Speech by Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-Rhode Island), June 30, 2000

Speech by Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-Rhode Island), June 30, 2000

Mr. L. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I would like to share with my colleagues my views on several items contained within this conference report.

Shortly after becoming a Senator, I was named chairman of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere Affairs. One of the most important matters before our subcommittee this year is the Administration's proposed anti-drug aid package for Colombia . The conference report before the Senate today includes $1.3 billion for this plan.

On February 25, I called the first hearing of my subcommittee to consider the many facets of this package. I must say that at first, I was quite skeptical of providing such a dramatic increase in anti-drug military aid to Colombia . My concerns centered on whether the United States had a comprehensive long-term strategy for this plan, whether this swift and dramatic infusion of military hardware would result in a worsening of the human rights record of the Colombian military, and whether there were assurances that these funds would not be wasted due to corruption.

At our hearing, our subcommittee explored a number of questions about this plan. Key among our witnesses was Jose Miguel Vivanco, Executive Director of the Americas Division of Human Rights Watch. Mr. Vivanco outlined a report he had just authored documenting the continued links between the Colombian military to the paramilitaries that have been implicated in countless human rights abuses in Colombia . He also touched on the lack of progress in prosecution in Colombia's civilian courts of military personnel accused of human rights abuses.

Two months later, I chaired a meeting of the Foreign Relations Committee with the President of Colombia , Andres Pastrana. At this meeting, several members of the Committee and other interested Senators were able to discuss in depth with Mr. Pastrana our concerns about this plan. I came away from our meeting fully convinced that President Pastrana is a courageous, reform-minded leader who is committed not only to ending drug trafficking in Colombia , but also to bringing stability, ending violence, and promoting human rights there as well.

I am gratified that concerns such as those raised at our subcommittee hearing and our meeting with President Pastrana received attention as the House and Senate have considered the Administration's plan. In that regard, the conference report before the Senate today includes several stringent requirements, including a series of conditions on the progress of Colombia's military in addressing human rights abuses; $29 million more than the President's request for human rights and justice programs; a requirement that the U.S. President develop a comprehensive strategy with benchmarks; and additional anti-drug funding to neighboring nations so that this problem is not simply exported out of Colombia .

Although there remain numerous critics who do not support this plan, I would attest that the provisions in this bill are far better than simply appropriating the funds without condition. With these strong provisions included, I support passage of this anti-drug package for Colombia .

However, let's be clear that passage of this plan today is not the end of Congress' consideration of this critical issue. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere Affairs, I will closely monitor implementation of this aid package to ensure that the conditions enacted by Congress today are carried out responsibly and thoroughly by the Administration.

I would also like to mention a rider inserted by the Conference Committee that would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from finishing work on a proposed rule revising the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program under the Clean Water Act. The TMDL issue is an important policy matter, one with significant consequences for public use of our Nation's surface waters and for many businesses, farmers and others who will be affected by the rule. No doubt, this issue is controversial and merits careful consideration and debate. However, the TMDL provision inserted into the Military Construction and Supplemental Appropriations bill inappropriately transfers the decision regarding the TMDL rule from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Senate and House Appropriations Committees.

This rider is not germane to the underlying bill, was inserted into the Conference Report without any public debate, and cannot be amended. In my view, important decisions regarding environmental policy should not be made behind closed doors and out of public view. This type of backdoor legislating circumvents the legislative process of debate and amendment, and abuses the public trust. By including this language in a conference report that cannot be amended, Senators must either accept the offensive provision, or vote down an appropriations bill containing important funds for disaster relief, humanitarian aid, and national defense.

Since the bill provides critical assistance to people that need help, I reluctantly support its passage.

As of July 18, 2000, this document was also available online at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r106:S30JN0-436: