pursuant to subsection (a) are those 
relating to economic and development assistance allocation.
    Currently, pursuant to Executive order 12163 of September 
29, 1979, certain foreign assistance funds appropriated to the 
President are deemed apportioned to the Director of IDCA (and 
subsequently, the Administrator of the Agency for International 
Development). The Committee's intent with this section is to 
ensure that after enactment these funds are apportioned to the 
Secretary of State, and not the Administrator of A.I.D.

Sec. 413. Status of AID

    Section 413 states that, unless abolished by the President 
pursuant to his reorganization plan, AID shall continue as an 
entity in the Federal Government. This section also allows the 
Administrator of A.I.D. to utilize the Foreign Service 
personnel system with respect to A.I.D. employees.

                    chapter 3--conforming amendments

Sec. 421. References

    Section 421 states that, except as otherwise provided by 
this Act, any reference in any statute, reorganization plan, 
Executive order, or other official document proceeding to the 
Director or any other officer of the International Development 
Cooperation Agency (IDCA) shall be deemed to refer to the 
Secretary of State, and any reference to IDCA shall be deemed 
to refer to the Department of State.

Sec. 422. Conforming amendments

    Section 422 makes technical and conforming amendments.

             Title V--Agency for International Development

                     chapter 1--general provisions

Sec. 501. Effective date

    Section 501 requires that this section take effect on the 
earlier of October 1, 1998, or the date of the proposed 
transfer of these functions as required by the reorganization 
plan described in section 601 of this Act.

          chapter 2--reorganization and transfer of functions

Sec. 511. Reorganization of Agency for International 
            Development

    Section 511(a) states that the Agency for International 
Development will be reorganized in accordance with this 
division of this Act and with the reorganization plan submitted 
pursuant to section 601 of this Act.
    Section 511(b) requires that the functions of the offices 
of public affairs, press affairs and legislative affairs of the 
Agency for International Development be transferred to the 
Department of State.
    The Committee believes that the transfer of A.I.D.'s 
legislative, press and public affairs functions into the 
Department of State are essential to bring coherence to the 
Executive Branch's congressional relations and public affairs 
regarding the relationship of U.S. foreign assistance with 
American foreign policy. The Committee recognizes that the 
President's reorganization proposal contemplates the transfer 
of only A.I.D.'s press operation into the State Department. 
However, since A.I.D.'s press office currently consists of 
fewer than eight employees and maintains a budget of $670,000, 
this transfer would hardly represent the streamlining and 
revitalization of America's foreign policy apparatus that is 
needed.
    Today, A.I.D.'s Legislative and Public Affairs Bureau 
contains 52 employees and will spend $4,500,000 in Fiscal Year 
1997. Its transfer and reorganization within the Department of 
State will serve as an essential first step in bringing renewed 
coordination between foreign policy-making and foreign aid 
distribution.

            chapter 3--authorities of the secretary of state

Sec. 521. Definition of United States assistance

    Section 521 provides definitions for United States 
assistance.

Sec. 522. Placement of Administrator of AID under direct 
            authority of the Secretary of State

    Section 522 mandates, consistent with the President's plan, 
that the Administrator of the Agency for International 
Development serves under the direct authority of the Secretary 
of State.

Sec. 523. Assistance programs coordination, implementation, and 
            oversight

    Section 523(a) provides the Secretary of State with the 
authority to coordinate all programs, projects, and activities 
of United States assistance under the direction of the 
President. This authority does not supersede the responsibility 
of the Secretary of Commerce in relation to the promotion of 
exports of United States goods and services. This authority 
also does not supersede the responsibility of the Secretary of 
the Treasury to coordinate the activities of the United States 
in relation to the International Financial Institutions, and 
the organization of multilateral efforts aimed at currency 
stabilization, currency convertibility, debt reduction, and 
comprehensive economic reform programs.
    Section 523(b) articulates the specific coordination 
activities of the Secretary of State in relation to United 
States Assistance. The activities include: (1) designing of an 
overall assistance strategy; (2) ensuring the coordination of 
United States government agencies; (3) coordinating with the 
individual country governments and international organizations; 
(4) providing proper management and oversight for the agencies 
providing assistance; and (5) resolving policy disputes among 
United States government agencies with respect to assistance 
being provided.
    Section 523(c) requires that any federal agency 
administering any foreign assistance must remain accountable 
for those funds.
    Section 523(d) requires the Administrator of The Agency for 
International Development, at the request of the Secretary of 
State, to detail AID employees to the State Department for the 
purpose of assisting in the coordination of U.S. foreign 
assistance.
    The changes made by section 523 are essential to bring 
improved coordination and rationalization to U.S. overseas 
economic and development assistance programs. The establishment 
within the Department of State of this coordination function 
will ensure that, in the future, foreign aid programs are being 
carried out in a manner consistent with our nations overall 
foreign policy. It furthers the President's goal of 
establishing the Secretary of State's pre-eminence in foreign 
policy-making. According to the State Department's April 17, 
1997, statement regarding reorganization, one reform ``...would 
be to further improve coordination between AID's and State's 
regional bureaus.'' This section is consisent with that 
objective.
    Strengthened coordination between A.I.D. and the State 
Department is essential. The foreign aid budget has been 
shrinking in recent years, making it more important that scarce 
resources be better prioritized. In addition, A.I.D. will 
relocate this year from Foggy Bottom to its new offices at the 
Ronald Reagan Federal Building, making face-to-face contact 
between senior A.I.D. officials and their State Department 
counterparts more difficult. Ensuring that coordination 
originates in the Department of State will increase the 
likelihood that foreign aid serves American interests.
    A.I.D. contends that it has built, during the past 35 
years, a unique cadre of foreign aid specialists who carry out 
foreign aid programs in more than 75 developing nations. The 
establishment of coordinators in the State Department will 
complement A.I.D.'s experience and ensure that A.I.D. does not 
deviate from U.S. foreign policy goals. This section in the 
bill grants authority to detail A.I.D. employees to the State 
Department to ensure that programmatic concerns are taken into 
mind throughout the coordination process. This will ensure that 
the State Department immediately has the technical expertise to 
review ongoing A.I.D. programs. The Committee's intent is not 
to create a entirely new bureaucracy at the State Department. 
It would be logical that the regional assistant secretaries of 
state serve as aid coordinators rather than following exactly 
the coordinator models established by the FREEDOM Support Act 
and the SEED Act, which created independent assistance 
coordinator's offices in the State Department. Finally, the 
Committee hopes that this section will further strengthen the 
relationship between our U.S. Ambassadors and A.I.D. mission 
directors overseas in the coordination of U.S. assistance 
policy in developing countries. Too often there is lack of 
coordination between our embassies and A.I.D.'s missions.

Sec. 524. Sense of the Senate regarding apportionment of 
            certain funds to the Secretary of State

    Section 524 expresses the sense of the Senate that the 
International Affairs (function 150) development and economic 
assistance funds appropriated to the President, should be 
apportioned by the Office of Management and Budget directly to 
The Secretary of State rather than the Administrator of the 
Agency for International Development.

                          Title VI--Transition

                     chapter 1--reorganization plan

Sec. 601. Reorganization plan

    Section 601(a) requires that by October 1, 1997, or 15 days 
after the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to 
Congress a plan for reorganization of the structures and 
functions of United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 
the United States Information Agency, and the United States 
International Development Cooperation Agency as they relate to 
the Department of State.
    Section 611(b) prohibits the reorganization plans for ACDA, 
USIA, and AID from: (1) creating a new executive department; 
(2) continuing a function beyond the period authorized by law 
for its exercise or beyond the time when it would have 
terminated if the reorganization had not been made; (3) 
authorizing an agency to exercise a function which is not 
authorized by law at the time the plan is transmitted to 
Congress; (4) creating a new agency which is not a component or 
part of an existing executive department or independent agency; 
or (5) increasing the term of an office beyond that provided by 
law for the office. Other laws that may be affected by the 
reorganization are enforceable until the effective date of the 
reorganization plan in this Act. The President must ensure that 
the Federal Register publishes the date by which functions of 
ACDA, USIA, and AID are to be transferred or terminated in 
accordance with the reorganization plans for each agency 
detailed in this title.
    Section 601(b) establishes that the agencies covered under 
this subsection are the United States Arms Control and 
Disarmament Agency, the United States Information Agency, the 
United States International Development Cooperation Agency, and 
the Agency for International Development.
    Section 601(c) establishes the required elements of the 
plan for reorganization. The required elements will include: 
identification of the functions of each agency that will be 
transferred to the Department; identification of the effects on 
personnel of the agencies as it relates to transfers, 
separations, and terminations; identification of the effects on 
Department personnel as it relates to transfers, separations, 
and terminations; specification of the steps that the Secretary 
will take to reorganize internally the functions of the 
Department; specification of the agency funds to be transferred 
to the Department as a result of the reorganization; 
specification of the potential allocation within the Department 
of unexpended agency funds as a result of reorganization; 
specification of plans to address the disposition of various 
administrative and logistical liabilities of each agency as a 
result of reorganization; and recommendation of additional 
amendments to the laws of the United States that may be 
required as a result of reorganization.
    Section 601(d) provides for the possible abolition of the 
Agency for International Development, and in lieu of abolition, 
a plan for reorganization of the Agency.
    Section 601(e) allows the President to amend or modify the 
reorganization plan on the basis of consultations with 
Congress.
    Section 601(f) establishes the effective date of 
implementation of this act, by statute or Presidential 
determination.

                  chapter 2--reorganization authority

Sec. 611. Reorganization authority.

    Section 611(a) authorizes the Secretary of State to 
complete the reorganization as set forth in this Act. This 
authority does not allow for the abolition of entities 
established in this or any other act. This authority does not 
allow for the alteration of the delegation of functions 
contained in this or any other act.
    Section 611(b) sets the requirements and limitations of the 
reorganization. The reorganization may not create a new 
executive department, continue a function beyond the 
termination set forth in this Act, authorize a new agency to 
exercise a function not authorized by law, create a new agency 
which is not a part of an existing executive department or 
independent agency, or increase the term of office beyond that 
which is provided by law.

Sec. 612. Transfer and allocation of appropriations and 
            personnel

    Section 612(a) provides that personnel, assets, 
liabilities, contracts, property, records, and unexpended 
appropriations balances of the abolished agencies, that are 
associated with functions that will be transferred to the 
Department of State, shall be transferred to the Department of 
State.
    Section 612(b) requires that unexpended and unobligated 
funds transferred pursuant to this division may only be used 
for purposes for which the funds were originally authorized and 
appropriated by Congress.

Sec. 613. Incidental transfers

    Section 613 authorizes the Director of the Office of 
Management and Budget to make, in consultation with the 
Secretary of State, such incidental dispositions of personnel, 
assets, liabilities, grants, contracts, property, records, and 
unexpended balances of appropriations as may be necessary to 
carry out the provisions of this title. The Director provides 
for the termination of the affairs of all agencies terminated 
by this title and for other measures and dispositions that may 
be necessary to achieve the purposes of this title.
    This section should not be construed as anything more than 
an authorization for the Director of OMB to deal with issues 
that were not adequately addressed in the reorganization plans 
submitted to and approved by the Congress. This authority 
should in no manner supersede that given to the Secretary of 
State in other sections of this title.

Sec. 614. Savings provisions.

    Section 614(a) provides that orders, determinations, rules, 
regulations, contracts, and other administrative actions, 
issued or allowed by the President or a federal agency covering 
functions that will be transferred to the Department of State 
shall continue if they were in effect at the time the title 
takes effect. They shall continue until the President or the 
Secretary of State or another authorized official terminates, 
modifies, or revokes them.
    Section 614(b) clarifies that any proposed rules or 
applications etc. relating to functions that will be 
transferred and that are pending before an agency at the time 
this title takes effect shall not be affected by the 
transition. Those proceedings shall continue as if the 
transition did not exist until they are otherwise modified or 
terminated by an authorized official, a court of law or a new 
law. However, this subsection further clarifies that this 
section shall not be interpreted to mean that any of the 
proceedings detailed above will be saved from termination or 
modification due to the transition.
    Section 614(c) allows that suits pending before the 
effective date of this title shall continue as if this title 
had not been enacted.
    Section 614(e) allows administrative actions relating to 
functions that will be transferred under this title to continue 
as if the title had not been enacted.

Sec. 615. Property and facilities

    Section 615 requires the Secretary to review the property 
and facilities transferred to the Department to determine 
whether they are required by the Department.

Sec. 616. Authority of Secretary of State to facilitate 
            transition

    Section 616 establishes that the Secretary has the 
authority to utilize agency personnel that have been 
transferred due to reorganization. The Secretary also has the 
authority to utilize funds appropriated for the functions 
provided for as a result of reorganization, as needed.

Sec. 617. Final report.

    Not later than January 1, 2000, a year after the transition 
is to have come to a close, the President is to submit a final 
report to Congress detailing how all funds appropriated to and 
operations of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, the 
United States Information Agency and the International 
Development Cooperation Agency were disposed of or distributed 
within the government.
    This section is intended to provide the Congress and the 
American public a detailed accounting and an itemized 
description of where the functions and funds of the agencies 
that were abolished were divided up within the Department of 
State. The Committee hopes that the President will utilize this 
report to provide a detailed history of the transition events 
of the three years preceding the submission of the report.

 Title VII--Functions, Conduct, and Structure of United States Foreign 
                      Policy for the 21st Century

    This title proposes the creation of a bipartisan 
``Commission on the Functions, Conduct, and Structure of United 
States Foreign Policy for the 21st Century.'' The purpose of 
the Commission would be to engage in a dispassionate 
comprehensive review of American foreign policy--the 
structures, procedures, roles personnel, missions, management, 
funding, and policy priorities--as America heads into the 
twenty-first century. The goal of this provision is to review 
foreign policy and foreign policy-related activities of all 
U.S. government agencies participating in the conduct of 
American foreign policy.
    The provision sets out a detailed series of timetables for 
reports and recommendations from the Commission and responses 
from the Executive branch. It is expected that these reports 
and responses will lead to serious considerations for reform 
and, where necessary, change in the manner in which we conduct 
foreign policy and national security.
    Title VII also includes an important requirement that the 
Secretary of State provide, on an annual basis, a national 
foreign affairs strategy report describing the priorities and 
resources required to advance successfully the national 
interests, values and principles of the United States. This 
would require consultation between the Department of State and 
all other foreign affairs agencies in the government.

              DIVISION B--FOREIGN RELATIONS AUTHORIZATION

                      Title X--General Provisions

Sec. 1001. Short title

    Section 1001 may be cited as the ``Foreign Relations 
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1998-1999.''

Sec. 1002. Definitions

    Section 1002 defines the term: appropriate congressional 
committees.

           Title XI--Department of State and Related Agencies

              chapter 1--authorizations of appropriations

    Sec. 1101. Authorizations of appropriations

    This section authorizes appropriations under the heading 
``Administration of Foreign Affairs'' for fiscal years 1998 and 
1999. It includes funds for executive direction and policy 
formulation, conduct of diplomatic relations with foreign 
governments and international organizations, effective 
implementation of consular programs and its border security 
component, the acquisition and maintenance of office space and 
living quarters for the United States missions abroad, 
provision of security for those operations, information 
resource management, and domestic public information 
activities. It authorizes funds for the salaries, expenses, and 
allowances of the officers and employees of the Department, 
both in the United States and abroad and the expenses of the 
Office of the Inspector General. This section also authorizes 
funds for activities such as relief and repatriation loans to 
United States citizens abroad and for other emergencies of the 
Department; and authorizes appropriations for protection of 
foreign missions and officials and for the American Institute 
in Taiwan.
    The Committee encourages the use of readily available 
multi- ply, micro-layered, strong security films as an 
alternative measure to address the security needs of U.S. 
embassies and/or other Department of State facilities around 
the world. In addition, such film may also be used to address 
energy efficiency issues as well as severe weather-related 
conditions.

Sec. 1102. Migration and refugee assistance

    This section authorizes appropriations for fiscal years 
1998 and 1999 under the heading ``Migration and Refugee 
Assistance'' to enable the Secretary of State to provide 
assistance and make contributions for migrants and refugees, 
including contributions to international organizations such as 
the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the 
International Committee of the Red Cross, through private 
voluntary agencies, governments, and bilateral assistance, as 
authorized by law.

Sec. 1103. Asia Foundation

    The Asia Foundation, founded in 1954, is a private, non- 
governmental grant-making organization that advances U.S. 
interests in the Asia-Pacific region by promoting democracy, 
the rule of law, trade and investment liberalization, and 
peaceful relations within the region. Many of the democratic 
institutions that exist in Asia today and thousands of 
government, business and the nongovernmental sector leaders 
have benefited directly from Asia Foundation programs. The 
Committee supports the Foundation's work and believes the 
authorized level of funding is necessary to support programs 
that serve the interests of the United States.

                 chapter 2--authorities and activities

Sec. 1121. Reduction in required reports

    This provision has been requested by the Administration. 
Section 1121 repeals Section 161(c), second sentence, 22 U.S.C. 
4171 note, on required reports on competency of foreign 
language experts at embassies. Repeals Section 502B (b), 22 
U.S.C. 2304 (b), on required reports on human rights in 
countries that receive security assistance. Repeals Section 705 
(c), P.L. 99-83, on required reports on emigration from Haiti. 
Repeals Section 123 (e) (2), P.L. 99-93, on required reports on 
Operation, Maintenance, Security, Alteration, Repair of Foreign 
Service facilities. Repeals Section 203 (c), P.L. 99-529, on 
required reports on military training and other nonlethal 
assistance for Haiti. Repeals Sections 5 and 6, P.L. 96-236; 7 
U.S.C. 3605 and 3606, on required reports on implementation of 
the sugar agreement. Repeals Section 514, P.L. 97-121, the 
Foreign Assistance and Related Programs Appropriations Act, a 
one time report on appropriations. Repeals Section 209 (c) and 
(d), P.L. 100-204, on required reports on audience survey of 
Worldnet program and notification of selected surveyor. Repeals 
Section 228 (b), P.L. 102-138; 22 USC 2452 note, on required 
reports on Near and Middle East research and training.

Sec. 1122. Authority of the Foreign Claims Settlement 
            Commission.

    The Administration has requested this authority. This 
section amends section 4 of the International Claims Settlement 
Act to permit the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission to 
preadjudicate claims by U.S. citizens in a category determined 
by the Secretary of State. Currently the Commission only has 
general authority to adjudicate claims after a settlement has 
been reached by the Department with a foreign government. 
According to the Administration, preadjudication by the 
Commission of claims by U.S. citizens prior to such an 
agreement provides the Department with important information on 
the value and validity of claims by the U.S. public in advance 
of the negotiation and conclusion of an agreement.
    According to the Department, it faced difficulties when the 
Commission could not preadjudicate claims by U.S. citizens 
against Cambodia and Albania in advance of the negotiation and 
conclusion of settlement agreements with those countries, and 
special legislation was necessary to authorize the Commission 
to adjudicate Nazi persecution claims. The Administration has 
argued that this amendment would greatly facilitate claims 
settlement practices by providing a mechanism for obtaining 
further information from U.S. citizens about their claims in 
advance of actual negotiation.

Sec. 1123. Procurement of services

    This section amends the State Department Basic Authorities 
Act to enable the Department to use personal services contracts 
to obtain expert and other support services for international 
claims and proceedings. Currently, the law allows the Legal 
Adviser's Office to obtain these services by contracting with 
firms. In many cases, the same services could be obtained at 
half the cost by contracting with an individual. This amendment 
would permit the Department, for example, to hire an individual 
accountant or records manager to work on a particular project, 
rather than having to retain an accounting firm to perform the 
same task, usually at more than twice the cost.
Sec. 1124. Fee for use of diplomatic reception rooms

    The Administration has requested this authority. Department 
of State Diplomatic Reception Room facilities (DRR) are used 
from time to time for receptions and dinners by non-
governmental groups sponsored by a Departmental official where 
the event is affiliated with or in support of official U.S. 
Government business. The outside group is responsible for its 
own catering costs of events held outside of regular working 
hours. Such costs include overtime pay for security officers, 
elevator operators and similar charges.
    This legislation would clarify the Department's authority 
to charge and retain a fee to cover direct incremental costs 
incurred when outside groups use the DRR (currently State 
Department relies upon a GSA authority that would benefit from 
greater clarity) and also would give the Department the 
authority to charge and retain a fee to cover broader indirect 
costs associated with the event.

Sec. 1125. Prohibition on judicial review of Department of 
            State counterterrorism and narcotics-related 
            rewards program
    The Administration has requested this authority. This 
section amends section 36 of the State Department Basic 
Authorities Act to make clear that determinations by the 
Secretary regarding counterterrorism and narcotics-related 
rewards are not subject to judicial review. This provision 
would conform the State Department Rewards Program to similar 
provisions in various statutes comprising reward authorities of 
the Attorney General, including 18 U.S.C. 3072 which applies to 
the Attorney General's authority to grant rewards related to 
domestic terrorism.

Sec. 1126. Office of the Inspector General

    This section requires that the Office of the Inspector 
General (OIG) of the Department of State to develop and provide 
employees a handbook setting out its policies and procedures 
for investigating individuals, and the rights to counsel of 
such individuals. It also requires the OIG to submit a report 
on the guidelines for public disclosure of information 
regarding and on-going investigation, and the instances of such 
disclosure for the year ending December 31, 1997.

Sec. 1127. Reaffirming United States international 
            telecommunications policy.

    This section clarifies that the Diplomatic 
Telecommunications Service Program Office (DTS-PO) will utilize 
full and open competition in the procurement of 
telecommunications services; make efforts to promote the 
participation of all commercial private sector providers, and 
implement these requirements at the prime contracting level and 
at the subcontracting level, unless the fixed price contracts 
make it more costly to require a prime contractor to compete 
his subcontracts because of time constraints on the contract, 
or other similar impediments to staying within the fixed price.

                          chapter 3--personnel

Sec. 1141. Elimination of statutory establishment of a certain 
            positions of the Department of State

    This provision has been requested by the Administration. 
This section would repeal the requirement for the establishment 
of a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Burden sharing.

Sec. 1142. Restriction on lobbying activities of former United 
            States chiefs of mission

    This provision amends Section 207 of title 18, United 
States Code, regarding ``Restrictions on former officers, 
employees, and elected officials of the executive and 
legislative branches'', to also prohibit any person who serves 
in the position of chief of mission within the category of 
senior executive branch personnel who are restricted, for one 
year after they leave the chief of mission position, from 
knowingly making representations on behalf of someone with an 
interest in a matter that is before any officer or employee of 
the department or agency in which they served.

Sec. 1143. Recovery of costs of health care services

    This provision has been requested by the Administration. 
This section, which implements recommendations of the 
Department of State's Office of the Inspector General, amends 
section 904 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 to authorize the 
Department to recover and retain the costs incurred by the 
Department for health care services provided to eligible USG 
employees and their families and to other eligible individuals. 
The proposed legislation would permit the Department to recover 
and retain such costs from third- party payers, and to recover 
directly from the employee if the employee chooses to be 
uninsured. The Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs, as 
well as the Indian Health Service, already have similar 
authority.

Sec. 1144. Nonovertime differential

    This provision has been requested by the State Department. 
This provision allows the Secretary of State to substitute 
another day in lieu of Sunday for purposes of Sunday premium 
pay in countries where the normal workweek includes Sunday. 
Sunday premium pay (an additional 25% of a day's basic pay) is 
paid to eligible employees under Title 5 when they work on 
Sunday as part of their regular (not overtime) schedules. It is 
paid primarily in 16 Islamic countries where Sunday is part of 
the normal work week. This authority would allow the Secretary 
of State to recognize the officially recognized day of rest and 
worship, in lieu of Sunday, as the day for which employees 
would be eligible for premium pay in keeping with the customary 
business week of the host country. Approximately $750,000 was 
spent in 1994 by the Department alone to provide Sunday premium 
pay at 16 Islamic posts. The Department notes that commissioned 
foreign service officers are not eligible for premium pay. 
Eligible recipients include junior officers and specialists, 
information management personnel and watch staff. The Committee 
understands that this provision will in no way restrict the 
religious practices of State Department employees.

Sec. 1145. Clarification of remedial authority of the Foreign 
            Service Grievance Board

    Section 1145 amends subsection 1107(c) of the Foreign 
Service Act of 1980, as amended, to make clear that the Board's 
authority to order remedies is limited to those actions 
specified in section 1107(b) of the Act. The amendment is 
necessary because the Board has occasionally relied on other 
statutes as authority for directing remedies not authorized by 
section 1107(b) of the Act. For example, the Board recently 
held that it can use the authority vested in courts by the Fair 
Labor Standards Act to direct the Department of State to pay 
liquidated damages even though the Foreign Service Act does not 
give it the power to grant such a remedy. Similarly, the 
amendment to section 1107(f) is intended to clarify the 
remedial authority of the Board in discrimination cases. 
Section 1107(f) was added to the Foreign Service Act by Section 
153(c) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 
1992 and 1993 (P.L. 102-138, 105 Stat. 673).

Sec. 1146. Pilot program for foreign affairs reimbursement

    This section amends section 701 of the Foreign Service Act 
of 1980 which addresses the Department's authorities and 
responsibilities with respect to training. New subsection 
701(e)(1) authorizes the Secretary to provide appropriate 
training and related services at the institute on a 
reimbursable basis to employees of United States companies that 
do business abroad, and to family members of such employees. 
This authority does not apply to language training.
    In addition, this section would allow the institute to 
charge a fee for access by corporate entities to ``related 
services'' such as the Overseas Briefing Center's Information 
Center or other research/information/facilitative services the 
Foreign Service Institute provides federal customers. Through 
the Information Center, individuals can gain information about 
the range of services available in certain cities where the 
Department has overseas posts (e.g. information about schools, 
medical services, and other services of interest to individuals 
and families that are posted abroad). Fees charged would cover 
the pro rata share of operating such services (e.g. staff 
salaries and benefits, contractual expenses, administrative 
overhead, etc.)
    New subsection 701(e)(2) authorizes the Secretary to 
provide job-related training and related services to employees 
of companies under contract to the Department of State, who are 
performing services to the Department primarily in the United 
States, and in some instances at posts abroad. This provision 
would give the Department the flexibility to provide training 
to certain employees of third party contractors through 
government facilities when it is deemed in the best interest of 
the U.S. Government. While there would be no reduction in the 
expectation that the contractor firm would provide qualified 
workers, there are instances where changing technology or 
unique factors in the federal work environment would require 
training in order to obtain the optimum performance from 
contract employees. Such training might include: word 
processing, PC training, employee orientation seminars, 
customer service, and training in USG-specific subjects such as 
the Non-Expendable Property Accounting (NEPA) system, or 
passport/visa processing.
    New subsection 701(e)(3) provides that any training under 
section 701(e) would be on a reimbursable or advance-of-funds 
basis. Reimbursements or advances will be credited to the 
currently available applicable appropriation account.
    New subsection 701(e)(4) authorizes such training only if 
it does not interfere with the institution's primary mission of 
training employees of the Department and other U.S. Government 
agencies. It is not intended that training allowed under this 
authority would include training in foreign languages.
    New subsection 701(f)(1) authorizes the Secretary to 
provide training for Members of Congress and the Judiciary on a 
reimbursable basis.
    New subsection 701(f)(2) provides that Legislative Branch 
staff members and employees of the Judiciary may take part in 
training programs offered by the institution including language 
training, on a reimbursable basis, in a previously scheduled 
class.
    New subsections 701(f)(3) and 701(f)(4) are identical to 
new subsections 701(e)(3) and 701(e)(4), providing that any 
training under new subsections (e) and (f) is authorized only 
to the extent that it will not interfere with the institution's 
primary mission of training employees of the Department and of 
other agencies in the field of foreign relations.

Sec. 1147. Grants to oversee educational facilities

    This section provides authority for U.S. Government 
agencies to make grants to overseas educational facilities. 
Currently, two agencies (the Department of State and USAID) 
jointly fund an assistance program for overseas schools 
administered by the Office of Overseas Schools, Department of 
State. Other agencies have indicated a willingness to share the 
financial burden of such assistance proportional to their 
representation abroad, but some lack the grant authority 
necessary to do so. This amendment corrects this, to allow 
agencies whose employees have children attending schools 
assisted by the Department to make appropriate advances or 
reimbursements to the Department.

Sec. 1148. Grants to remedy international child abductions

    This section provides for specific grant authority for the 
Department of State in certain instances. Section 606(a) amends 
Section 7 of the International Child Abduction Remedies Act 
(ICARA) to allow the United States Central Authority to make 
grants or enter into contracts or agreements in order to 
accomplish its responsibilities.

Sec. 1149. Foreign Service reform

    Under current law, a Foreign Service Officer appointed to 
an Executive position requiring Senate confirmation may elect 
to receive either his/her Foreign Service salary, based on 
rank, or the salary that corresponds to the confirmable 
position. In some cases that rank-based salary is higher, in 
other cases lower, than the salary of the position in question.
    This section ends this option, by requiring that Foreign 
Service Officers, as Officers commissioned by the President, 
receive in all such instances their regular salaries based upon 
rank and service.
    Under current law, Foreign Service Officers may not be 
recommended for certain Presidential recognition for 
extraordinary service unless funds are available for the cash 
awards that accompany such recognition. The net effect may be 
to deny officers the recognition of their Commander in Chief, 
when warranted, if funds for performance pay are not available. 
This section would make it possible to confer a Presidential 
award without requiring an accompanying cash payment.
    Finally, this section requires the Secretary of State to 
develop and implement a plan to identify officers who are 
ranked by promotion boards in the bottom 5% of their class for 
any two of the five preceding years, and recommend such 
officers for separation from the Foreign Service. The Committee 
believes that this provision will help the Department to retain 
the best performers, while still meeting the required personnel 
reduction targets.

Sec. 1150. Law enforcement availability pay

    This section repeals the provision in 5 U.S.C. 5545a(a)(2) 
that excludes special agents in the Diplomatic Security Service 
of the Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) from 
being eligible to receive Law Enforcement Availability Pay 
(LEAP). LEAP is a form of premium pay that compensates criminal 
investigators for being available for ``unscheduled duty in 
excess of a 40-hour work week based on the needs of the 
employing agency'' and because of related conditions which 
present themselves to such investigators. Availability pay is 
fixed at 25 percent of basic pay (including locality pay), and 
the investigator must work or be available to work an annual 
average of two hours of unscheduled duty per regular work day. 
LEAP recipients are exempt from the minimum wage and overtime 
pay provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Sec. 1151. Law enforcement authority of Department of State 
            special agents overseas

    This section amends Section 37 of the State Department 
Basic Authorities Act to clarify the authority of Special 
Agents of the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) to provide 
assistance upon request to law enforcement agencies authorized 
to conduct law enforcement functions, including investigations, 
outside of the United States.
    These changes would address problems of potential liability 
for RSOs while conducting investigative inquiries for other law 
enforcement agencies and pre-empt legal challenges to evidence 
obtained by RSOs on behalf of other agencies.

                 chapter 4--consular related activities

Sec. 1161. Consular officers

    This provision will permit U.S. citizen employees abroad 
who are not consular officers to perform additional consular 
functions, including the issuance of reports of birth abroad, 
the authentication of foreign documents, the administration of 
nationality provisions in Title III of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act and the administration of oaths for patent 
purposes. With the authorities granted by section 302, these 
provisions will permit further improvements in the efficiency 
of consular staffing abroad.

Sec. 1162. Repeal of outdated consular receipt requirements

    This provision has been requested by the State Department. 
Consular fees must be collected in accordance with 22 U.S.C. 
4212- 4214, which requires the consular officer to issue a 
detailed, individually signed receipt for each transaction, 
register the transaction in a book and submit a certified 
transcript of the registry with the accounts. These regulations 
were enacted in 1856 to safeguard against overcharging or other 
fiscal malfeasance at a time when consular officers were 
remunerated with consular fees rather than salaries.
    The provisions of 22 U.S.C. 4212-4214 are in any event no 
longer necessary. Repeal of the antiquated requirements of 22 
U.S.C. 4212-4214 would allow streamlined collection of all 
consular fees using automated methods which would nonetheless 
meet CFOA and FMIA standards.

Sec. 1163. Elimination of duplicate Federal Register 
            publication for travel advisories

    This provision has been requested by the State Department. 
This section amends Section 44908(a) of Title 49 which requires 
the Secretary of State to issue and publicize a travel advisory 
upon being notified by the Secretary of Transportation that a 
condition exits that threatens the safety or security of 
passengers, aircraft or crew traveling to or from a foreign 
airport, including by publishing the travel advisory in the 
Federal Register. The proposed amendment would strike the 
requirement for Federal Register publication by the Secretary 
of State, since it essentially duplicates a similar requirement 
in 49 U.S.C. 44907(d)(1)(A)(i), which requires the Secretary of 
Transportation to publish a notice in the Federal Register 
whenever he determines that a foreign airport maintains 
inadequate security.
    Similarly duplicative and unnecessary is the International 
Maritime and Port Security Act, 46 U.S.C. App. 1801, et seq, 
requirement that the Secretary of State publish a travel 
advisory in the Federal Register whenever the Secretary of 
State is notified by the Secretary of Transportation that the 
latter has determined that a port does not maintain and 
administer effective security measures. Publication by the 
Secretary of State of a travel advisory in the Federal Register 
is always preceded by the publication of a notice of 
determination in the Federal Register by the Secretary of 
Transportation.

Sec. 1164. Inadmissibility of members of former Soviet Union 
            intelligence services

    Section 1164 will deny United States visas to individuals 
who were employed by the intelligence services of the Union of 
Soviet Socialist Republics prior to the collapse of the Soviet 
Union at the end of 1991. The purpose behind the provision is 
to respond to actions by the Russian government to deny entry, 
to the Russian Federation, for U.S. citizens who were employed 
by United States intelligence agencies during the Cold War. The 
United States government currently lets bygones be bygones with 
such individuals, with the exception of individuals who broke 
U.S. law or who cause a continued threat to U.S. national 
security. However, the Russian government has capriciously 
attempted to cast a wide net to keep out any and all U.S. 
citizens with an intelligence background. This action has 
deprived many retired. American intelligence officers with the 
ability to pursue careers with international corporations or 
other fields in which they may have high qualifications in 
language skills, personal contacts and interest.
    The Committee hope that this provision will build pressure 
to revise this unfair policy is for the United States to impose 
reciprocal sanction against retired Russian intelligence 
officers. The State Department refuses to take this step. 
Therefore, Americans who risked their lives in the defense of 
democracy during the Cold War are left without options while 
the agents of the former Soviet Union enjoy all the privileges 
of access, travel and business in the United States, a country 
against which they acted as sworn enemies. Until the Russian 
government relents on this matter the Committee supports this 
change in U.S. law.
    As a result of discussions during mark-up, this provision 
was amended to provide waiver authority to the Executive 
Branch.

Sec. 1165. Denial of visas to aliens who have confiscated 
            property claimed by nationals of the United States
    Section 1165 gives the Secretary of State discretionary 
authority to deny visas to any foreign national who has 
confiscated or has directed or overseen the confiscation or 
expropriation of property the claim to which is owned by a 
national of the United States or who converts or has converted 
for personal gain confiscated or expropriated property the 
claim to which is owned by a national of the United States. 
This provision does not apply to property cases covered under 
the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 
1996 (P.L. 104-114).
    Section 1165 exempts from its coverage any properties in 
territories that are in dispute as a result of war between 
United Nations member states and in which the ultimate 
resolution of the dispute territory has not been resolved. 
Examples of territories which may be covered by this exemption 
include lands in dispute as a result of the Peru-Ecuador 
conflict, the so-called ``Soccer War'' between El Salvador and 
Honduras, and the conflicts in the Middle East between U.N. 
member states.
    This section also requires each Chief of Mission to provide 
the Secretary of State with a list of those foreign nationals 
who have confiscated or converted American properties where the 
property remains in dispute. The Secretary of State must report 
to Congress, on a semi-annual basis, in those instances where a 
foreign national who has confiscated or converted an American 
property has been granted a visa.
    The Committee notes that, other than the Cuba-specific visa 
denial provision in the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity 
(LIBERTAD) Act, there are no sanctions on foreign officials or 
foreign private individuals if they wrongfully take an 
American's property overseas.
    According to the most recent State Department report on 
``U.S. Citizen Expropriation Claims and Certain Other 
Commercial and Investment Disputes'' (dated October 1, 1996), 
more than 700 American citizens had contacted U.S. Embassies 
about expropriation claims or commercial disputes, in 36 
countries. These figures do not include the 5911 certified 
claims against Cuba.
    The largest number of these property cases are in the 
Western Hemisphere. In Nicaragua alone, there are over 1000 
properties in dispute. There 28 cases in Costa Rica, some two 
dozen in Honduras, and about a dozen in the Dominican Republic.
    The Committee recognizes that some properties in question 
are expropriated by the foreign government in a so-called legal 
process, but without the rightful owner receiving compensation. 
Many properties are stolen by officials, acting for private 
gain, or wealthy businessmen who bribe local officials or hire 
thugs to run off the legal owner. Section 1165 gives the 
Secretary of State the authority to deny visas for any illegal 
property taking.
    The Committee believes that without the authority provided 
by this section, U.S. Embassies are limited in their ability to 
help American citizens either receive compensation or their 
property. The Committee has received countless pleas from both 
American property claimants and U.S. officials for this type of 
authority. The Committee expects the Secretary of State to 
implement Section 1165 to achieve the prompt, adequate, and 
effective resolution of American property claims overseas.

Sec. 1166. Inadmissibility of aliens supporting international 
            child abductors

    This provision is intended to deny visas to aliens or 
family members of such aliens who assist in the abducting of 
children.

      Title XII--Other International Organizations and Commissions

               chapter 1--authorization of appropriations

    This section authorizes $3,941,000 for fiscal year 1998 and 
$3,500,000 for fiscal year 1999 under the heading 
``International Conferences and Contingencies''. It authorizes 
funds for certain aspects of official United States Government 
participation in regularly scheduled or planned multilateral 
intergovernmental conferences, meetings and related activities.
    The Committee urges the State Department to work toward 
officially endorsing the creation of an Organization for 
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) private sector 
advisory body. We support the Department's efforts at the June 
11-13 Economic Forum of the OSCE in Prague to strongly advocate 
the case for an OSCE Business Congress. We urge that follow-up 
efforts continue, including consideration of devoting 
Department resources to cover start-up costs that would 
demonstrate a U.S. commitment to the advisory body as well as a 
focus on U.S. business interests. This would in turn help 
promote interest in and contributions from U.S. businesses to 
cover future financial needs of the Business Congress.

Sec. 1202. International commissions

    This section authorizes appropriations for fiscal years 
1998 and 1999 under the heading ``International Commissions''. 
It authorizes funds necessary to enable the United States to 
meet its obligations as a participant in international 
commissions including those commissions dealing with American 
boundaries and related matters with Canada and Mexico, and 
international fisheries commissions.

                     chapter 2--general provisions

Sec. 1211. International criminal court participation

    This section requires that any participation of the United 
States in an international criminal court is subject to the 
advise and consent of the Senate and statutory implementing 
legislation.
Sec. 1212. Withholding of assistance for parking fines owed by 
            foreign countries

    Section 1212 expands upon current law which requires 
withholding the proportional amount of foreign aid to what a 
country owes Washington, D.C. in parking fines, plus ten 
percent. Section 1212 expands this requirement to New York 
City, and Virginia, and Maryland.
    According to the Mayor's office in New York City, United 
Nations diplomats received 125,000 parking tickets in 1996, 
which represent approximately $6,875,000 in unpaid fines. These 
fines will likely never be paid because diplomatic immunity 
prevents New York City from prosecuting offenders. Current law 
has encouraged various countries to pay parking fines to the 
government of the District of Columbia.

Sec. 1213. United States membership in the International 
            Parliamentary Union

    This section requires either a cap of $500,000 on U.S. 
payments to the Inter Parliamentary Union or withdrawal by the 
United States. The fund also requires that funds allocated for 
travel by members of Congress be returned to the State 
Department.
    This provision was recommended by the Secretary of the 
Senate as a result of the lack of member interest despite U.S. 
annual dues of $1 million. Approximately $492,000 has 
accumulated for member travel, but never expended.

Sec. 1214. Reporting of foreign travel by United States 
            officials

    Section 1214 requires any officer or employee of United 
States Executive agencies attending any international 
conference or in engaging in any other foreign travel to submit 
a report to the Director of the Office of International 
Conferences of the Department of State stating the purpose, 
duration and estimated cost of the travel. The requirement does 
not apply to the President, the Vice President, or any person 
traveling on a delegation led by the President or Vice 
President, or any officer or employee of the Executive Office 
of the President, or the foreign travel of officers or 
employees of United States Executive agencies who are carrying 
out intelligence or intelligence-related activities, or law 
enforcement activities or the deployment of members of the 
Armed forces of the United States or U.S. Government officials 
engaged in sensitive diplomatic missions.
    On June 6 1996, the Foreign Relations Committee held a 
hearing on United Nations World Conferences in which foreign 
travel by employees of Executive agencies was examined.

  Title XIII--United States Informational, Educational, and Cultural 
                                Programs

               chapter 1--authorization of appropriations

Sec. 1301. Authorization of appropriations

    This section authorizes funds to be appropriated for fiscal 
years 1998 and 1999 to carry out international information 
activities, educational and cultural exchange programs under 
the U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948, the 
Mutual Educational and Cultural Act of 1961, Reorganization 
Plan Number 2 of 1977, the Radio Broadcasting to Cuba Act, the 
Television Broadcasting to Cuba Act, the National Endowment for 
Democracy Act, the United States International Broadcasting Act 
of 1994, and to carry out other authorities in law consistent 
with such purposes.

Sec. 1302. National Endowment for Democracy

    This section authorizes $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 
and $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 to carry out the National 
Endowment for Democracy Act. The section prescribes in law 
current National Endowment for Democracy (NED) practice, that 
55 percent of funding will be divided equally between the four 
major NED grantees: the International Republican Institute 
(IRI), the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the Free Trade 
Union Institute (FTUI), and the Center for International 
Private Enterprise (CIPE).

    chapter 2--usia and related agencies authorities and activities

Sec. 1311. Authorization to receive and recycle fees

    This provision has been requested by USIA. Section 810 of 
the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 
1948 (22 U.S.C. 1475e) (the ``Smith-Mundt Act'') currently 
authorizes USIA to receive fees from English-teaching and 
library services, and Agency-produced publications, and not to 
exceed $100,000 of payments from motion picture and television 
produced by the Agency under the authority of the Act. Those 
fees need not be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous 
receipts, but may be credited each fiscal year to the 
appropriate appropriation of USIA.
    This section would expand the above Smith-Mundt authority 
to also authorize USIA to receive and ``recycle'' fees for 
educational advising and counseling abroad and for services 
rendered in the U.S. by the Agency's Exchange Visitor Program 
office. A study conducted in 1994 determined that the latter 
could generate as much as $1.5 million annually.
    It is anticipated that the monies would be generated by a 
charge on each Form IAP-66 issued by the Agency. That form 
enables the exchange visitor to obtain a J nonimmigrant visa 
and enter the U.S. as a participant in a USIA-designated 
exchange visitor program. (There would be no charge levied on 
Forms IAP-66 used in connection with exchange programs 
administered by federal agencies.)
    The Agency is currently providing educational advising 
services at approximately 60 posts abroad. For Fiscal Year 
1997, the Agency estimated that it could reasonably expect to 
collect approximately $800,000 in fees for educational 
advising. For Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999, the Agency estimates 
that approximately $1.5 million will be collected for such 
services.
    The proposal would also permit the Agency to recycle monies 
received from the sale of advertising by the Voice of America. 
USIA estimates that if granted this authority, it could collect 
approximately $1,000,000 in advertising revenues.

Sec. 1312. Appropriations transfer authority

    This provision has been requested by USIA. In 1992 Congress 
amended Section 701 of the United States Information and 
Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1476) to permit 
USIA appropriations to exceed corresponding authorization 
levels by five or ten percent, depending on the accounts. This 
authority provides that when funds are authorized to be 
appropriated to specific accounts for two fiscal years, in the 
second fiscal year of a two- year authorization the 
appropriators may transfer portions of the authorized amounts 
to other accounts, subject to certain limitations.
    The proposed amendment would make the transfer authority 
available in either fiscal year and would make such authority 
permanent. Similar authority was granted to the Department of 
State in the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 
1994 and 1995, which amended Section 24(d) of the State 
Department Basic Authorities Act.

Sec. 1313. Expansion of the Muskie Fellowship Program

    This provision has been requested by USIA. When Congress 
enacted the Edmund S. Muskie Fellowship Program in 1992 
(Section 227 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal 
Years 1992 and 1993), the statute allowed for fellowships in 
only four fields of study: business administration, economics, 
law, and public administration. The proposed amendment would 
add four additional fields of study to the program: journalism 
and communication, education administration, public policy, and 
library and information sciences.

Sec. 1314. Au Pair extension

    This section permanently authorizes the au pair program.

