Dan Burton

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the distinguished Speaker, the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich].

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to my colleague, the gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Meek]. (Mrs. MEEK of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the reason I waited until near the end of the debate to take my time is because, as is always the case, there is a lot of misinformation that takes place in this debate and I wanted to make sure I clarified these arguments. First of all, a lot of my colleagues have said we are going to hurt the people of Cuba. When Castro has a foreign investor invest in Cuba, the money that is paid by the employees of that firm goes to Castro. Let us say that they get $400 a month. Castro gets the $400 a month and then he pays them in the local currency, $400 of that local currency. But the exchange rate is 700 to 1, which means the average Cuban is making less than $5 a month. We cannot hurt those poor people much worse than Castro has hurt them. The embargo is not going to hurt the Cuban people. Castro has murdered the Cuban people economically, and literally in many cases. And I would like to say to my colleagues who opposed the embargo, when we talked about these same issues when we had the embargo against South Africa, they took a different position. There is no consistency in their arguments. When Castro took power, Cuba had the highest standard of living in Latin America. Today it is the lowest, not because of the United States embargo, because for the past 35 years they have been propped up by the Soviet Union, but because of Castro's Communist government control policies that do not work. He is the one that has been hurting the Cuban people, not the United States and not the embargo, because the embargo had no teeth in it until 3 years ago. Somebody said that the OAS was not with us on this. The fact of the matter is Castro has been excommunicated from the Organization of American States because of his actions, because of his exporting of revolution. My colleagues have said, you know, we are going to penalize people who invest in Cuba and have invested in Cuba. This is a prospective bill. People who have already bought confiscated U.S. property will not be penalized unless they buy more American property. So if they have already got property down there, they are not going to fall under this bill. But people who buy confiscated American property in the future are going to be penalized because there will be a cause of action in U.S. courts unless suspended by the President. And, No. 2, anybody that traffics in confiscated U.S. property will not be able to get a visa to come to the United States. They know full well, the Canadians, the Spanish and everybody else, they know that this bill takes effect on the date of enactment, and if they buy property that is taken away from Americans, stolen from Americans by Fidel Castro, they know what they are getting into. So I have no sympathy for those people who want to buy confiscated, stolen American property to give Castro the hard currency that he needs to stay in power. Now, a lot of my colleagues say, you know, we ought to do business with this guy, especially since Boris Yeltsin says we should. Well, Russia and the Soviet Union have been supporting Castro all along, so that does not surprise me, but the facts of the matter are these: Castro has exported communist revolution in Africa, in Central America, in South Africa where Che Guevara was killed. He has exported communism wherever he could. He is a committed revolutionary and he still believes. That Castro has killed innocent human beings. He has put thousands and thousands of people in his Communist gulags. If you want to know how they are treated, read Armando Valderas' book ``Against All Hope'' and it will tell you very clearly how he treats people who disagree with him. My colleague, the gentleman from California [Mr. Dornan], talked about a fellow who defeated him in a college race for student body president, and Castro shot him to death. That is the kind of guy we are talking about. He is a horrible human being, one that should not be in power, especially not for 35 years. Two years ago, on the high seas, he had his Cuban Navy pull up alongside a tugboat with people on it who were fleeing to freedom. Women were holding their babies above their heads, and he ordered his Navy to wash them off the decks with power hoses. The women took the babies, the children, into the hold of the tugboat, and Castro brought his navy ship alongside. They directed the hoses into the hold and they sunk that ship, that tugboat, and killed those women and children like rats. This is the kind of government you guys want to do business with, and my colleagues' answer is, well, the way to work with Castro is to open up trade and do business with him, that will solve the problem. Really? Do you really believe that? We have opened up trade with Communist China. It has not changed the Communist regime over there. We have opened up trade with Communist Vietnam. That has not changed anything. And here we are, 90 miles from our border they are shooting down planes with innocent Americans in them, in international air space, and we are supposed to say we are going to solve this problem by doing business with him. Baloney. The way you deal with Fidel Castro, since he is on his last legs, is do not let him have the hard dollars that he needs to stay in power, and that is what this bill does. This bill will force him from power, I really believe that, in the next 2 or 3 years, and then the people of Cuba will have freedom, democracy, and human rights because there is going to be about $3 or $4 billion invested very quickly, and they will have the freedom that they wanted all these years. Get out of here, Castro. We want you gone. We want freedom, democracy, and human rights throughout this hemisphere, and you are the last holdout. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to yield 1 minute to our colleague, the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Kennedy], who has been a big help on this bill.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 1 minute to my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Zimmer].

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Sanford].

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Torricelli], my colleague who has done so much work in this area.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Menendez], who has been a tremendous help on this bill. (Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Deutsch].

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, a great, great honor befell one of our colleagues yesterday. Jim Bunning from Kentucky, a very good friend of mine. Everybody here in the front row was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. This is an honor that very few baseball players ever achieve. Jim pitched no-hitters in both the American and National Leagues. He did extraordinary things and it is high time he was recognized. I remember when I was about 6 years old, and he was in the majors, how much I admired Jim Bunning. Maybe I was a little bit older, but anyhow let me just say that Jim deserves this honor. I hope all of my colleagues will take the opportunity today to congratulate him. It is a great honor for Jim Bunning and a great honor for the State of Kentucky.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, the Presidential campaigns, particularly the Republican primary campaign, is in the full swing right now, and there has been a lot of derogatory comments made by one candidate or another about their opponents. I think we have a good field of Republican candidates, and I wish they would quit the terrible rhetoric about one another and really stick to the facts. I think if they do that, the American people will find them to be the kind of people they want to elect President and will elect the nominee we can all live with and be happy with and can elect in November to the Presidency of the United States. One of the problems that I have is that there has been a lot of misinformation about one of the candidates, and I am not taking sides in this Presidential campaign at this point, but I would like to point out some of the inaccurate remarks that have been made in what I believe to be untrue statements. First of all, they say Pat Buchanan, one of the leading candidates for President, has been one who wants to put a wall around the United States and be a protectionist, and they say the manifestation of this is because he opposed NAFTA and a lot of the jobs going to Mexico and other parts of the world, and they have said that this is the wrong approach and that we should not be worrying about that. The fact of the matter is NAFTA has been a disaster, and Mr. Buchanan is not wrong. Let me give you some figures: In 1995, the U.S. trade deficit with the world was about $120 billion. That included a deficit of about $671 billion with Japan, $40 billion with China, and the deficit with Mexico is now $16 billion. Two years ago, when we signed NAFTA, we had a $6 billion trade surplus with Mexico. Now we have a $16 billion trade deficit. That means we have lost $22 billion in trade with Mexico in the last 2 years, and each one of those billions of dollars costs the people of this country 19,000 jobs. And so since NAFTA was passed, we have had a net loss of over 300,000 jobs going to Mexico. A net loss of 300,000 jobs. I think that it is not inaccurate to say it is not in the best interests of the people of this country to have businesses and industries relocate in Mexico to the detriment of American workers because of an unfair trade agreement. Now, people say why do we have an unfair trade agreement? ``Why do you say that, Dan?'' The reason I say that is there are several problems with the NAFTA bill. Mr. Buchanan has talked about those. One of the problems is the tariffs on the Mexican side of the border come down over 15 years. On the American side of it's border, in many cases, those tariffs come down in 5 years. That gives the Mexican entrepreneur or business person a 10-year advantage, because they are still going to have tariffs on their side of the border for American products while we do not have them here. Now, the wage rates down there in some parts of Mexico are very, very low. You can employ people in the Yucatan, including fringe benefits, for a dollar an hour, and their counterpart in the United States is being paid anywhere from $10 to $20 an hour. That labor disparity is one reason to go down there. In addition to that, the tariffs not coming down as quickly on the Mexican side also is an inducement for American industry to leave here and go down there. Why would a small labor-intensive industry, let us say, that manufactures microwave ovens want to stay here when their competition is in Mexico at much lower wage rates, selling into the United States with no tariffs while they are paying much higher wage rates here in the United States and they cannot sell into Mexico without an import tariff? And so there is a real disadvantage for American industries staying here instead of going south of the border. Mr. Buchanan talks about that, and it is something that has cost us, as I said, over 300,000 jobs. Let me give you some figures: Imports from Mexico have increased 51 percent; that is, products coming from there to here. United States exports going to Mexico have increased by only 8 percent. So they have got a 33 percent advantage there. The $5.7 billion trade surplus I talked about in 1992 is now a $16 billion trade deficit, costing 300,000 jobs. The companies along the border are relocating in Mexico because of these advantages. More workers, in 90 percent of the cases, let me just read this to you, at this rate, taking Japan and China, for example, excuse me, while large corporations made sweeping predictions that NAFTA would enable them to hire more workers, in 90 percent of the cases these companies who said they would be able to hire more workers because of NAFTA have made no significant steps toward fulfilling these promises. In fact, according to the Department of Labor estimates, many of these leading NAFTA promoters have laid off workers, including GE, Procter & Gamble, Mattelle, and Xerox. For example, Wrangler has closed three manufacturing plants, lost 700 jobs to Mexico. United Technologies automotive plant in St. Mathews, SC, laid off 400 workers to plants in Mexico. Cleveland Mills, owned by Fruit of the Loom, folded in December, eliminating 400 jobs. This is part of the Fruit of the Loom plans to cut 3,200 jobs, close six plants and move those operations to other parts of the world, including Mexico. Eleven El Paso apparel factories closed down in the first year alone because of NAFTA, and recently the Hershey Co., an all-American company, everybody loves those Hershey Kisses, they moved one of their major Hershey Kisses plants to Mexico, and this is just another reason why facts need to be laid out very clearly in this campaign, and we should not be denigrating any one candidate to the advantage of another, because of misinformation. Mr. Buchanan is right on the money on this issue. We are losing jobs. There needs to be free trade, but there needs to be fair trade as well, and so I hope my colleagues that are running for President will keep this in mind.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Let me say to my colleague from Florida that we really appreciate his leadership on this bill. He has been very, very helpful in getting the Burton-Helms bill through the U.S. House of Representatives with a veto-proof majority. This horrible act that took place this weekend to which the gentleman referred should eliminate any doubt in anybody's mind about the necessity for passing this bill and cutting off Castro's ability to get hard currency by selling confiscated United States property that was owned by Americans in Cuba. I cannot stress strongly enough the support that the gentleman has given and how much I appreciate that. The President has now come on board, a little late, but we are very happy he is on board, and he said he is going to support some modification of this bill. I hope the President will sign the bill in the original form as it passed the House. That is the toughest bill we are going to have. If he cannot, I hope he will at least give us a very tough alternative so we can send Castro a unified message, and I know my colleague wants to do that, that this country stands together in opposing the human rights violations and the travesty that happened down there last weekend. I want to thank my colleague once again for his leadership.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, last week the nation of India celebrated its Republic Day, the 46th anniversary of the adoption of its constitution in 1950. On this occasion, it seems fitting to step back and assess India's progress in the areas of human rights and conflict resolution with its neighbors. It is unfortunate to report that India's progress in many areas has not been very good. In terms of making peace with its neighbor, Pakistan, India's record has frankly been abysmal. In fact, on the very day that India was celebrating Republic Day, two rockets were fired into a small town in the Kashmiri region of Pakistan. One struck a mosque just after noon prayers, killing 20 civilians and injuring many more. It is widely assumed that the rockets were fired by the Indian Army. The next day, India took the very belligerent step of test-firing its Prithvi II missile. This new missile is nuclear-capable and able to reach any major city in Pakistan. India's refusal to negotiate seriously with its neighbor Pakistan, and with the Kashmiri people, over the status of Kashmir has been a major disappointment to the world community. Much more disappointing has been India's inhuman record of government-sanctioned murder and torture in Kashmir. For years, India's security forces have run amuck in Kashmir, committing gang-rapes, extrajudicial killings, burning down entire villages, spraying gunfire into crowds of civilians and committing unspeakable acts of torture on the Kashmiri people. India has conducted a carefully orchestrated campaign of rape, torture, and murder in order to keep the people of Kashmir from demonstrating for independence. I was particularly struck by one story reported by Professor William Baker in a recent book: He interviewed a young woman who had been abducted by Indian soldiers who had just searched her village. They dragged her off to their compound, where they kept her naked in a pit. They raped her in a pit for 10 days. They extinguished their cigarettes all over her body. When they were through with her, they took her to the bank of a river, stabbed her in the head with a bayonet, and left her for dead. Today she is so traumatized, she has lost most of her memory. For the people of Kashmir, such treatment is all too common. In neighboring Punjab, where the Sikh people have also been fighting for their right to self-determination, the human rights situation has been just as dismal. In June of 1984, 11 years ago, as the movement for a free Khalistan was gaining steam, the Indian Army launched an assault on the holiest Sikh shrine--the Golden Temple in Amritsar. Thirty-eight other temples were also attacked, and over 20,000 Sikh civilians were murdered. Since that time, life in Punjab has been a nightmare of repression. Thousands of Sikhs are imprisoned without charges and tortured. Young men are abducted by security forces and disappear forever. Entire families are brutalized. Mr. Speaker, recently, the Indian Government has been making the claim that the human rights situation in Punjab has improved dramatically. Unfortunately, there is no truth to the claim. It has been estimated that as many as 70,000 Sikhs languish in Indian prisons without charges. Asia Watch has reported that ``virtually everyone detained in Punjab is tortured.'' Last month, I sent around a Dear Colleague letter detailing a particularly horrible encounter that happened late last year. A human rights activist was detained by Indian police along with his driver. The driver's legs were tied to two separate jeeps that drove off in opposite directions, tearing the man into pieces. The human right activist had disappeared. In another case that has received widespread attention, well-known human rights figure Jaswant Singh Khalra was abducted by police last September. Mr. Khalra earned the wrath of the Indian Government by publicizing charges that the army had murdered over 25,000 Sikhs and cremated their bodies to cover up their crimes. Despite international protests, including a letter from myself and 64 of my House colleagues, Mr. Khalra has disappeared into the Indian prison system. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Khalra should be released immediately, along with all prisoners of conscience in Punjab and Kashmir. It is long past time for India's reign of terror to come to an end. The Indian Government cannot achieve its goals through the systematic abuses of basic human rights. The time has come for the Government of India to sit down and negotiate agreements with Sikh and Kashmiri political leaders that respect their rights to democracy, self-determination, and human rights. I would like to make one final observation. In the very near future, India's Ambassador to the United States, Mr. S.S. Ray, will be returning to India. Mr. Ray has been a controversial figure. During the late 1980's, he was the Governor of the State of Punjab. This was at the time when some of the worst atrocities were taking place there, and Ambassador Ray was, at the time, in command of the security forces who were committing them. It was highly inappropriate for the Government of India to send to us an ambassador who has been widely charged with responsibility for a campaign of human rights abuses by security forces under his watch. I hope that, in selecting a new ambassador, the Indian Government will be more sensitive to the concerns of the American people and the international community.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, at a time in America, when many areas are experiencing an increase in juvenile crime, a society that is more violent than ever, when there is virtually no training for youngsters to prepare them for a productive adult life and the number of needy families and children is on the increase, there exists an organization in California that is doing their part to fight all of these social problems. It is the Boys and Girls Club of Coachella Valley. On a recent visit to California, I had the opportunity to see firsthand the work that is being carried on by this fine organization. In addition to offering a full schedule of activities for children on a daily basis that includes athletics, homework assistance, fine arts, health education, community service, cooking instruction, and computer classes, I also witnessed the following very meaningful programs: A nutrition program where meals with substance are served on a daily basis to the children. The club also identifies needy families in the community through the churches and other social service organizations and distributes nourishing food to them. The club's nutrition program is operated in conjunction with a local food bank called FIND, Food In Need of Distribution. FIND serves 7,200 needy families weekly and distributes 3,200,000 pounds of food annually. I also witnessed another program operated by the Boys and Girls Club called Building Horizons. How appropriate a name, as this program teaches high school students from five different high schools the skills necessary to pursue a career in the construction industry upon graduation. On-the-job training is created for the students by constructing two homes each school year. Through a partnership with a local city the homes are sold to low- and moderate-income families. This program is also run in cooperation with the local school districts and the building