Alfonse D’Amato

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Five minutes.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise this evening because the annual meeting of the International Monetary Fund, IMF, and the World Bank are being held in Washington this week; as a matter of fact, this very evening. As financial leaders gather from all over the world, I think it is incumbent that we review recent developments concerning the IMF, the Mexican bailout and the IMF's proposed international bailout fund. The IMF recently released its annual survey of global capital markets, which includes an analysis of the Mexican peso crisis. This IMF report confirms many of the concerns that I have expressed since the beginning of the year. The IMF report also raises many troubling questions. First, did the Mexican Government persuade the U.S. officials to approve a loan package by exaggerating this crisis after denying there was a problem for over a year? And by overstating the crisis, did the Mexican Government increase its own problems and further destabilize the peso? Second, was the bailout, as structured, really necessary? The Mexican Government and the Clinton administration claimed that without the bailout, conditions in Mexico would have been far worse. But the situation in Mexico is a disaster. Just ask the Mexican people. Third, was the crisis in Mexico certain to spread to other emerging markets? That is the rumor that was spread. That is what Congress was told. According to the IMF report, the answer is no. The IMF report states that: once the panic trading subsided, markets discriminated, albeit imperfectly, among countries according to the quality of their economic fundamentals. Fourth, should the administration have sent American taxpayers' dollars to pay off rich tesobono holders? The administration pushed this bailout plan without a single vote of Congress. The American people should not have been forced to bear the financial risk of the Mexican Government and foreign investors. The administration should not have soothed the pains of speculative investors at the expense of the American taxpayers and the Mexican people. Mr. President, we now know that the U.S. tax dollars were sent to Mexico to bail out speculators. In fact, the IMF report indicates that the peso's devaluation was precipitated and made far worse by the massive withdrawal of money by Mexican and foreign investors. We now know that Mexican investors who had a firsthand view of Mexico's rapidly deteriorating political and economic situation in 1994 were the first to cash in their holdings and take their money out of the country. Mr. President, the IMF report underscores the initial question that the American taxpayers have asked over and over: Why were billions of American taxpayers' dollars sent to a foreign country that was first abandoned by its own wealthy citizens, citizens who, Mr. President, had inside information and bailed out? At a minimum, the Mexican Government should have looked to its own rich countrymen for help before turning to U.S. taxpayers to bail them out. At a minimum, our Treasury Department should have insisted upon that. The IMF report confirms that the Mexican Government withheld important financial data and provided inaccurate and overly optimistic economic forecasts. If a country does not provide complete and accurate disclosure of key economic figures, we should punish this deception, not reward it. Mr. President, I am also troubled by the IMF's role in the Mexican peso crisis. I am deeply concerned by the recent Whittome report, an internal study which focuses on the IMF's review of economic conditions in Mexico. Unfortunately, the U.S. Department of Treasury has classified this report. But according to news articles in the international press service, the Whittome report concluded that the IMF distorted its own reporting on Mexico in response to political pressure from the Mexican Government. Why is this report being withheld from the American public and the Congress? We have a right to know what happened in this Mexican bailout. Unfortunately, this administration has made a habit of concealment. The Treasury Department has classified the Whittome report so the American people cannot read it and make their own judgment about how this crisis was handled. Mr. President, that is wrong. People have a right to know. The Mexican Government has been less than candid with the American people and the world financial markets. The administration should not be aiding them in their disingenuous behavior. We should not reward bad economic policies or deception. That report should be made public. The IMF and the World Bank and the Clinton administration have proposed the creation of a $50 billion bailout fund to handle future Mexico-style crises. I am opposed to using U.S. taxpayers' dollars to support this bailout fund. The American taxpayers have already been forced to contribute more than their fair share. The Mexican bailout was billed to the Congress and the American people as an international effort, but American taxpayers were left holding the bag. The American people are sick and tired of picking up the check. We still have not been paid back for the first bailout, and despite last week's propaganda, I doubt we ever will be. The Mexican Government and the U.S. Treasury have proudly proclaimed that the prepayment of $700 million of a $12.5 billion debt shows the bailout was a success. What they have not told us is that this so-called ``prepayment'' of $700 million is only a fraction of the $2 billion that is due in a few weeks. What about the remaining $1.3 billion that is due at that time? It is no accident that this publicity coincides with Mexican President Zedillo's visit to Washington and the IMF's annual meeting. I do not see how we can have a serious discussion about increasing the amount of money the IMF makes available to bail out other countries if we cannot trust the IMF's own reports, if we do not even get to the see the IMF's report, if the Treasury Department classifies it. The IMF's future role in the world economy must be reexamined, especially in the light of the disturbing reports that the fund has become too easily swayed and manipulated by political pressures. We must demand candor, honesty, and good business judgment from our own officials and from anyone else asking for U.S. taxpayers' dollars. The American people deserve accountability. As the World Bank and the [[Page S 14951]] IMF consider international bailout funds and other mechanics that deal with global economic problems, the Congress must not be idle. Mr. President, the Congress must remain vigilant in its efforts to protect taxpayers' dollars. We will be watching for the full payment from the Mexican Government at the end of this month, and we will be closely reviewing any proposed international bailout fund. If the administration is ready to declare the Mexican bailout a success, then we should have immediate repayment of the entire $12.5 billion of taxpayers' money. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I would also like to encourage funding for the DARE program for fiscal year 1996. Drug use is rising among our Nation's youth, not declining as it should be. We have a responsibility to our children to prepare them for the devastation that results from drug habits. If DARE provides our children with such basic skills, it should be continued. It seems to me that having uniformed police officers speak directly to school children could only have beneficial effects. national weather service