Sec. 1315. Radio broadcasting to Iran in the Farsi language

    This section provides $2,000,000 per fiscal year for 
surrogate broadcasting in the Farsi language by Radio Free 
Europe/Radio Liberty, such broadcasts to be named Radio Free 
Iran.The Committee firmly believes that the United States must 
do all it can to isolate the government of Iran, prevent Iran's 
acquisition of weapons of mass destruction and deny Iran access 
to the earnings that enable it to pursue nuclear weapons and 
sponsor terrorism.
    However, the Committee is equally persuaded that it is 
important for the United States to distinguish the regime in 
Iran from the people of that country. The people of Iran have 
lost their political, civil and religious freedoms since the 
Islamic Revolution. Access to free thought, ideas and 
information through broadcasting in Farsi will, the Committee 
hopes, do for the people of Iran what Radio Free Europe/Radio 
Liberty did for the people of the East bloc during the Cold 
War.

Sec. 1316. Voice of America broadcasts

    This section requires the Voice of America to devote daily 
broadcasting time to information regarding the products, 
cultural and educational facilities and potential trade with 
officials of each of the states of the United States. These 
broadcasts are directed to include interactive discussions with 
state officials.

Sec. 1317. Working group on government sponsored international 
            exchanges

    This section adds a new subsection (g) to section 112 of 
the Mutual Education and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, also 
known as the Fulbright-Hays Act (22 U.S.C. 2460), establishing 
within the United States Information Agency a senior level 
inter-agency Working Group on International Exchanges and 
Training, whose purpose is to improve the coordination, 
efficiency, and effectiveness of United States Government 
sponsored international exchanges and training. The Working 
Group will also assist the President in ensuring that all 
United States Government-sponsored international exchanges and 
training are consistent with United States foreign policy and 
avoid duplication of effort.

Sec. 1318. International information programs

    This section makes the technical changes necessary to 
rename USIA's ``Salaries and Expenses'' appropriations account 
the ``International Information Programs'' accounts, as 
requested by USIA.

Sec. 1319. Authority to administer summer travel and work 
            programs

    This section would allow USIA to continue to administer the 
summer travel and work program without mandatory preplacement 
requirements. This program is self financing and requires no 
U.S. funding. Students from Europe have been visiting the 
United States on the Summer Work and Travel Program since 1964. 
This program has allowed students of average means to enter the 
U.S. on J1 visas and to work for three months. Over 15,000 
students participate in the program annually.

                       Title XIV--The Peace Corps

Sec. 1401. Short title.

    This section establishes the title as the Peace Corps 
reauthorization.

Sec. 1402. Authorization of appropriations

    Section 1401 amends the Peace Corps Act (22 U.S.C. 2502(b)) 
to provide the authorization to appropriate $234,000,000 for 
fiscal year 1998 and $234,000,000 for 1999.

Sec. 1403. Amendments to the Peace Corps Act

    Section 1403 makes certain modifications to current law 
regarding personal services contractors, overseas travel, and 
other technical changes.

      Title XV--United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

               chapter 1--authorization of appropriations

Sec. 1501. Authorization of appropriations

    This section authorizes appropriations of $39 million for 
FY 1998.

                         chapter 2--authorities

Sec. 1511. Statutory construction

    This provision reinstates a clarification contained in the 
Arms Control and Disarmament Act since 1963, but removed in the 
102nd Congress. Section 1511 makes clear that the Arms Control 
and Disarmament Agency cannot authorize policies or actions 
which would interfere with, restrict, or prohibit the 
acquisition, possession, or use of firearms by an individual 
for the lawful purpose of personal defense, sport, recreation, 
education or training.

                       Title XVI--Foreign Policy

Sec. 1601. Payment of Iraqi claims

    This provision establishes a process for the adjudication 
of claims resulting from the freezing of all Iraqi assets in 
the U.S. following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990.

Sec. 1602. United Nations Membership for Belarus

    This section will ensure that if the Government of Belarus 
chooses to forgo its sovereignty and reunite with the Russian 
Federation, it will no longer be treated as a sovereign state 
for purposes of international law. This measure is intended to 
put on notice those in Belarus who seek to return to the days 
of the Soviet Union that this time that, unlike throughout the 
Cold War, Belarus will not even be allowed a seat at the United 
Nations. The Committee finds the undemocratic leadership of 
Belarus to be leading the nation in the wrong direction, but so 
far conditions for sovereignty are still identifiable. The 
Committee does not intend this provision to be activated until, 
in the view of the Secretary of State, Belarus has forfeited 
its sovereignty. If this point is reached the Committee further 
recommends that the United States government downgrade its 
Embassy in Minsk to the status of Consulate, that no United 
States bilateral exchanges or visits be scheduled with 
Belarusian officials--including the President--except as 
appropriate through Moscow or at appropriate levels of state 
and local government in the United States.

Sec. 1603. United States policy with respect to Jerusalem as 
            the capital of Israel

    Section 1603(a) authorizes the appropriation of $25,000,000 
for fiscal year 1998 and $75,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 for 
the construction of a U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem. This tracks 
the language of the Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Act, and 
should serve as a further reminder to the President that the 
Congress is committed to the placement of the U.S. Embassy in 
united Jerusalem, the capital of the State of Israel.
    Section 1603(b) prohibits the expenditure of appropriations 
authorized by this Act for a consulate or diplomatic facility 
in Jerusalem unless that consulate or diplomatic facility is 
under the supervision of the U.S. Ambassador to Israel. The 
Committee finds that no purpose is served by the existence of 
an free-standing consul in the city of Jerusalem, except to 
provide the false appearance of independence from other U.S. 
diplomatic representation in the State of Israel.
    Section 1603(c) prohibits the expenditure of appropriations 
authorized by this Act for the publication of any official U.S. 
government document that does not list Jerusalem as the capital 
of the State of Israel. Section 1604(d) requires that for 
persons born in Jerusalem, the Secretary of State, upon 
request, designate Israel as the place of birth on official 
U.S. documents such as passports, birth registrations, or 
certifications of nationality. On U.S. passports and other 
official documentation, it is customary to put the country of 
birth and not the city.

Sec. 1604. Special envoy for Tibet

    The provision requires the President to appoint a special 
envoy for Tibet.

Sec. 1605 Prohibition on financial transactions with countries 
            supporting terrorism

    Section 1605 amends section 2332d(a) of title 18, USC, 
relating to financial transactions with terrorists states by 
eliminating the authority of the Secretary of Treasury to write 
regulations for section 2332d(a) of title 18, USC, and provides 
certain exceptions to the prohibition contained therein. 
Specifically, the exceptions on the prohibition against 
financial transactions are for diplomatic activities, providing 
humanitarian relief, and activities of journalist. The 
President may waive the prohibitions on financial transactions 
with terrorist states if he determines it is in United States 
national security interests.
    Section 1605 is necessary because the regulations written 
for section 321 of the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death 
Penalty Act of 1996 were diametrically opposite to the intent 
of the provision, which clearly stated that financial 
transactions between U.S. persons and terrorists states were 
prohibited. Specifically, the regulations permitted virtually 
all financial transactions between U.S. citizens and Sudan and 
Syria. Furthermore, the only transactions the regulations would 
have prohibited were those which might further terrorism within 
the United States, even though section 321 prohibited 
transactions which further international terrorism.
    Section 1605 is identical to S.873, introduced on June 10, 
1997. The African Affairs Subcommittee held an extensive 
hearing on this matter on May 15, 1997.

Sec. 1606 United States policy with respect to the involuntary 
            return of persons in danger of subjection to 
            torture

    Section 1606 prohibits the United States from expelling, 
extraditing, or otherwise to effect the involuntary return of 
any person to a country in which there are reasonable grounds 
for believing the person would be in danger of subjection to 
torture.

Sec. 1607 Reports on the situation in Haiti

    This section requires a semi-annual report to Congress, 
beginning January 1, 1998, on the U.S. military and Coast Guard 
presence in Haiti, the number of armed incidents involving U.S. 
personnel, and the estimated cumulative cost of U.S. activities 
in and around Haiti during the reporting period.
    Section 1506 repeals an earlier congressionally-mandated 
reporting requirement contained in P.L. 103-423 (October 25, 
1994). Many of the reporting elements of the 1994 law are no 
longer relevant. The Committee repealed the provision in P.L. 
103-423 at the request of the Department of State. The 
Committee believes that continued U.S. involvement in Haiti 
requires some continued accountability as to the nature, extent 
and cost of U.S. efforts in Haiti.

Sec. 1608. Report on an alliance against narcotics trafficking 
            in the Western Hemisphere

    This section expresses the sense of Congress that the 
President, during his travels in the Western Hemisphere in 
1997, and through other consultative means, discuss with the 
democratic governments of the hemisphere the prospect of 
forming a multilateral alliance to address problems related to 
illegal drug trafficking. It specifically asks the President to 
seek the input of other governments as to the possibility of 
forming structures (1) to develop a regional, multilateral 
strategy to deal with the drug trafficking threat and (2) to 
establish mechanisms to improve multilateral coordination.
    Section 1608 requires a report to Congress no later than 
October 1, 1997 on the reactions of these governments to such a 
proposal, the feasibility and advisability of forming such an 
alliance, an assessment of the U.S. national interests in such 
an alliance being formed, including the President's evaluation 
of how to improve multilateral cooperation and the allocation 
of resources if the President determines that such an alliance 
is not in the national interests of the United States. This 
report shall be unclassified, but may contain a classified 
annex.
    The committee finds that efforts to counter drug 
trafficking in the Western Hemisphere have been hampered by 
policies that approach this transnational problem as a series 
of bilateral relationships. This dynamic has created the 
impression that antidrug policy is a struggle between the 
governments of the United States and our hemispheric neighbors, 
rather than a common battle against the narcotics mafias.
    One proposal that has been put forward to move the 
hemisphere towards a new approach is the formation of a 
multilateral alliance among the nations in our hemisphere most 
directly threatened by the narcotics trade. Such an alliance 
would seek to launch collective strategies incorporating firm 
goals and timetables to address the production, transport, and 
consumption of illegal drugs. As part of an alliance, these 
nations could explore establishing a permanent mechanism for 
coordination and intelligence-sharing. The Committee is aware 
of discussions involving U.S. facilities in Panama as a site 
for a Multilateral Counterdrug Center.
    Whether through the establishment of an alliance or through 
other means, the Committee finds that there is an urgent need 
for better multilateral cooperation and coordination to address 
the severe transnational problems associated with drug 
trafficking.

Sec. 1609. Report on greenhouse gas emissions agreement

    This section requires that the President prepare a detailed 
and comprehensive report on the economic and environmental 
impacts of the final negotiating text of any proposed 
international agreement under the U.N. Framework Convention on 
Climate Change (FCCC) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The 
report must be completed six months prior to any vote by the 
parties to the treaty. The Committee expects that this report 
will provide an in- depth analysis and assessment of the impact 
of the agreement on U.S. employment, trade, consumer 
activities, competitiveness, and the environment. The Committee 
is concerned about the lack of hard information to date, given 
the advanced state of negotiations by parties to the FCCC, and 
the expected conclusion of the negotiations in Kyoto, Japan.

Sec. 1610. Reports and policy concerning diplomatic immunity

    Section 1610 asks the Secretary of State to explore the 
possibility of having states waive diplomatic immunity, or have 
the diplomat's country prosecute, when a criminal act is 
committed. The report included Section 1610 requires that the 
Secretary of State report to Congress how many Americans have 
diplomatic immunity, how many foreign diplomats in the U.S. 
have immunity, and the cases where diplomats escaped justice 
because of immunity.