industry. So you can see where the Building Horizons program serves two purposes, one, to provide career opportunities for aspiring students in the construction field and much needed affordable housing in the Coachella Valley. Finally, their criminal justice program accepts youngsters who are referred from the local police department who commit minor infractions. Successful solutions to the child's problem are found and the child is encouraged to get involved in Boys and Girls Club programs and with their professional staff, who are wonderful role models. Their counselor also works with young people who are trying to separate themselves from gang involvement. The Boys and Girls Club of Coachella Valley does an incredible job with the children. As you can see, one of the things that they do extremely well is partnership with other agencies and organizations both private and public. I congratulate my good friend Leo Wyler, who is one of the leaders in the Coachella Valley, for dealing with these problems as well as all of the other people in that area who are working so hard to make their young people successful, productive adults. The future of America, in my view, depends on programs like these and the involvement of leaders in the community in making sure that we have productive alternatives for our young people. If we don't emulate programs like these, then the future of America as respects drugs, crimes, et cetera, will not be very bright. Again, Mr. Speaker, my congratulations go out to all of those who support these programs, including my former colleagues Al McCandless and my good friend Leo Wyler. $100 Will Buy $1,615.00 Worth of Food Hunger cannot be adequately described by numbers. But ``numbers'' tell the story of FIND's 1994 services to the needy families of eastern Riverside County: Families served weekly........................................\1\ 7,200 Volunteers..........................................................465 Annual volunteer hours...........................................85,000 Value of volunteer hours at minimum wage.......................$404,009 Pounds of food distributed annually...........................3,200,000 Annual operating costs (1994)...................................325,000 \1\ 75 percent of the families served by FIND have monthly incomes of less than $800. If purchased at store, you would have spent $5,250,000. And we spent $325,000. This is accomplished through the energy and time of our volunteers.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me extend to our good friend, the gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio], and his family from the Republican side of the aisle our sincerest condolences on the death of his daughter, Anne. I cannot imagine what it would be like to lose a daughter or a son, but I certainly do not want to experience that. So we wish Vic the very best and his family the very best, and they get all of our deepest sympathy. tribute to russell w. brown Mr. Speaker, it is interesting, the reason I am taking this 5-minute special order is because in 1964, I met a fellow who was to become one of my dearest friends, and he died day before yesterday of cancer, and he became like a brother to me. I remember in 1970, when I first decided to run for Congress, I talked him into getting involved in politics. He said, ``Oh my gosh,'' he says, ``I wouldn't want to do that. It takes too much time. There is so much crookedness and corruption,'' you know what people say. I talked him into it. His name was Russell W. Brown, incidentally. He became one of the political leaders in Indianapolis, IN, and the State of Indiana for 30 years. I do not know what our party or the political process would have done had we not had such a person in a leadership position in Indianapolis. He was an inspiration to everybody. He spent a tremendous amount of time, as both sides of the aisle know, working for various candidates, making sure that their views were expressed and they got elected. Those people are the unsung heroes. We get elected and we get on television and people around the country find out who we are. They may not agree with us, but at least we get some notoriety. But people like Russ Brown, who spent 15, 20, 30, 40 hours a week working on our behalf and on behalf of the country, the Nation, never getting much recognition. But they certainly deserve it. Without them, the foot soldiers, the people who are the political leaders back home, without them we would not be elected and the country would not be able to get its job done, and the Congress would not be able to get its job done. I would just like to say today, and I guess I am kind of rambling, Mr. Speaker, I normally do not do that, I guess, I am certainly going to miss Russ. He was a wonderful man. He was a great humanitarian, a great father, a great husband, and he was one of my dearest friends, and throughout the remainder of my life, I will miss his smiling face, and his words of encouragement, and all the wonderful things he did for me and for this country.