Dan Burton

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, the committee of jurisdiction on authorizing is the Committee on International Relations, on which I serve and have served for 12 years now. What I cannot understand is why the subcommittee on the Committee on Appropriations is exceeding what the House authorizing committee requested, by $46,554,000. It is our responsibility to study this issue and to make a decision on what we should authorize to be spent. After we did that, the gentleman came back and raised it by $46 million. Why?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, in 1996 in the foreign aid authorization bill for fiscal year 1996 and 1997, the House Committee on International Relations authorized only $419,000,000, $5,000,000 in operating expenses for AID for fiscal year 1997. The cut in this amendment would bring the total operating expenses level down to what was authorized but never enacted into law by our committee. This amount was later increased to $465 million. What we are trying to do here is to reduce by $46,554,000 the operating expenses for AID. This is what was authorized by the Committee on International Relations and we think it should not be exceeded.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 4.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, the bill, at the very least, is confusing. For anyone who is not a member of the Committee on Appropriations to read this, they would think that there is $144 million in excessive spending here. Let me just say this. I will take my colleague at his word and I will withdraw the amendment. But I hope next year when we come up with a bill that it will be drafted in such a way, especially the explanation, that any Member, aside from a member of the Committee on Appropriations, can look and see if you folded in child survival and childhood diseases and other things in there, because it is not apparent. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, the whole premise of my argument is this: The administration, the President of the United States and his administration, asked for 1 billion, 6 million dollars for development assistance. This bill, according to the way I read it, has 1 billion, 150 million dollars, or $144 million more than what the President requests. Mr. Chairman, I have confidence in this particular area that the President has evaluated where the money should go, in Africa and elsewhere, and has come to the conclusion that 1 billion, 6 million dollars is enough, and I think $144 million above that is excessive.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. If the gentleman will yield, let me just say this. I do not know how anybody in this body that is trying to follow expenditures can look at this and understand it, and I think that the staff should be very careful when they put these kinds of figures in here because if we look at it on its surface, it looks like we have increased the administration's request by $144 million. Well, it is very clear. Look at the bottom of page 13. Now, how are we, as colleagues of the gentleman's who do not have the privilege of serving on the Committee on Appropriations, supposed to understand that he folded other things in there and the administration has not?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. If the gentleman would yield further, let me just say this. The bill is very confusing, if the gentleman is accurate, and I think that to present this to the Congress when we are trying to go through and save the taxpayers' money, and I have great respect for my colleague; when he gets something that shows $144 million increase and he is saying----

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Why did they do that?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. So the administration did not put Africa into that $1,006,000,000.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I want to really get to the bottom of this. If the gentleman would yield further, the point I am trying to make is when the administration made its request, they obviously folded into this account all the things the gentleman is talking about. What he is saying is that they did not fold in some of these things he is talking about, and that is why he is $144 million higher. That does not make sense to me when I look at the bill.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Well, the administration for this particular area asked for $1,006,000,000. Did they not include those other things the gentleman from Alabama wanted in there? Is that what the gentleman is saying? The administration in that $1,006,000,000 did not include the other things? Because the gentleman got $144 million more than the administration wanted, and what he is saying is that he has added other things into that account. Well, did the administration not add other things into that account, child survival account?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. So what the gentleman from Alabama is saying is the administration----

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. In that one category it is $144 million above what the administration requested. Tell me what is in the bill. There it is.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. If the gentleman would yield further, the money is in those other accounts to be spent. We have got it in the bill in these other sections. I am talking about the developmental assistance. The developmental assistance, the administration is asking for $1,006,000,000. The gentleman from Alabama has got $1,150,000,000, and I am trying to cut out that excess of $144 million for development assistance alone. As my colleagues know, with all due respect to my colleague----

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. If the gentleman would yield further, let me just say this. I do not have any problem with the money going for child survival. What I am talking about is the development assistance, and the development assistance, according to the gentleman's bill, is $144 million above what the administration asked for in that one area. It is $144 million above what the administration requested. That is what I want to cut.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, what I am trying to figure out here, and I believe I am correct, the development assistance account, which I am trying to cut by $144 million, is separate from the child survival, nonchild diseases, children basic education and the grant to UNICEF. Those are separate accounts, and what I am trying to cut is the development assistance to the tune of $144 million, which brings it down to the administration's request.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. But if that is a separate account, then why is it----

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Well, if that is a separate----

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. If the gentleman would yield further, on page 12 it lists child survival, nonchild diseases, children's basic education and a grant to UNICEF, and that is a total of $600 million, and the child survival in Egypt ESF and disaster assistance is $55 million. Those are separate accounts, as I understand it. That is not part of the development assistance. That is a separate account; am I not correct?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Maybe the gentleman can explain to me what it says on page 13 near the bottom of the page in the bill. Says development assistance. It gives a fiscal year 1996 level. It gives the gentleman's request or the President's request, and it gives the committee recommendation. I would presume, if there is any additional child developmental assistance, it would be included in all of those figures. Now, above that there is a displaced children program which is $10 million, but that does not seem to be a part of the developmental assistance.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. What I am talking, if the gentleman would yield further, what I am talking about is cutting developmental assistance alone, not talking about child survival. Leaving that account aside, I am talking about cutting the development aid down to what the administration requested, and, if the gentleman will look on page 13 of the bill itself, it shows that the fiscal year 1996 level, it shows the fiscal year 1997 request and the administration, and it shows the committee recommendation, and the committee recommendation is $144 million above what the President and the administration requested. And I am not talking about the child survival account. And what I am trying to do is cut the $144 million in excess of what the President wanted out of the bill.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. If the gentleman will yield, if he can clarify something for me? The child survival fund; is that not a separate fund from developmental assistance?