Sec. 1611. Italian confiscation of property case

    Section 1611. states that the Congress urges the Italian 
government to seek a negotiated settlement with an American 
citizen whose property was confiscated over twenty years ago 
without fair and proper compensation. Mr. Pier Talenti has made 
every effort to work within the Italian judicial system to 
reach an agreement on resolving his claim. However, despite 
explicit language on compensation for expropriated property 
contained in the 1948 Friendship Treaty signed by the United 
States and Italy, to date, the Italian government refuses to 
properly compensate Mr. Talenti. The validity of Mr. Talenti's 
claim is demonstrated by the decision of the Department of 
State last August to espouse his case and formally press the 
Italian government to promptly negotiate a settlement.
    The Congress should support American citizens who seek fair 
and proper compensation when their property has been 
confiscated by another government. This provision is an effort 
to encourage the Italian government to abide by their treaty 
obligations and reach an agreement with Mr. Talenti to resolve 
his case.

                   DIVISION C--UNITED NATIONS REFORM

                      Title XX--General Provisions

Sec. 2001. Short title

    Section 2001 states that this division may be cited as 
``United Nations Reform.''

Sec. 2002. Definitions

    Section 2002 defines the terms: appropriate congressional 
committee, designated specialized agency, secretary general, 
United Nations member, United Nations peacekeeping operation.

Sec. 2003. Nondelegation of certification requirements

    Section 2003 expresses that the Secretary of State may not 
delegate the authority in this chapter to make any 
certification.

               Title XXI--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 2101. Assessed contributions to the United Nations and 
            affiliated organizations

    This section authorizes $938 million for fiscal year 1998 
and $900 million for fiscal year 1999 for all assessed 
contributions to international organizations, subject to the 
following certifications and conditions:

          (1) Of those funds, it makes available in fiscal 
        years 1998 and 1999, $80,000,000 on a semi-annual basis 
        only when the Secretary of State certifies to the 
        Congress that no action has been taken by the United 
        Nations to increase the United Nations 1998-99 budget 
        of $2,533,000,000 during that period without finding an 
        offset elsewhere in the United Nations budget during 
        that period.
          (2) This section withholds 20 percent of the funds 
        made available for the United Nations until the 
        Secretary of State certifies that the Office of 
        Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) continues to 
        function as an independent inspector general. This 
        section requires the Director of the OIOS to report 
        directly to the Secretary General on the adequacy of 
        his resources and to notify in writing each program, 
        project, or activity funded by the United Nations that 
        it has the authority to audit, inspect, or investigate 
        it.
          (3) This section prohibits U.S. funding of U.N. 
        global conferences. The U.N. Global Conferences 
        referred to in this section are those organized on a 
        one-time basis with universal participation to address 
        a single subject, such as environment or population, 
        outside of the normal course of regularly scheduled 
        deliberations by existing U.N. bodies and directed to 
        the achievement of a binding international agreement, 
        or other legal instrument, on a particular matter (such 
        as, the negotiation on the control and elimination of 
        anti-personnel land mines in the U.N. Conference on 
        anti-personnel land mines in the U.N. Conference on 
        Conventional Weapons and the U.N. Conference on 
        Disarmament).
          (4) The section requires annual withholding of 
        $50,000,000 until the Secretary of State certifies that 
        in fiscal year 1998 that 1,000 authorized posts have 
        been suppressed at the United Nations, and that in 
        fiscal year 1999 the United Nations is maintaining a 
        vacancy rate of at least five percent for professional 
        staff and 2.5 percent for general services staff. Both 
        policies have been presented by Secretary General Kofi 
        Annan as part of the 1998-99 budget for the United 
        Nations.
          The Committee intends that the transfer of posts due 
        to changes in UN budget methodology, or for any other 
        purpose, must not be counted toward the 1,000 post 
        suppression. For example, posts from the jointly-
        financed activities which still exist, but are deleted 
        from the UN staffing table because of the use of net 
        budgeting, would not be included in the 1,000 post 
        suppression.
          Furthermore, the Committee has the assurance of the 
        Administration that the suppression of posts will 
        result in an actual reduction in UN employees. The 
        1,000 post target will not be reached solely by 
        eliminating vacant posts.
          The Committee strongly believes that no UN funding 
        should be appropriated for posts which must remain 
        vacant under this provision. Under current practice, 
        the UN appropriates funds to vacant posts at a reduced 
        level in order to be able to fulfill salary obligations 
        when a position is filled. Given that the vacancies 
        under this provision would be mandatory, funding would 
        not be necessary.
          Furthermore, the Committee concurs with the stated 
        position of the UN Secretary General that 500 posts 
        should remain vacant. This would result in considerable 
        cost savings and streamline the UN workforce.
          (5) This section requires the Secretary of State to 
        certify that no United States contributions have been 
        used to fund other international organizations out of 
        the United Nations regular budget. This certification 
        is not intended to refer to the U.N. giving grants or 
        payments to other organizations. The Committee intends 
        to ensure that no portion of the U.S. contribution to 
        the United Nations regular budget be directly used to 
        fund the operating costs of another organization. 
        Should any such organization be funded out of the 
        regular budget, the provision will require that the 
        U.S. withhold from its U.S. assessment to the U.N. 
        budget the U.S. share of the amount budgeted for such 
        organizations.
          (6) The amount authorized in this account is capped 
        at $900,000,000 after fiscal year 1998. Additional 
        authorization is required to exceed this amount. When 
        the assessments owed by the United States to 
        international organizations surpass the authorized 
        amount, this section requires the United States to 
        either withdraw from an organization or take action so 
        that organization, in the next biennium, reduces the 
        total obligations of the United States below the 
        authorization ceiling.
          (7) This section also requires that the United States 
        continue to press its policy that the organizations in 
        this account should have procedures in place to return 
        excess contributions to member states when 
        contributions exceed expenditures.

Section 2102 United Nations Policy on Israel and the 
            Palestinians

    This section provides that it shall be the policy of the 
United States to assist Israel in gaining acceptance into a 
United Nations regional bloc. It states further that it shall 
be the policy of the United States to seek the abolition of the 
U.N. Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices 
Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and other 
Arabs of the Occupied Territories; the U.N.'s Committee on the 
Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People; 
the U.N.'s Division for the Palestinian Rights; and the U.N.'s 
Division on Public Information on the Question of Palestine. 
The Secretary of State is required to consult with the 
appropriate congressional committees on steps taken to these 
ends, including efforts to bring Israel into the Western Europe 
and Others Groups of the U.N.
    The Committee objects to the United Nations failure to 
include Israel in a regional grouping, the only longstanding 
member of the United Nations to be so excluded, as well the 
continued existence of the various anti-Israel committees at 
the United Nations, is proof of U.N. bias against the State of 
Israel. The Committee believes that inclusion of Israel in a 
regional grouping would promote the peace process.
    The Committee urges the Secretary of State to do everything 
possible to attain the stated policy goals of this section, and 
pledges to follow this question closely.

Sec. 2103. Assessed contributions for international 
            peacekeeping activities

    This section authorizes $200 million for fiscal year 1998 
and $205 million for fiscal year 1999 for assessed peacekeeping 
operations and activities. This section also consolidates many 
current reporting requirements regarding international 
peacekeeping activities.

Sec. 2104. Data on costs incurred in support of United Nations 
            peace and security operations

    This section requires the United States to report annually 
to the United Nations on the total costs of United Nations 
peacekeeping activities--including assessed, voluntary and 
incremental costs--to the United Nations. The section also 
requires the United States to request that the United Nations 
prepare and publish a report that compiles similar information 
for other United Nations member states.

Sec. 2105. Reimbursement for goods and services provided by the 
            United States to the United Nations

    This section requires that the United States seek and 
receive reimbursement for any assistance, including personnel, 
services, supplies, equipment, and facilities, to the United 
Nations, United Nations assessed peacekeeping operations, and 
bilateral assistance designed to assist that country to 
participate in the peacekeeping operation. This section is 
intended to ensure that the U.S. Government is reimbursed by 
the U.N. for military assistance (including civil police 
programs) it provides in support of the U.N. or U.N. 
peacekeeping operations, whether this assistance is provided to 
the U.N. or to another country participating in such an 
operation.
    This section is prospective in its application and permits 
the President to waive the provision if he determines that an 
important national interest exists. However, such a waiver is 
subject both to notification requirements of section 634A of 
the Foreign Assistance Act and a joint resolution of 
disapproval by Congress if Congress disapproves of the 
President's determination.
    The provision also exempts this section from applying to 
direct assistance for U.S. military personnel. The 
Administration requested this provision, and understands that 
it is designed only to allow for incidental costs in support of 
U.S. troops such as extra blankets, latrines, or other similar 
services that the U.N. does not ordinarily supply for troops 
carrying out a U.N. peacekeeping operation.
    As drafted, the Committee believes that this section does 
not hamper, deter, or delay the President in his ability to use 
any authority to provide assistance under any constitutional 
authorization.

Sec. 2106. Restrictions on United States funding for United 
            Nations peace operations

    This section limits U.S. funding of peacekeeping activities 
to the peacekeeping budget of the United Nations, and prohibits 
the funding of such activities out of the regular budget, 
unless the President determines and notifies Congress that an 
important national security interest exists. The Committee 
expects that this comprehensive reporting will quantify all 
costs to the United States for peacekeeping activities, and 
enable the Congress to consider those costs in relation to the 
proposed operation or expansion of an operation prior to action 
by the United Nations Security Council.

Sec. 2107. United States policy regarding United Nations 
            peacekeeping missions

    This section makes clear that the policy of the United 
States is to limit the size and scope of United Nations 
peacekeeping missions. It is not the policy of the United 
States to support major U.N. peacekeeping operations such as 
the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) in the former 
Yugoslavia. Smaller peacekeeping missions should be considered 
on a case by case basis (with full consultation with Congress 
as required in section 2102 of this Act). The Committee expects 
that a clear statement of this policy will save United States 
taxpayers millions of dollars as it limits the scope and 
mandate of United Nations peacekeeping missions.

                Title XXII--Arrears Payments and Reform

               chapter 1--arrearage to the united nations

  Subchapter A--Authorization of Appropriations; Disbursement of Funds

Sec. 2201. Authorization of appropriations

    This section authorizes $100,000,000 in fiscal year 1998, 
$475 million in fiscal year 1999, and $244 million in fiscal 
year 2000 for the repayment of arrears to the United Nations, 
United Nations peacekeeping activities, United Nations 
specialized agencies, and other international organizations.

Sec. 2202. Disbursement of funds

    This section outlines the manner in which disbursements 
will be made, and requires that certification of specified 
reforms be completed prior to any disbursement of funds by the 
United States. This section also requires a 30 day notification 
by the Secretary of State to Congress prior to the disbursement 
of any funds.