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, let me just say that I think we should give up something to serve in this House, and I think most people do give up something, but we should not give up everything. We should not give up everything. A lot of people have outside investments, and I guarantee my colleagues that this is going to lead to the point where if we have outside investments, property and so forth, and we sell it, we will not be able to get over $20,000 a year out of our investments. And a lot of people have made those investments counting on them for additional income because of the kids in college and other expenses they have to deal with. But we are going to lead to that. That is where we are going. In the past years, I have served with thousands and thousands of legislators in the State House and in the Federal Government, and very few were corrupt. I would say much less than one-half of 1 percent. And yet we engage in self-flagellation around here on a routine basis. We might as well have a cat-o'-nine-tails with little pieces of metal in it and just beat each other to death in front of the public. Maybe that will satisfy this insatiable desire for perfection. We are not going to be perfect. We are human beings. But we have a much lower rate of crookedness than the average population. and if Members do not believe it, just look at the statistics. Mr. Speaker, the thing that bothers me is we just continue down that road. My staff, who make very little salary, cannot even take an apple from somebody now. They cannot have a sandwich with somebody. They are making $20,000 a year, and they used to look forward to a lunch with somebody, and they cannot do it anymore because of the gift ban that we passed. We are just going way too far. Way too far. Mr. Speaker, I think that what we ought to be doing is we ought to be thinking about watching ourselves. If we do something corrupt, it is going to be brought out. I do not understand the mentality that says that we have to continue to limit ourselves, to squeeze ourselves time and again. And every single outside group, like Common Cause or Ralph Nader, they raise their eyebrows a little bit and we all start genuflecting. We all start getting more and more concerned. It makes no sense to me. Why are we doing this? If a person writes a book, I think the Solomon amendment addresses it very well. No big bonus at the front end, but if it is a royalty they get, they earn, they should be able to get that. What is corrupt about that? Intellectual property rights ought to be protected by this body. We should not be taking away first amendment rights. The gentleman from Hawaii is absolutely correct, that is what we are doing. I just simply do not understand it. If a person is going to be corrupt, they are going to be corrupt. They are going to take money like they did in ABSCAM. They will take it under the table, behind the back, over a transom, in a hotel room. So they are going to be corrupt, and they should be brought to justice. But we should not all be beating each other to death continually before the public like we do. It makes absolutely no sense. And let me just say this, Mr. Speaker. I really and truly believe we are going to drive people out of this chamber who have a lot to contribute because we are squeezing everybody so tightly.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I want to call to the attention of my colleagues two articles from the December 15, 1995, New York Times and the December 16, 1995, Washington Post which report that India may be preparing for another nuclear weapon test near Pokhran, India. My colleagues may recall that India exploded a nuclear device at this very site back in 1974. Since then, India's nuclear program has advanced rapidly making significant progress in the development of ballistic missiles. All these activities on the part of India pose a direct threat to Pakistan's security. Despite these threatening moves, Pakistan has displayed considerable restraint. In fact, Pakistan has indicated on numerous occasions its willingness to accept nonproliferation measures, including accession to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, if India were to accept the same. While Pakistan, who has been a longtime ally of the United States, has come under United States sanctions, India has been allowed to pursue its nuclear program without any consequence. Indian activities at the Pokhran site not only threaten security and stability in South Asia, but also adversely impact United States efforts to have a Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty concluded during 1996. Mr. Speaker, it is imperative that India should give up its nuclear ambitions and cooperate with Pakistan and its other neighbors in South Asia in banishing forever the chances of nuclear war in South Asia. [From the New York Times, Dec. 15, 1995] U.S. Suspects India Prepares To Conduct Nuclear Test (By Tim Weiner) Washington, Dec. 14.