Speech by Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-New York), June 29, 2000

Speech by Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-New York), June 29, 2000

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I speak today to express my strong opposition to the back room deal that resulted in the FY 2000 Supplemental package being attached to the FY 2001 Military Construction Appropriations bill.

As with H.R. 3908, the original House version of the FY 2000 Supplemental Bill, a major concern of mine regarding this legislation is that no authorization language was passed to allow Members the opportunity to argue for funding for projects important to them. As a Member of the Committee on International Relations and the Representative of the largest Colombian-American community in the U.S., I wanted to be involved in the development of our policy on Colombia.

We should have developed a bill that would strike a balance between the needs of international concerns, such as Colombia, human rights and Kosova, and domestic spending priorities. I would have supported such a bill. Unfortunately, despite the passage of much improved legislation in the Senate; this bill does not appear to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I say appear because I have not had the opportunity to read the Conference Report on the FY 2000 Supplemental. The backroom deal that negotiated this legislation circumvented the normal appropriations process and brought it directly to the floor without providing Members the opportunity to read and digest the legislation. I find this very troubling. This legislation provides billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars without real Congressional oversight.

Additionally, as with the original House Supplemental, this legislation may also lack the necessary human rights conditions on our assistance to Colombia.

As with the first House Supplemental, the provisions in this legislation dealing with civil society programs are woefully under funded, especially when compared to the vast funding levels for counter-narcotics assistance.

Now, I will say that I have had the opportunity to review the funding levels in this legislation and I am happy about the modest increase for human rights and justice programs in Colombia and the region. In fact, these programs are funded at $29 million more than the President requested for a total of $122 million. This is a positive step, but a relatively small one when compared to the high level of military assistance for Colombia and the region.

Finally, on the Colombia portion, no money was included for domestic prevention and treatment. Interdiction plays a role, but it is next to useless without prevention and treatment programs. Demand will always find supply. I am sorry the Republican leadership will not acknowledge this simple truth.

As I said during the debate on the previous supplemental, I have met with Colombian leaders in Washington, D.C., in my Congressional District and in Colombia. I have traveled to Colombia and seen the need for U.S. assistance. I know the problems of the Colombian people and I am especially supportive of judicial reform efforts, but this supplemental is not going to provide the right kind of assistance.

Mr. Speaker, in addition to the Colombia portion of this Supplemental, I am also concerned that the President's request for Kosova was under funded by almost $334 million and that the Administration's request for debt relief funds for poor countries was not included at all.

I find the failure to include funding for debt relief for the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) especially troubling because the international agreement on debt relief requires U.S. participation in order for other countries to contribute their pledges. At a time when many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa are facing an epidemic of biblical proportions with the AIDS crisis, failure to provide for debt relief is bad policy.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the Supplemental retained important provisions for the Low Income Heating and Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). I am also glad that it included $35 million for the Social Security Administration to respond to the increased workload resulting from the recent repeal of the Social Security earnings limit and $2 million for Commission on International Religious Freedom. However, this Supplemental and the backroom deal that brought it to the floor without a review period troubles me greatly.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the supplemental and I request that the relevant committees be asked to deal with these funding increases through the normal budget process.

As of July 18, 2000, this document was also available online at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r106:H29JN0-B744: