Speech by Rep.
Nita Lowey (D-New York), March 15, 2006
Mrs. LOWEY.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
With great respect for my colleague, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's
amendment though I think he raises a valid concern. I just returned
from Colombia, and I think there is a real need to boost the Colombian
government's interdiction efforts. I think, in fact, I think that greater
focus on interdiction may well be more effective than our current emphasis
on eradication. However, I think the responsibility for funding this
program lies first and foremost with the Colombian government.
The President of Colombia was in Washington just a few weeks ago and
met with Chairman Kolbe and me. He did not indicate to us any pressing
need for this assistance. In fact, I believe the State Department is
seeking to reprogram funds away from Colombian aviation programs and
the Colombian national police to finance the demobilization programs.
That said, I do agree that the gentleman raises an important point.
I think it is time that we look at a different mix for funding for Colombia,
one that boosts spending on alternate development and interdiction programs
and reduces funding for eradication programs which I think are ineffective
at best. However, I think this amendment is better considered in the
context of FY 2007 appropriations process where a more comprehensive
discussion of the Colombia program can take place, and I think that
is what is really needed here.
There is no emergency requirement for the funding. It does not belong
in the supplemental. Therefore, I do urge my colleagues to vote against
this amendment.
As of June
13, 2006 this page was also available at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/R?r109:FLD001:H51010