--American intelligence experts suspect India is preparing for its first nuclear test since 1974, Government officials said today. The United States is working to discourage it, fearing a political chain reaction among nuclear nations. In recent weeks, spy satellites have recorded scientific and technical activity at the Pokaran test site in the Rajasthan desert in India. But intelligence experts said they could not tell whether the activity involved preparations for exploding a nuclear bomb or some other experiment to increase India's expertise in making nuclear weapons. ``We're not sure that they're up to,'' a Government official said. ``The big question is what their motive is. If their motive is to get scientific knowledge, it might be months or years before they do the test. If it's for purely politician reasons, it could be this weekend. We don't know the answer to those questions.'' Shive Mukherjee, Press Minister of the Indian Embassy here, said today that the activities at the nuclear test site were army exercises whose ``movements have been absurdly misinterpreted.'' The Congress Party of India, which has governed the country most of the years since independence in 1947, is facing a serious challenge from a right-wing Hindu nationalist party, United States Government officials say a nuclear weapons test could be used by the Congress Party as a symbol of its political potency. Despite efforts to persuade the world's nuclear powers to sign a comprehensive test ban treaty, China and France have tested nuclear weapons in recent months. If India follows suit, its neighbor, Pakistan, with which it has tense relations, may also test a nuclear weapon, Government and civilian experts said. Neither country has signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. ``It's going to have a nuclear snowball effect,'' said Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control in Washington and a leader civilian expert on the spread of nuclear weapons. ``It also jeopardizes the possibility that the world will sign a comprehensive test ban treaty next year.'' A State Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity said that if India exploded a nuclear bomb, it ``would be a matter of great concern and a serious setback to nonproliferation efforts.'' ``The United States is committed to the early completion of a comprehensive test ban,'' the official said. ``We are observing a moratorium on nuclear testing and we have called upon all nations to demonstrate similar restraint.'' But not all nations have heard the call. India says publicly that it wants the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. But its nuclear hawks argue that the United States and Russia will never live up to that ideal and that a comprehensive test ban that is not linked to drastic reductions in the world's nuclear arsenals could leave India a second-rate or third-rate nuclear power. Mr. Milhollin said India did not have a great archive of test data for nuclear weapons that could be mounted on a warhead and placed on a missile. ``Once the test ban treaty comes in, they will be data-poor,'' he said. ``A test now would supply them data, it would be a tremendous plus for the Congress Party, it would give them a big boost in the elections.'' Political pressure for a nuclear test is building among India's right wing. ``They are saying: `What are we sitting around for? Why should we sign a test ban treaty not linked to the reduction of nuclear weapons' '' said Selig S. Harrison, an expert on South Asia at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. In 1974 India exploded what was believed to be a Hiroshima- sized bomb equal to 12,000 tons of TNT, which is called a ``peaceful nuclear explosion.'' It renewed its program some years later, and in 1989 the Director of Central Intelligence, William H. Webster, testified that India had resumed research on thermonuclear weapons. While India has sought to limit the nuclear abilities of China, it is most concerned about the nuclear-weapons program of Pakistan, although Pakistan has not acknowledged it has one. The two countries have had three wars, unending political tensions and constant border disputes since they were formed by the partition of India in 1947 after its independence from Britain. A subnuclear experiment, which would not involve a nuclear explosion, might not have the political effect of a full- fledged detonation. But Administration officials said they feared that any test would create pressure on Pakistan to follow suit. ``We look at this in a balance with Pakistan,'' a White House official said:

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I move to lay the appeal on the table.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Let me just say, the gentleman from Wisconsin a few minutes ago, as others have, has made reference to the 73 freshmen we have on our side of the aisle, indicating that they are going off on a tangent and holding us all hostage and stopping progress on the negotiations. Many of us have been waiting for a long, long time to head this country toward a balanced budget. I have been here 13 years. We have waited and we have waited and we have waited for that additional cadre of people who are willing to fight with us to get to a balanced budget. We have heard all the rhetoric, all the arguments for years from the Democrat side of the aisle saying, ``We're going to do it, we're going to do it, we're going to do it'' but we never do it. The deficit continues to rise and rise and rise and we now have a $5 trillion national debt. So I would just like to say to my colleague from Wisconsin, thank God for the 73 new Republican freshmen because they speak for what we have been speaking for the past 13 years. They do not speak by themselves. They speak for all of us. We are all together on this and we are going to get the job done.