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to voice my support for the Truth in Lending Act Amendments of 1995. Our colleagues in the House recently passed this legislation. It is the product of bipartisan cooperation between the Senate and the House. The broad bipartisan support that this bill has attracted is evidence of the urgency of the situation that it addresses. As chairman of the Banking Committee, I believe that immediate action [[Page S 14567]] is warranted. I would therefore encourage my colleagues to immediately consider and pass H.R. 2399. Mr. President, H.R. 2399 is intended to curtail the devastating liability that threatens our housing finance system in the wake of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals' recent decision in Rodash versus AIB Mortgage Co. The Rodash case produced an onslaught of over 50 class action suits. The majority of these suits demanded the most draconian remedy available under Truth in Lending--rescission. When a loan is rescinded, the borrower is released from the obligation under the mortgage. Currently, there are dozens of Rodash-styled class action suits pending. If rescission is granted in a class action lawsuit, every class member would be entitled to reimbursement of all finance charges, as well as other charges. The threat of wholesale rescissions presents a real danger to our modern system of home financing: potential liability that could reach into the billions. Last spring we enacted H.R. 1380, a class action moratorium. We enacted this moratorium to allow both Houses time to craft a solution. The moratorium expires on October 1, 1995--so now is the time to act. Mr. President, I cannot overemphasize the threat to our mortgage lending system and the secondary markets that provide the mortgage market with liquidity. And we cannot forget that the liquidity of the mortgage markets has helped millions of Americans obtain their dream of home ownership at lower costs. H.R. 2399 is the result of much hard work and represents a commonsense compromise to a highly technical problem. H.R. 2399 provides greater certainty for lenders without eliminating the substantive protection available to consumers. I would like to summarize some of the important provisions of this bill: First, this bill provides retroactive relief from Rodash-styled class actions that are pending certification. H.R. 2399 also clarifies the treatment of certain fees for the purposes of the Truth-in-Lending disclosures. This legislation provides greater flexibility, or tolerance, for honest mistakes that result in technical violations and can produce a litigation morass. The current tolerances provided under the law are unreasonably low, especially in the context of the 3-year right of rescission. Two tolerances are established for rescission purposes. The tolerance formulas are based on the size of the loan in question. A smaller tolerance is established for standard nonpurchase money mortgages. If a borrower receives money from a refinance, only that money is subject to rescission. A larger tolerance is available in no new money refinancings. No new money refinancings are used by consumers to take advantage of declining interest rates. In these refinancings, no advances--other than loan proceeds that might be used to finance closing costs, which are not deemed to be new advances--are received by the consumer. H.R. 2399 clarifies the liability of assignees and loan servicers under Truth in Lending. These clarifications will provide greater certainty for the secondary market and help enhance liquidity of the mortgage market in general. H.R. 2399 also contains substantive protection for consumers. It retains the 3 day right rescission, and creates a right of rescission in the mortgage foreclosure context. The Truth in Lending Act requires lenders to provide consumers with notice of their right to rescind in certain transactions. However, the requirements concerning the form of notice to be provided are ambiguous. This bill eliminates liability when the incorrect form of rescission notice was given to the borrower in a closed-end transaction as long as the consumer received a completed form, whether the form was one of the model forms published by the Federal Reserve Board or a comparable form. The addition of the requirement that the lender otherwise complied with all the requirements of this section regarding notice is intended to make clear that the lender will continue to have liability for any violation of this title that is unrelated to the form of notice, such as a misdisclosure of the APR that exceeds the tolerance. However, the lender will not be penalized for the form of notice it provided. While any of us might take issue with any of the particular provisions in this bill, on balance it represents a workable solution, and demonstrates congressional resolve in the face of a tremendous problem. I urge all my colleagues to support this important legislation and pass it immediately, without amendments.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to thank our brave U.S. service men and women who with total dedication serve around the globe, but most importantly to pay tribute to four individuals who recently died in the service of our country. On August 15, 1995, Chief Warrant Officer Michael R. Baker, Chief Warrant Officer Donald J. Cunningham, Specialist Crew Chief Robert A. Rogers, and Specialist Crew Chief Dale Wood perished when their U.S. Army Blackhawk helicopter crashed into the sea off the shores of Cyprus. The crew was on a routine humanitarian mission to bring supplies and mail to the U.S. Embassy in Beirut. U.S. service men and women worldwide are frequently responsible for humanitarian and lifesaving missions which often go unnoticed by the American people. These missions are often fraught with danger attributable to health concerns or often insurgent occupation. The Cyprus airlift is just one example where our U.S. service men and women are tasked to put themselves in harms way. In addition to Cyprus being needed as a strategic point to support our Middle East efforts it has also become a strategic point for United States involvement in several areas of international concern, such as counterterrorist measures, narcotics trafficking, counterfeiting, money laundering, and international bank fraud. The Cyprus [[Page S 14560]] National Police force has been very cooperative and helpful in our international law enforcement efforts. I would like to take this opportunity to personally thank Assistant Chief of Police Panikos Hadjiloizou. Chief Hadjiloizou has been noted as being one of the driving forces in the cooperative international law enforcement effort being conducted within Cyprus. Chief Hadjiloizou has worked in close coordination with the U.S. Secret Service, the Drug Enforcement Agency, and other U.S. law enforcement agencies in efforts to stem these organized criminal organizations. I wanted to take this opportunity to thank Chief Hadjiloizou and hope that this cooperative effort continues its successful campaign. I also want to thank Chief Hadjiloizou and the men under his command for their extraordinary efforts to locate and recover the remains of the Blackhawk crew in order to return them to their families. I am sure that I am speaking on behalf of all my colleagues when I thank him for all his efforts. We all are aware that international criminal activity is expanding and the only way to counteract this growth is through cooperative, task force involvement between the United States and its international neighbors.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I am proud to cosponsor with Senator Mack, the Economic Growth and Stability Act. As chairman of the Joint Economic Committee and a member of the Banking Committee, Senator Mack has studied economic issues studiously. I commend him for this initiative. This bill would repeal the Humphrey-Hawkins Act, which sets the current guidelines for the Federal Reserve's conduct of monetary policy. The multiple goals of Humphrey-Hawkins, however laudable, are conflicting and unattainable. In the long term the Fed can only address inflation. Unemployment and other such matters are the responsibility of the administration and Congress--which we control through our spending and tax decisions. Under this bill, we could no longer lay the blame of failed fiscal policy at the foot of the Federal Reserve. Senator Mack's bill would recognize that the appropriate goal for the Federal Reserve is maintaining price stability in the long term. The Economic Growth and Price Stability Act recognizes that a key factor in encouraging growth is a stable environment in which to make decisions about the future. In an atmosphere of assured price stability, American families and corporations would be better able to budget and plan for the future. Assuring this steady level of capital investment and growth will create the jobs necessary to keep Americans' working. The policies and school of thought behind this legislation are sound. Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan has testified that ``a key ingredient in achieving the highest possible levels of productivity, real income, and living standards is the achievement of price stability.'' The Economic Growth and Stability Act is a critical step in this direction. Working together, the Federal Reserve can tackle inflation while the Congress, with the right fiscal policy, can stimulate long-term growth. We must return to a period of strong growth for our country to prosper and remain globally competitive. We owe it to ourselves and our children.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I am proud to cosponsor with Senator Mack, the Economic Growth and Stability Act. As chairman of the Joint Economic Committee and a member of the Banking Committee, Senator Mack has studied economic issues studiously. I commend him for this initiative. This bill would repeal the Humphrey-Hawkins Act, which sets the current guidelines for the Federal Reserve's conduct of monetary policy. The multiple goals of Humphrey-Hawkins, however laudable, are conflicting and unattainable. In the long term the Fed can only address inflation. Unemployment and other such matters are the responsibility of the administration and Congress--which we control through our spending and tax decisions. Under this bill, we could no longer lay the blame of failed fiscal policy at the foot of the Federal Reserve. Senator Mack's bill would recognize that the appropriate goal for the Federal Reserve is maintaining price stability in the long term. The Economic Growth and Price Stability Act recognizes that a key factor in encouraging growth is a stable environment in which to make decisions about the future. In an atmosphere of assured price stability, American families and corporations would be better able to budget and plan for the future. Assuring this steady level of capital investment and growth will create the jobs necessary to keep Americans' working. The policies and school of thought behind this legislation are sound. Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan has testified that ``a key ingredient in achieving the highest possible levels of productivity, real income, and living standards is the achievement of price stability.'' The Economic Growth and Stability Act is a critical step in this direction. Working together, the Federal Reserve can tackle inflation while the Congress, with the right fiscal policy, can stimulate long-term growth. We must return to a period of strong growth for our country to prosper and remain globally competitive. We owe it to ourselves and our children.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I thank my friend and colleague for that clarification. I feel the importance and immediacy of filling these law enforcement positions should not be delayed to bureaucratic debate on the amount of funds awarded to the different agencies.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss United States aid to the PLO, as it has been included in the fiscal year 1996 foreign operations appropriations bill and to explain my vote on the subject. We have to face the facts. The PLO is not complying with its responsibilities. It has failed to restrain the radicals in Gaza; failed to extradite terrorist murderers in its custody to Israel; it has failed to change the PLO Covenant; and it has failed to come clean with the amount of its assets. Most importantly, the PLO's overwhelming failure to restrain the radical elements within its areas of control is an insult to Israel and everyone who had placed hope in Yasir Arafat's ability to deliver the peace. Mr. President, I am angered that the PLO will be funded in this foreign aid bill, and moreover, with the fewest of strings attached. The PLO is not living up to its end of the bargain, but the United States is rewarding this band of murderers, nonetheless. I would venture to say that the PLO has no plans to live up to its bargain. They were created with murder in mind, and they will continue that way. I must say that I fear for Israel. While we provide aid and comfort for the PLO, Yasir Arafat concludes deals with Hamas, rediverts aid, and continues business as usual, laughing all the way to the bank. The United States should be ashamed of itself for giving aid and comfort to these murderers. In the end, though, it will not be the United States that suffers first. It will be Israel, and for them I feel sorry. I want it known very clearly, I voted for the foreign operations appropriations bill so that Israel could receive the aid that it needs at this crucial time. It is in no way a vote in favor of aid to the PLO. However virulently against funding the PLO in the manner in which it will be funded, I am not willing to hurt Israel by voting against the entire bill. In fact, I think that it was wrong to link the two aid packages together because Senators, such as myself who support aid to Israel but not the PLO, are put in a difficult position. If one votes to kill the aid to the PLO by voting against the overall bill, he or she also votes to kill the aid to Israel. This is wrong and it distresses me greatly. Mr. President, I ask to have printed in the Record, a letter to me from four grieving mothers, whose children have been taken from them by terrorist acts carried out by the very people to which the United States will be providing aid. This letter pleads for extradition by the PLO to Israel of the murderers of their children. I urge my colleagues to read this heartrending letter to further understand the mistake we are committing by providing this aid to the PLO with so few strings attached. Mr. President, I also ask to have printed in the Record, copies of documents that are purported to be from the Palestinian Economic Council, Development and Reconstruction, otherwise known as PECDAR. These documents, which I make no claim to their authenticity, highlight a series of alleged economic diversions and schemes by the PLO to buy up property in the West Bank to leverage against Israel. Finally, I ask to have printed in the Record an article on this same subject by A. M. Rosenthal that details the documents in question.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I do not intend to take all that time. The FBI is earmarked for $12.6 million for foreign law enforcement training in the International Law Enforcement Academy in Hungary. This earmark is essential for the security of the United States. And I say this because the FBI is training the law enforcement officers of Russia and the former Soviet Union and also Eastern Europe so that the organized crime gangs do not bring their business to the United States. And when I say the United States, I want you to know that they are doing a thriving business in my own State of New York, in Brighton Beach, which has been called ``the hub of the Russian mafia.'' I am encouraged by FBI Director Louis Freeh's deep commitment to fighting Russian organized crime. His efforts have highlighted his concern for the issue and we want to support him as he has taken the clear initiative on this important front. With these funds the FBI will be able to continue international cooperation on a level heretofore not seen in international law enforcement. The FBI will be able to provide training in organized crime and related investigative matters, forensic and other advanced investigative technological support, and continue the goodwill efforts begun last year with Director Freeh's visit to the region. Because the countries of Eastern Europe are facing the Russian crime gangs first, before they come here, this type of cooperation is vitally necessary and unprecedented in the history of law enforcement. Presently, one of the greatest threats facing democracy in Russia and Eastern Europe today, is the rapid expansion of organized crime. The situation is so bad that organized crime literally threatens to undermine the very democracy that the United States and the West seek to protect through their assistance programs, and more so by connection, our own security. President Yeltsin has stated that ``organized crime is trying to take the country by the throat.'' When one looks at the numbers, this is becoming all too clear. At the beginning of 1994, according to Russian First Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs Mikhail Yegorov, there were 5,691 organized crime groups in Russia, with over 100,000 gang members. In addition to the number of groups operating in Russia, there are close to 100 criminal groups concentrated in 29 countries, including Germany, Italy, Poland, Hungary, the Baltic Countries, Turkey, China, and 24 in the United States alone, with a concentration in my own backyard of Brighton Beach, NY. In Brighton Beach, Russian organized crime gangs become intimately involved in gasoline-tax scams, insurance fraud, drug trafficking, forgery, and contract killings. In addition to New York, Russian organized crime gangs operate in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Miami, Chicago. Their activities range from money laundering, illegal money transactions, control of gambling and prostitution, narcotics trafficking, and most dangerously, in 1993, 241 cases of illegal trading in nuclear material in Germany. Worse yet, these gangs have formed connections with the Sicilian mafia and the Colombian gangs. Additionally, it is very alarming to look at the activities of these gangs in counterfeiting U.S. Federal Reserve notes, FRN's. During fiscal year 1992, there were no counterfeit FRNs reported as appearing in Russia by either Russian or United States governmental entities. The reason for the absence of reported counterfeit U.S. currency activity was apparently in direct correlation to the restricted Russian-American political and economic relationship. During fiscal year 1993, however, without any assistance directed at the detection of counterfeit U.S. currency, $1,049,090 in counterfeit U.S. currency was documented as appearing in Russia. Accordingly to law enforcement officials, this activity is apparently ``only the tip of the iceberg,'' and the actual amount of activity would readily become more apparent when U.S. law enforcement personnel can get to the region. If we do not begin work on solving this problem now, we are headed for a situation where crime will so inundate the region that democracy itself become threatened and perhaps fall. If an extremist were to come to power in a backlash to a situation of near or total anarchy, we might find ourselves again threatened with confrontation with Russia. As for the other former states of the Soviet Union, they might also find themselves threatened by the resurgent nationalism these extremists espouse. For these reasons, we must act now to stem the tide of Russian organized crime. If we do not act now, the fate of Russia and our own security will become threatened. We cannot allow this chance to stop the violence, from slipping through our hands. If the Russian crime syndicates continue at the pace they are taking, it [[Page S 14049]] could cause a right-wing backlash in Russia, bringing another dictatorial leader to power, this time from the right. This situation would invariably throw the fate of democratic reform into doubt and cast the world back into the throws of the cold war. Let me say this, Mr. President. These moneys are absolutely essential if we are going to have any success dealing with the kind of organized crime efforts that have made an incredible impact in the United States of America from abroad but yet impacting my city, the city of New York, and its people. I have to tell you, this earmark is essential for the security of the United States, and it is being used today productively to fight crime. We have an area in New York that, unfortunately, has become a magnet for organized crime. That is in Brooklyn, Brighton Beach. I want you to know that they are doing a thriving business. What the FBI is attempting to do is to coordinate, to train and to build the kind of relationship abroad, not only in Russia, but in other areas, so that they have the ability to communicate, to interdict, to stop and, hopefully, stop it before it becomes so pervasive in the United States. This money funds organized crime investigations, insurance fraud, bank fraud, murder, smuggling--and do you know where that is taking place? Not just abroad, but here. That is the impact. I cannot believe that we would want to in any way impede this very successful program for a very modest investment. It is absolutely essential that we continue. We should be doing more. So I hope, as well-intentioned as my colleague's endeavors--and I believe them to be so; he has been a proponent of more anticrime legislation or as much as anybody. But I hope that we let the Director and let the other agencies, the Treasury Department and the DEA, have that opportunity to make an impact in saving lives, in battling crime right here in the United States of America, because that is what the impact of these funds are. Mr. KERRY addressed the Chair.

Mr. D'AMATO. If I might have 2 minutes.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I might inquire of the manager of the bill for a moment----

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise to discuss with the chairman of the subcommittee an issue of importance regarding the opening of offices for the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Secret Service in the triborder area of Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay. This area has been identified as extremely dangerous with criminal and terrorist elements running rampant in the area. Today's organized terrorist and criminal organizations are international in nature and the presence of these agencies is of paramount importance to the security of the United States and its elected officials. The subcommittee, in its deliberations saw the preponderance of these criminal activities and appropriated funds for the establishment and maintenance of offices for both agencies. The bill in its current form allocates $5 million for both agencies to establish and maintain offices. It is my understanding that this appropriation is to be split evenly between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Secret Service, $2.5 million per agency. I realize that this was the intent of the subcommittee and I merely wanted the opportunity to ensure that the Record accurately reflects this appropriation.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Affordable Housing Tax Credit [the Credit], which is the Federal Government's principal and most successful rental housing program. The Credit Program, however, is under attack and is threatened with termination. As part of budget reconciliation, the Ways and Means Committee has proposed to sunset the Credit at the end of 1997 pending a GAO review of the management of the program. Crafted this way and if accepted by the Senate, the proposal would greatly reduce private equity attracted to affordable housing through 1997, and if terminated after 1997, would halt the development or rehabilitation of affordable rental housing. In essence, Ways and Means is adopting a ``Ready, Fire, Aim Strategy.'' The committee proposes to eliminate the program before determining there is a problem. No hearings have been held and no study has been conducted. Shoot first and ask question later. Mr. President, I have written the chairman of the Finance committee, Senator Roth, urging that the Committee not consider the Ways and Means proposal to sunset the Credit. Oversight of any Federal program is always appropriate, and the Credit should not be exempt. But a mandated sunset before review is just a budget gimmick to pick up revenues in the out years. Congress can always change the program if mismanagement is found, but only after hearings. Termination without review will drastically slow the flow of private capital to projects currently being planned. Action before study is rash. Budgetary needs should not dictate housing policy. The Credit has enjoyed widespread bi-partisan support. Indeed, the program was originally sponsored by former Senator Mitchell and my colleague from New York, Congressman Rangel, as part of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, and signed into law by President Reagan. In the Bush administration, Secretary of HUD, Jack Kemp, was the chief advocate of the Credit on behalf of the administration. Under current law, the Credit is limited to $1.25 per capita per State and administered by the States on behalf of the Federal Government. Eligible affordable housing units are provided a Federal tax credit each year for 10 years, though the units must remain affordable for at least 15 years--many States require 30 or more years of affordability. Investors provide equity to projects in exchange for the credits to facilitate the development of affordable units. Based on the Nation's population of approximately 260 million, States are able to allocate approximately $325 million of credits from their 1995 per capita volume limitation. Although the credits are utilized each year for 10 years by investors, those investors provide equity upfront during the development process. At today's market pricing, the roughly $325 million of volume cap credits available in 1995 will result in approximately $1.85 billion of private capital invested in affordable rental housing. This private equity translates into rental housing for families in need of affordable housing. According to the National Council of State Housing Agencies [NCSHA], since 1986 the Credit has assisted in the development of over 700,000 units rental housing. In 1994 alone, according to NCSHA, the Credit produced 114,000 new or rehabilitated units, spurred construction activity leading to 98,000 jobs, $3.1 billion of wages, and $1.5 billion in tax revenues. According to the New York State Housing Finance Agency and the Division of Housing and Community Renewal, in 1994, over 6,100 units of rental housing were made possible because of the Credit in my home State. The production of these units resulted, directly, in an estimated $520 million of housing investment in the State. Of the 6,100 units, over 4,700 were for low-income families. Also, in 1994, New York participated in a national redistribution of unused credits from the prior year. As a result, $9 million in additional credits were allocated leading to $90 million of new housing production activity and 1,200 units of rental housing. The corresponding benefits to New York State's economy translated to gainful employment and badly needed stimulation of our business community. This is why I have been contacted by my Governor, George Pataki, his commissioner of housing, Joseph Holland, and his housing finance agency president, Stephen Hunt, to oppose any curtailment of the Credit Program until careful study has determined a need for change. Additionally the City of New York has urged me to stand up to the House Ways and Means Committee's proposal. Without the Credit my State, and its biggest city, would be deprived of its most important rental housing production program. The Credit was only made permanent in 1993. Prior to that the program would sunset and Congress would have to enact legislation to extend its authority. Since the permanent extension in 1993, the market has been flooded with equity; principally from major corporations otherwise not involved in affordable housing. the value of credits in the marketplace has dramatically increased as these companies compete for scarce credits awarded by States. The Ways and Means action will put a chill on this market driving down the amount of equity available for housing in 1996 and 1997. There is no assurance that the program would be extended after 1997. As a result, private equity available for affordable housing will dramatically drop because of political uncertainty and looming termination. This is unwarranted since no hearings or studies have shown problems with the Credit Program. As chairman of the Banking Committee, with jurisdiction over housing and HUD, I am keenly aware of the dramatic decline in Federal appropriations for housing programs. Mr. President, I am also very sensitive to the difficulties with HUD managing large Federal spending programs to support affordable rental housing. I have talked at length with Secretary Cisneros about his HUD reinvention blueprint based on less regulation and bureaucracy. Federal spending programs managed by HUD are slow moving and filled with red tape. On the other hand, [[Page S 14099]] the Credit is allocated promptly and is not dominated by Byzantine Federal regulations and paperwork. If anything, Congress should and will move beyond the Secretary's blueprint. But we should not terminate a program and slow the flow of capital derived from the Credit, until hearings have determined a need for change. Mr. President, I urge rejection of the proposed Ways and Means Committee action to sunset the Credit. As a member of the Finance Committee I will work assiduously to protect this important program.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask if the pending amendment has not been set aside, the Brown amendment be set aside for purposes of my offering an amendment, at which time the amendment will recur.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. D'AMATO. I do not mean to have a protracted debate on this, but I will take the time to read several excerpts from the State Department countries report, our State Department's report this year on Turkey as it relates to human rights. This comes from the report directly. The human rights situation in Turkey worsened significantly in 1994. Worsened significantly in 1994. The police and security forces often employed torture during periods of incommunicado detention and interrogation, and the security forces continued to use excessive force against noncombatants. Let me go on a little further. Various agencies of the Government continued to harass, intimidate, indict, and imprison human rights monitors, journalists, lawyers, and professors for ideas which they expressed in public forums. Disappearances and mystery murder cases continued at a high rate in the southeast. Let me go to page 3. I have another excerpt. Political murders and extrajudicial killings attributed to Government authorities and terrorist groups continued at the relatively high 1993 rates. Government authorities were responsible for the deaths of detainees in official custody; suspects in houses raided by security forces; and other types of civilian deaths in the southeast. Disappearances continued in 1994, while most of those reported in 1993 and earlier remained unsolved. This is a pattern. This has not just evolved. And it is not getting better. It is getting worse. Mr. President, again, it is not good enough to say that while one has joined us in an effort to investigate aggressions against the United States, to be helpful as it were, and more than helpful in our battle to liberate Kuwait, it is not sufficient to say that because one has loaned itself militarily to our defense, we look the other way when it continues these kinds of basic human rights violations not only of its citizens but of other citizens. It is inexcusable and intolerable for them to be permitted and for us to countenance by way of our actions, by way of making aid available, the continued blockade of the 2 million people in Armenia. It is wrong. And quiet diplomacy has not reduced that situation or resolved that situation. It continues. And on and on it goes. One might talk about the situation in Cypress and what the Government of Turkey has done is simply by way of armed force taken and occupied that country illegally, and it thumbs its nose at the United Nations and those attempting to bring about a peaceful resolve. I believe until we do what we are supposed to do--and I say it pays dividends because we did not win the cold war with the Soviets because we decided to look the other way on human rights abuses. It is because we stood up to them and we said we are not going to treat you the way we would the other nations that follow the normal patterns of conduct, conduct that is expected. So, Mr. President, I hope that my colleagues will accept this amendment. I think this amendment will be a very powerful impact in sending the right signal and maybe seeing that someday there are basic freedoms that are guaranteed, that nations will not be suppressed by the use of Turkish military might, that food and aid to people who are needy and starving will be permitted. That seems to me to be something that is so easy, but when a nation is so intolerant and so indifferent to the rights of others, then I think we have to send a clear message and that is why the Senator offers this amendment. I yield the floor. Mr. BYRD addressed the Chair.