                Subchapter B--United States Sovereignty

Sec. 2211. Certification requirements

    This section identifies the certifications that will be 
required for payout of the funds authorized in fiscal year 
1998. Specifically, the Secretary must certify that:

        (1) a contested arrears account, or some other 
        appropriate mechanism, has been created for the U.S. 
        This account represents the difference between what the 
        United Nations says is owed by the United States and 
        the amount recognized by the United States Congress. 
        Thus, the sum of the obligations that the Congress is 
        authorizing in this legislation is the total that the 
        Congress shall authorize to be appropriated to the U.N. 
        for its arrears under the regular and peacekeeping 
        budgets. Agreement must be reached with the United 
        Nations that any monies identified in this account will 
        not affect the voting rights of the United States as 
        contained in Article 19 of the United Nations charter.
        (2) the United States Constitution controls U.S. law 
        and no action by the United Nations or any of its 
        agencies has caused the U.S. to violate the 
        Constitution.
        (3) neither the United Nations nor its specialized 
        agencies have exercise authority over the United States 
        or taken forward steps to require that the U.S. cede 
        sovereignty.
        (4) U.S. law does not give the United Nations any legal 
        authority to tax the American people; no taxes or 
        comparable fees have in fact been imposed; and there 
        has been no effort sanctioned by the United Nations to 
        develop, advocate or promote such a taxation proposal.
        (5) the United Nations has not taken formal steps to 
        create or develop a standing army under Article 43 of 
        the United Nations Charter.
        (6) interest fees have not been levied on the U.S. for 
        any arrears owed to the United Nations.
        (7) neither the United Nations nor its specialized 
        agencies have exercised any authority or control over 
        public or private property in the United States.
        (8) the United Nations has not engaged in external 
        borrowing, nor have the financial regulations of the 
        United Nations or any of its specialized agencies been 
        amended to permit borrowing, nor has the United States 
        paid any interest for any loans incurred through 
        external borrowing by the United Nations or its 
        specialized agencies.

Subchapter C--Reform of Assessments and United Nations Peace Operations

Sec. 2221. Certification requirements

    This section requires that the Secretary shall not make her 
1999 certification if she determines the 1998 certifications 
are no longer valid, and prior to payment of authorized arrears 
in fiscal year 1999, certify that the following requirements 
have been met:

        (1) The share of the total regular budget assessment 
        for the United Nations and its specialized agencies 
        does not exceed 22 percent for any member.
        (2) The share of the total peacekeeping budget for each 
        United Nations assessed peace operation does not exceed 
        25 percent for any member.
        (3) The mandates of two peace operations funded from 
        the regular budget, the United Nations Truce 
        Supervision Organization (UNTSO) and the United Nations 
        Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) 
        are subject to annual review by the Security Council, 
        and the Congressional notification requirements for 
        peacekeeping activities set out in section 2102(c) of 
        this Act.

               Subchapter D--Budget and Personnel Reform

Sec. 2231. Certification requirements

    This section requires that the Secretary shall not make her 
FY 2000 certification if she determines that the 1998 and 1999 
certifications are no longer valid, and prior to payment of 
authorized arrears in fiscal year 1999 certify that the 
following requirements have been met:

        (1) The share of the total regular budget assessment 
        for the United Nations and its specialized agencies 
        does not exceed 20 percent for any member.
        (2) The three largest specialized agencies, the 
        International Labor Organization, the Food and 
        Agriculture Organization, and the World Health 
        Organization have each established an internal 
        inspector general office comparable to the Office of 
        Internal Oversight Services established in the United 
        Nations following a similar certification requirement 
        in the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, FY94-95 
        (section 401 of P.L. 103-236).
        (3) The United Nations is implementing budget 
        procedures that require the budget agreed to at the 
        start of a budgetary cycle to be maintained, and the 
        system wide identification of expenditures by 
        functional categories. For purposes of this section, 
        system-wide identification of expenditures by 
        functional categories is defined to mean an object 
        class distribution of resources. The object class 
        distribution should accompany the initial regular 
        assessed budget estimates for both the United Nations 
        and its specialized agencies.
        (4) The United Nations and the International Labor 
        Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization, 
        and the World Health Organization have each established 
        an evaluation system that requires a determination as 
        to the relevance and effectiveness of each program. The 
        United States is required to seek a ``sunset'' date for 
        each program unless the program demonstrates relevance 
        and effectiveness.
        The Committee strongly objects to the incorporation of 
        funding for terminated programs into the baseline of 
        the UN budget for the next biennium. Funding for 
        programs which have ceased and one-time expenditures 
        should not be carried over into the next budget cycle. 
        The sunset of programs should result in financial 
        savings for the member states.
        (5) The United States must have a seat on the United 
        Nations Committee on Administrative and Budgetary 
        Questions (ACABQ). Until 1997, the United States has 
        served on this committee since the creation of the 
        United Nations. This committee is key to the budgetary 
        decisions at the United Nations and the United States, 
        as the largest contributing nations, should have a seat 
        on this Committee.
        (6) The General Accounting Office (GAO) shall have 
        access to United Nations financial data so that the GAO 
        may perform nationally mandated reviews of all United 
        Nations operations.
        (7) The United Nations is enforcing a personnel system 
        based on merit and is enforcing a worldwide 
        availability of its international civil servants; a 
        code of conduct is being implemented that requires, 
        among other standards, financial disclosure statements 
        by senior United Nations officials; a personnel 
        evaluation system is being implemented; periodic 
        assessments are being completed by the United Nations 
        to determine total staffing levels and reporting of 
        those assessments; and the United States has completed 
        a review of the United Nations allowance system, 
        including recommendations for reductions in allowances.
        (8) The International Labor Organization, the Food and 
        Agriculture Organization, and the World Health 
        Organization have each approved a budget that reflects 
        a decline in the budget approved for 2000-01 from the 
        levels agreed to for 1998-99.
        (9) The International Labor Organization, the Food and 
        Agriculture Organization, and the World Health 
        Organization have each established procedures require 
        the budget agreed to at the start of a budgetary cycle 
        to be maintained; the system wide identification of 
        expenditures by functional categories; and approval of 
        supplemental budget requests to the secretariat in 
        advance of appropriations for those requests.

                  chapter 2--miscellaneous provisions

Sec. 2241. Statutory construction on relation to existing laws

    This section makes clear that this Act does not change or 
reverse any previous provision of law regarding restriction on 
funding to international organizations.

Sec. 2242. Prohibition on payments relating to UNIDO and other 
            organizations from which the United States has 
            withdrawn or rescinded funding

    This section prohibits payment to organizations from which 
the United States has withdrawn or from which Congress has 
rescinded funding, including the United Nations Industrial 
Organization and the World Tourism Organization.

                             Cost Estimate

    In accordance with rule XXVI, paragraph 11(a) of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the 
following estimates of the cost of this legislation prepared by 
the Congressional Budget Office:

                               CBO Report

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, June 13, 1997.
Hon. Jesse Helms,
Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed table on the costs of a bill to 
reauthorize programs for the State Department for fiscal years 
1998 and 1999, to reorganize the U.S. foreign policy apparatus, 
and to reform the United Nations, as ordered reported by the 
Committee on Foreign Relations on June 12, 1997. The table 
shows amounts that the bill would specifically authorize to be 
appropriated, based on information provided by your staff. 
These authorizations total $5.9 billion for fiscal year 1998, 
$6.2 billion for fiscal year 1999, and $0.2 billion for fiscal 
year 2000.
    In the short time available, CBO has not been able to 
complete its review of the bill. Consequently, we have not 
determined whether the bill includes other provisions that 
might affect future appropriations, direct spending, or 
receipts, including some that might be subject to pay-as-you-go 
procedures. We do not yet know whether the bill contains 
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Joseph C. 
Whitehill, who can be reached at 226-2840.
      
      Sincerely,
                                            June E. O'Neill
Enclosure

   ESTIMATED BUDGETARY IMPACT OF AUTHORIZATIONS IN A BILL ORDERED REPORTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN   
                                          RELATIONS ON JUNE 12,1997 \1\                                         
                                    [by fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                                    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        1997      1998      1999      2000      2001      2002  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION                                                                               
  Spending under Current Law \2\....................                                                            
    Budget Authority................................     5,845         0         0         0         0         0
    Estimated Outlays...............................     6,162     1,119       325       118        10         0
                                                                                                                
  Proposed Changes..................................                                                            
    Estimated Authorization Level...................       ---     5,901     6,222       244         0         0
    Estimated Outlays...............................       ---     4,796     5,892     1,172       274       112
                                                                                                                
  Spending under the Bill \2\.......................                                                            
    Estimated Authorization Level...................     5,845     5,901     6,222       244         0         0
    Estimated Outlays...............................     6,162     5,916     6,218     1,289       284       112
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Note: This estimate includes the amounts specifically authorized in the bill. CBO has not completed its     
  analysis of other aspects of the bill.                                                                        
\2\ The 1997 level is the amount appropriated for that year.                                                    

                    Evaluation of Regulatory Impact

    In accordance with rule XXVI, paragraph 11(b) of Standing 
Rules of the Senate, the committee has concluded that there is 
no regulatory impact from this legislation.
              Additional Views of Senator Richard G. Lugar

    I disagree strongly with the Committee's decision to 
approve Division C in the bill, particularly Title XXII, 
pertaining to the United Nations and the payment of past U.S. 
debts. The Chairman and the Ranking Member have worked hard to 
forge a workable formula for paying our arrears. Unfortunately, 
Title XXII contains thirty- eight separate ``benchmarks'' or 
preconditions to our payments. These benchmarks make it 
unlikely the U.N. will reform along the lines we desire or that 
we will pay back our debts. Consequently, I believe our 
position in the U.N. could be weakened further, the fiscal 
crises will continue, and our ability to attain our interests 
in the U.N. will be impaired.
    The Committee should have debated whether the United States 
should retain membership in the United Nations and whether the 
United Nations should be a viable institution or one hobbled by 
inefficiency and fiscal stress. If we want to remain in the 
United Nations, which I believe we should, then we should 
improve our leverage to promote American interests. If we 
prefer a weak, feckless and financially stressed organization, 
the price of membership may be too high, and we should consider 
withdrawing from it. I believe the actions of the Committee 
failed to resolve our arrears problem with the United Nations 
and may have weakened the case for the reforms we have 
championed.
    This was one of the most important Senate votes on the 
United Nations in recent history. The Committee avoided a 
serious debate and, in the end, failed to protect our 
interests.
    Much more is at stake than the solvency of the United 
Nations, as important as its financial credibility is. Whenever 
we back away from honoring our commitments, other nations take 
careful notice. Our leverage on a host of foreign policy and 
national security issues is jeopardized. The Committee failed 
to appreciate the inter-connections that the arrears issue has 
with other foreign policy issues and with the quality of our 
relations among friends and allies.
    For the first time in recent years, the Congress has the 
opportunity to address the arrears issue in a constructive and 
meaningful manner. At the urging of many members, President 
Clinton proposed a viable international affairs budget for 
Fiscal Year l998. The Budget Committees, operating under 
enormous difficulties, provided full funding and remarkably 
broad latitude, through a ``special allowance'' in the Budget 
Resolution, to address the international arrears problem in its 
entirety. The opportunity to wipe the slate clean of our 
arrears may not happen again. Although the Committee mark 
provided a strong and credible funding level as a whole, it 
failed to seize the opportunity to solve our arrears problem. I 
fear we will be re-visiting this issue again and again.
    Title XXII of the bill includes a lengthy and detailed list 
of some thirty-eight mandated ``benchmarks'' that must be 
achieved over the next three years. Many of these pre-
conditions to our payments of past debts may be sound policy 
goals. They include a permanent reduction of our annual dues 
from 25% to 20% of the regular U.N. budget and from 31% to 25% 
of the peacekeeping budget. But these reforms will not be easy 
to achieve if the other 183 members of the United Nations do 
not believe we are serious about paying our debts. The bill 
mandates that the President must certify in each of the next 
three years that every one of the thirty-eight pre-conditions 
has been met before we pay portions of our past debts. It is 
very unlikely that these ``benchmarks'' will be met in the time 
mandated; therefore, U.S. funds are unlikely to be released. If 
so, the net result of the bill could be fewer real reforms at 
the United Nations and a weakened organization less able and 
less inclined to promote our interests.
    There is much misunderstanding about the amount and nature 
of our arrears. Only 5%, some $54 million, of the total $1.021 
billion amount we acknowledge we owe is actually owed to the 
United Nations. The bulk of our debt--$658 million--is our 
share of the costs of peacekeeping activities that we voted for 
and asked other nations to support with their troops.
    Nearly two-thirds of our total arrears are for past 
peacekeeping operations, but none of this would go to the 
United Nations. The United Nations is merely a conduit for 
payments to those countries who supported peacekeeping 
operations with troops and equipment. They took the risks and 
shared the costs in peacekeeping activities that we judged to 
be in our national interest. We owe these funds to other 
countries, not to the United Nations Secretariat or to its 
employees. Most of this debt is owed to our NATO allies, 
including France ($60.1 million), Great Britain ($41 million), 
the Netherlands ($21 million), Pakistan ($20.1 million), 
Germany ($18.3 million), Belgium ($17.3 million), Italy ($17.2 
million), India ($16.11 million), and Canada ($14.2 million).
    In this bill, we are asking our NATO allies to pay more 
than they pay now for future peacekeeping operations and for 
the regular budget as a condition of our paying back past dues 
that we are obligated to pay. It makes good sense to seek a 
reduction in our contributions, but this should not be a pre-
condition for paying what we already owe. We would be scornful 
of any other nation that made similar demands. This is not what 
an honorable and responsible nation should propose.
    It should be pointed out that even as we attempt to 
eradicate past arrears with the funds authorized in the bill, 
the bill creates new arrears. The bill underfunds the requests 
for both the International Organization and the International 
Peacekeeping accounts. Thus, as we attempt to eradicate past 
arrears, we are adding new debt at the same time. This 
contradictory action sends a confused signal about our 
seriousness in paying our arrears and weakens our leverage for 
achieving the reforms we seek. The United Nations will more 
likely serve United States interests if we are current in our 
obligations than if we remain a major debtor.
    By approving Title XXII of this bill, the Committee is 
passing up an opportunity to resolve the arrears problem. The 
Committee also is missing an opportunity to restore U.S. 
leverage needed to achieve reform at the United Nations. 
Finally, it is passing up a chance to strengthen our role and 
participation in international organizations that bring 
tangible benefits to all Americans and real potency to our 
foreign policy.