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, the President vetoed the bill. We did not veto the bill. The President vetoed the bill. I think America should know that. Let me just talk about something else that came to may attention tonight that really concerns me. I went to a conference that the Republicans had today and we were unanimous, like a fist of steel, we are unanimous, 235, that we are going to get a balanced budget in 7 years using CBO figures. But I watched television tonight, and I saw Tom Brokaw and Dan Rather and their people saying that our party is split all to heck and that Newt Gingrich cannot lead, and it is all because of the freshmen that we have this problem. Let me tell Dan Rather and Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw and the Democrats and the President, and anybody else, we are united. We want a balanced budget in 7 years using CBO figures and we will not be deterred. I do not care what you guys tell the media. The media was spewing out exactly what the Democrats have been telling the people tonight. It is wrong. We are united, we are not going to deviate. We are going to get a balanced budget in 7 years using CBO figures or else. I just want to tell everybody that I get a little bit concerned when I see the national media spewing out garbage that I know to be false. We had a conference today and when Newt Gingrich walked into that room, he got a standing ovation. Everybody applauded. And yet they keep telling us on television, he cannot lead our party. He is leading our party, he is doing a great job. We are united. So, Mr. President, Mr. Brokaw, Mr. Jennings, Mr. Rather, my Democrat colleagues, we are united, we are going to get it one way or another, and we are not going to pass any more CRs until we do.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the Democrat side of the aisle keep telling the American people that we are cutting, cutting, cutting, we are going to hurt everybody. Let me give some figures. We are increasing, increasing the earned income tax credit by $6 billion; school lunches we are increasing by $1.7 billion; student loans by $12 billion over the next 7 years; Medicaid we are increasing by $38 billion, and Medicare by $112 billion. Yet they continue to tell the American people and scare old people into believing we are cutting them. Yet, when we bring to the floor the President's budget, they do not want to vote on it. Do Members know why they do not want to vote on it? Because they know it is not a real budget. They know it is nothing but smoke and mirrors. They know the President is not sincere. They know it is a bad budget that is bad for America, and they know that even they will vote against it. They do not want to have to vote against it. Our budget is real. We balance the budget in 7 years. We still give a tax cut, and we increase spending for very important programs like Medicare. The Democrats should come clean.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, observation. Our troops are going and there is nothing we are going to be able to do about it. One of the things that concerns me is that we do not profit from history. We went into Beirut and we lost 241 Marines blown all to heck, trying to solve their problems that are of an age-old nature. We went into Somalia and got involved in a civil conflict there and guys driving around on pickup trucks with machine guns in the back drove us out of there. Aideed, the tyrant, the tribal leader, is still in power over there and we spent hundreds of millions of dollars. And we pulled out and we did not solve that problem. And now we are going into a quagmire much greater than either one of those, believing that we are going to solve those problems. We are not going to solve those problems. A year from now we will probably pull out and the war will go on and people will continue to die and we will have lost a lot of young men and women unnecessarily. So tonight all I want to say, because this is a fait accompli, is God bless those soldiers and God bless their parents and loved ones.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to express my congratulations and admiration to Mr. Donald Roach of Indianapolis, IN, as he retires from Allison Transmission. In his nearly 50 years in the work force, Mr. Roach served his community and country in several capacities. A weapons expert in the U.S. Army in the early 1950's, Mr. Roach brought his military expertise to Allison Transmission in Indianapolis in 1981. He began as a specialist on a battle-tank development project at Allison and then served as Allison's Audit Coordinator at the U.S. Army Tank Plant in Lima, OH, for the balance of the 1980's. Donald Roach would conclude his years of service as a regional account manager, sharing his lifelong experience and expertise with both customers and fellow Allison employees across the country. Even in this retirement, Donald Roach will remain active in various community service organizations and social clubs, and especially with his family. He has a wife, four children, and many grandchildren with whom he can enjoy the next phase of his life. I wish Donald Roach the best as he reflects on the many memories of the last 50 years.