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I offer this amendment on behalf of Senator Pressler, Senator Sarbanes, Senator Snowe and myself. I rise to propose an amendment to the foreign operations bill, which will help restore credibility to our foreign assistance program by ensuring that one of the largest recipients of United States aid, the Republic of Turkey, adheres to internationally accepted standards for human rights and humanitarian practices. My amendment will cap at $21 million the amount of economic support funds that the United States gives to Turkey. Ten million dollars in savings by capping these funds would then be appropriated by $5 million each to the Treasury and the Justice Departments to support law enforcement training [[Page S 13921]] activities in foreign countries for the purpose of improving the effectiveness of the United States in investigating and prosecuting transnational offenses. I am very pleased, and I want to commend the subcommittee, which has appropriated funds for the FBI with the same purpose. I want to make sure that there are enough funds to support the Treasury Department and other Justice Department activities in this area as well. Mr. President, let me make it clear that this amendment does not restrict United States military aid to Turkey. It does not restrict. But what I am attempting to do is send a message that the United States will no longer tolerate the human rights abuses in violation of international law that Turkey has and is conducting. This year the Turkish Government will receive $320 million in military aid from American taxpayers to address its security needs. In total, Turkey will receive $366 million. My amendment will bring this total to $341 million. The time has come after years of fruitless so-called quiet diplomacy for the Congress to take the lead in addressing a broad range of issues dealing with Turkey. Let me go over some of them. One, worsening human rights records; two, its continued blockade of humanitarian supplies to Armenia. It is incredible in this day and age that humanitarian supplies are being blocked to Armenia. Three, its refusal to work toward a lasting and equitable settlement in Cyprus, a situation that has been permitted to exist year after year after year; four, its denial of basic rights to its Kurdish minority. In each of these areas, Turkey has consistently violated international treaties and agreements to which it is a signatory. Among these are the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the European Convention on Human Rights. Mr. President, the Congress in the fiscal year 1995 foreign aid bill withheld 10 percent of the principal amount of direct loans for Turkey based on its human rights record and the situation in Cyprus. The Turkish Government has spoken clearly on that issue. It will reject any U.S. aid tied to its human rights record. It is clear, given the Turkish Government's response, that we must deal differently with Turkey on this subject. On the question of human rights we need only to look at the State Department's recently released 1995 Country Reports on Human Rights. What does it say? We see that years--and even decades--of behind-the- scenes efforts by the State Department have not produced any improvement in the human rights situation in Turkey. This report concludes in fact that ``the human rights situation in Turkey has worsened in 1994.'' Mr. President, this is our Government's report, the State Department's report. This is not a report of the Senator from New York, or a conclusion that I have come up with. It is our Government's report. Again, the human rights situation in Turkey has worsened significantly in 1994. Mr. President, do we reward them with aid? The full spectrum of human rights monitoring organizations have condemned Turkey for its systematic and widespread abuse of human rights, including the use of torture. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the U.N. Committee Against Torture, the European Parliament, and others go on and on in their condemnation of their systematic deprivation of basic human rights. Let us talk about Kurdish rights and the Kurdish problem. Nowhere is the case for cutting off aid to Turkey more compelling than the question of the Turks. To this day, Turkey continues to deny the very existence of its 15 million Kurdish citizens. Their military has systematically emptied over 2,000 Kurdish villages and uprooted over 1 million Kurdish citizens from their homes. This is not to mention the recent incursion into northern Iraq against the Kurds. The Turkish Government's systematic and deliberate campaign to eradicate the Kurdish identity within its borders is in many ways the high-technology murder, massacres, and deportations of Armenian genocide earlier this century. The question of Cyprus remains unresolved. Twenty-one years after Turkey illegally, in 1974, invaded the island nation, despite countless U.N. resolutions and international agreements, Turkey continues its illegal military occupation and obstructive efforts toward a peaceful settlement. The division of the island and the massive uprooting of the Greek Cypriots caused by the 1974 invasion remains a constant reminder of the failure of the international community to enforce a lasting and equitable resolution to the conflict. Turkey still must demonstrate its support for a settlement recognizing the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of Cyprus with a constitutional democracy based on majority rule, the rule of law, and the protection of minority rights. Mr. President, nowhere is the case more compelling for our stopping assistance--this does not relieve some assistance, but I believe it is a very reasonable course--than the case of what Turkey is doing today to Armenia. The failure of quiet diplomacy--that is what the State Department talks about--is no more evident than in the case of the Turkish blockade of humanitarian aid to Armenia. How in this day and age, in 1995, can we countenance Turkey refusing to permit humanitarian aid to a nation and to its people? It is in violation of all international law. It is in defiance of the United Nations. Yet they continue to blockade the borders with Armenia. How long has this taken place and gone on? For 2 years. For 2 years the Turkish Government has refused to allow desperately needed United States and other international assistance to reach the people of Armenia. Even the United States of America--even planes from the United States delivering aid to Armenia have been refused. It is wrong. We should not reward nations with our money when they conduct that kind of policy. Unable to cross Turkish territory or transit its airspace, relief supplies--we are not talking about equipment, war-making equipment. We are not talking about munitions. We are not talking about tanks. We are not talking about