 Additional Views of Senators Russell D. Feingold and John F. Kerry on 
                       International Broadcasting

    We strongly oppose the provisions in this bill that would 
establish a new, independent federal agency to administer U.S. 
international broadcasting programs. We believe that creating a 
new federal agency within a bill designed to consolidate 
foreign policy programs is directly contrary to the purpose of 
the underlying legislation. In an era when government 
downsizing is sorely needed, it makes little sense to create a 
new federal agency.
    There are five primary reasons why we oppose these 
provisions. First, the provisions reinstate a structure that 
allowed fiscal abuse and mismanagement to thrive for two 
decades. The structure that is being proposed by this bill is 
virtually identical to the Board for International Broadcasting 
(BIB), an independent federal agency that was abolished by the 
International Broadcasting Act of 1994. The BIB structure 
historically had been a breeding ground for fiscal abuses. The 
General Accounting Office and BIB Inspector General filed 
numerous reports over two decades documenting the fiscal abuses 
that this ``independent'' structure generated. Senator Howard 
Pastore in 1976 said of the fiscal mismanagement problem under 
the BIB structure, ``The abuse has reach the point of becoming 
almost scandalous.'' Extensive executive salaries and ``perks'' 
plagued the programs. Time after time, curbs were imposed to 
bring the spending into check, only to be thwarted by the 
agency. By finally abolishing this agency in 1994, this 
Committee ended two decades of uncontrolled mismanagement and 
fiscal abuse.
    Second, the provisions undermine the commitment of the 
Congress to privatization. The 1994 legislation included a 
commitment to privatize Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/
RL) by December 31, 1999. It makes no sense to recreate an 
independent agency to administer the grants for RFE/RL for the 
two and a half years left before this deadline. If the Congress 
creates this new independent agency, the agency will find a 
justification to continue.
    If RFE/RL is actually going to be privatized by the end of 
1999, as called for by the 1994 legislation, we would ask what 
this new federal agency is supposed to do. The majority of the 
Board's operations--calculated by budget, personnel or 
operating hours--are concerned with the Voice of America. Since 
it makes little sense to create a new agency simply to run VOA, 
we are concerned that the structure in this bill will give a 
new lease on life to the surrogate radios that are scheduled to 
lose their federal support in 1999. Radio Free Asia (RFA) also 
has a sunset date in the authorizing legislation that 
terminates its authority in 1998. We would like to know what 
this new agency will do after these dates. We fear that it will 
soon find reasons to argue that it needs to continue to exist, 
and spend taxpayer dollars lobbying to do so. Most likely, it 
will lobby to continue federal funding of RFE/RL to justify its 
own existence.
    Third, these provisions create a new federal agency. In an 
era of government downsizing and in a bill that is designed to 
consolidate the foreign policy agencies of the U.S. government, 
it is hard to believe that the members of this Committee, many 
of whom are deeply committed to downsizing the federal 
government and achieving deficit reduction, would opt to have a 
hand in creating a new federal agency. Not only do the 
broadcasting provisions ensure that the links with the State 
Department, and all the budgetary and policy oversight that 
those links imply, are severed, but establishing a separate 
agency will lead to the creation of all the legal structures 
that an independent agency requires. While this bill does not 
authorize any additional operating funds for international 
broadcasting, it does create an entity that will certainly 
require more administrative costs in the future. Rather than 
using the accounting, personnel, and support services of the 
State Department, this new entity will require its own legal 
office, its own personnel department, and its own publication 
office. In future years, it will either require additional 
funds or will use its scarce dollars on overhead rather than on 
programming.
    The record is clear that the independent agency structure 
being recreated is likely to entail heavy administrative costs. 
At the time Congress abolished the BIB, RFE/RL was spending 25 
percent of its budget on administrative costs compared to 12 
percent by VOA. Now, for example, it is estimated that the 
Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) receives approximately 
$28 million in administrative services--such as buildings, 
security, and payroll--from the U.S. Information Agency (USIA). 
The new agency will have to assume these costs--either by 
receiving new funding or cutting back on programming services 
to protect administrative overhead--and the Committee will 
surely be asked to authorize additional monies for these 
purposes, rather than reduce broadcasts. What other demands may 
develop from this new bureaucracy remain unknown.
    Fourth, in an age of dramatic changes in communications 
technology--with the Internet, CNN, and cellular telephone 
available just about anywhere in the world--it is becoming even 
less clear why the American taxpayer should foot the bill for a 
new federal agency to report local news abroad. The United 
States created RFE/RL when there were very few sources of 
independent news. Now, a dissident group in one country can 
trade electronic mail with its supporters or compatriots in 
other countries.
    Finally, the proponents of the creation of a new 
independent agency to administer RFE/RL assert that such a 
structure is needed to protect the journalistic independence of 
these radios. Currently, RFE/RL is funded almost entirely by 
the federal taxpayers. As long as RFE/RL continues to receive 
federal funding, it can never be truly ``independent''. The 
1994 legislation contained ``compromise'' provisions which 
allowed RFE/RL to be operated as a ``grantee'' rather than a 
direct federal program in order to protect its so-called 
journalistic independence. Such provisions would continue to 
exist if the broadcasting programs were consolidated with USIA 
in the State Department. But, it is clear that the best form of 
journalistic independence will come with privatization. For 
along with being the recipient of funds billed to taxpayers and 
appropriated by Congress, the Board is appointed by the 
President of the United States. We do not see how putting all 
the broadcasting services into one agency under these 
conditions constitutes ``journalistic independence,'' when 
Board members are appointed by the President. This is in 
addition to the fact that these programs are perceived around 
the world as creations and products of the U.S. government.
    If it is important for the United States government to have 
radio and television broadcasting services, then why can't 
those services be incorporated into the State Department with 
the protections that were established by the 1994 legislation 
to preserve journalistic integrity. The best way for these 
programs to have the independence they need and desire is 
simple: privatization.
    The provisions in the bill concerning international 
broadcasting are contrary to the spirit of the remainder of the 
reorganization provisions which mandate the streamlining of the 
foreign policy apparatus of the U.S. government. In a bill such 
as this, there is no reason to recreate an independent federal 
agency.

                    Evaluation of Regulatory Impact

        In accordance with rule XXVI, paragraph 11(b) of 
        Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has 
        concluded that there is no regulatory impact from this 
        legislation.

                MINORITY VIEWS OF SENATOR PAUL SARBANES

United Nations

    It is my strongly held view that the interests of the 
United States have been served by our Nation's active 
participation in the United Nations and the United Nations 
system. Over the years since the end of the Second World War, 
the UN has often been an effective means of promoting U.S. 
foreign policy interests. When we work with and through the UN, 
we can leverage our resources and influence in order to achieve 
a much greater impact than we could unilaterally. In the last 
decade, however, our status as the UN's biggest debtor has 
affected our credibility and undermined our leadership with our 
allies and within the international community. The United 
States owes over $1 billion to the UN for regular activities 
and peacekeeping, more than any other country, and nearly two-
thirds of the total amount owed by all countries to the UN.
    There has been a misperception that the UN can somehow 
dictate policies to the United States and force us to undertake 
actions that do not serve US interests. This is simply not the 
case. UN peacekeeping operations cannot be established without 
the concurrence of the United States. As a key member of the UN 
Security Council, we are one of five countries with veto power 
over all resolutions which are considered by the Council.
    As a country we pride ourselves for following the rule of 
law, and holding our citizens responsible for meeting various 
legal obligations. In fact, we try to urge other countries to 
follow our example and live up to those standards, both 
domestically and internationally. It is often a tremendous 
challenge to get countries to respect the basic rights of their 
citizens and to act in accordance with international law. We 
ourselves are not meeting those high standards as they relate 
to the UN. We undertook commitments under the UN Charter, and 
we have a responsibility to make good on them. This legislation 
seeks to impose unilaterally a host of conditions for the 
release of funds. I have no doubt that if some other country 
delinquent in meeting its obligations showed up with such 
demands we would be outraged.
    I very much regret that the Committee did not take the 
approach to the repayment of our arrears and our current 
obligations proposed by my colleague from Indiana, Senator 
Lugar. Senator Lugar's amendments would have addressed previous 
obligations in a straightforward manner and would have fully 
met current obligations thereby breaking the cycle of growing 
debts and waning influence.
    Instead the Committee's approach by seeking unilaterally to 
micro-manage the United Nations may alter the very nature of 
our relationship with the UN to our continued detriment.

Reorganization

    I oppose the Committee's legislation to reorganize the 
foreign policy agencies of the Executive Branch. I do not 
believe that such a reorganization should be forced on an 
administration which has indicated that it is willing to 
undertake such an effort, and is in the process of a developing 
a plan to do so. It is my view that the administration should 
have an opportunity to present its own plan to the Congress. It 
is my judgment that the Committee's legislation goes well 
beyond the President's approach in several instances and that 
we should, on a matter of this importance and a matter 
particularly within the purview of the Executive Branch, give 
the administration the opportunity to develop fully its own 
reorganization plan.

                        Changes in Existing Law

        It is the opinion of the Committee that it is necessary 
        to dispense with the requirements of subsection 
        26.12(b) of the Standing Rules of the Senate in order 
        to expedite the business of the Senate.