armaments. We are talking about basic relief supplies--food, clothing, and medicine--have had to be rerouted through Georgia where, due to instability widespread, large portions of that aid have sometimes been lost, along with the cost and the time necessary to get basic aid to a people whose suffering mounts and the toll of the devastation increases. We should not be rewarding with taxpayers' money that kind of conduct. And the business of saying they are our allies has long played out. It is not right that American taxpayers continue this kind of program. I hope that this sends a message that we say to the Turkish Government, fine, you are an ally, but basic human rights must be observed. It is for those reasons that I have offered this amendment, not just for the American taxpayer but for the defense of American values and ideals. If we are to make a difference, certainly there is no more compelling case than here and now. This is a small step in signaling that we mean what we say, that we are for democracy and we are for human rights. I do not understand how we can be sending millions of dollars in America taxpayer moneys encouraging the kinds of activities that the Turkish Government is engaged in. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. BYRD addressed the Chair.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise to cosponsor the Public Housing Reform and Empowerment Act of 1995. I wish to salute Senators Connie Mack and Kit Bond for their successful leadership in the development of this legislation. Without their guidance and direction, there would not be a public housing reform bill before you today. Both Senators are to be commended for their strong commitment to improving housing conditions in America. Mr. President, ``The Public Housing Reform and Empowerment Act of 1995'' is an important first step in the lengthy process of addressing the housing concerns of our nation. It represents a significant starting point in the passage of long overdue reforms of the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD]. Given limited Federal resources and the need to balance the budget within 7 years, Congress must find more cost-effective ways to provide affordable housing. This bill represents a concrete step in the fulfillment of Congress' responsibility to the American taxpayer to ensure that every Federal dollar is maximized to its greatest potential. Substantial input from HUD, public housing authorities, tenant associations and other interested parties has been received and incorporated into this legislation. However, I look forward to additional examination of this bill and further improvement of its provisions. Mr. President, the Honorable Senator from Florida has outlined the provisions of the bill in great detail. I would like to comment on several guiding principles of the legislation. First, it would reform the public housing system through the devolution of control from the Federal Government to the public housing authorities and their tenants. It would consolidate programs, streamline program requirements and provide greatly increased flexibility to public housing authorities. The bill also provides incentives to facilitate the transition from welfare to work and empower public housing tenants. This will allow our nation's public housing residents a greater opportunity to achieve economic independence. Furthermore, the bill would streamline the demolition and disposition process of distressed housing projects through the repeal of the one-for-one replacement requirement and other measures. The bill recognizes that public housing is most effective when there is a viable income mix among its residents. Federal preferences would be repealed. High performance public housing authorities would be allowed to establish rents with protections provided for very low- income families. The ``Brooke Amendment,'' which does not allow a rent greater than 30 percent of tenant income, would be waived in some instances. I will continue to closely analyze the impact, both immediate and future, which such a waiver would have on the tenants whom we are committed to serving. Also, special protections should be considered for elderly and disabled individuals living on fixed incomes. The safety and security of the residents of public and assisted housing is a paramount objective. To that end, the bill would allow public housing authorities increased access to criminal conviction records and permit greater flexibility in the eviction of drug criminals. Public housing authorities depend on drug elimination funding to provide police to safeguard law-abiding tenants. I will continue to closely examine the practical effects of the bill's provision which would fold the drug elimination grant program into a block grant. ``The Public Housing Reform and Empowerment Act'' officially embarks us on the reinvention of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the redirection of our Nation's housing policy. I would like to personally congratulate Senator Mack for his initiative and steadfastness in producing a public housing reform bill which is thoughtful and well-balanced. As chairman of the Banking Subcommittee on Housing Opportunity and Community Development, he faces the strong challenge of reforming the Department of Housing and Urban Development. I strongly support the Senator's deliberate and measured approach to addressing the complex and difficult housing issues before us. HUD is at a crossroads. HUD's fiscal crisis, poor management, and lack of capacity have placed the Department in a situation in which it can no longer continue with business as usual. HUD is expected to do too much and has too many varied and competing constituencies. We must determine which current functions should be transferred to other Federal agencies or other levels of government and which programs, if any, should be preserved within HUD. The Banking Committee and its Housing Subcommittees will continue to evaluate proposals for HUD reorganization and elimination. Congress will seek to thoroughly address a myriad of housing issues. I would like to acknowledge Senator Lauch Faircloth, chairman of the Banking Subcommittee on HUD Oversight and Structure, for his diligence in his oversight role of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. His forthright views on the future of HUD effectively serve to widen the debate on the Department's potential for reform. Additional legislative initiatives to reform HUD will be offered. However, reforms must be made with caution and careful consideration of budgetary and social impacts. Congress must assess fully the potential ramifications of statutory change on State and local governments and entities, the capital and bond markets, property owners and managers, local communities, and program recipients. We must remember that the fundamental goal of this process is to address adequately the affordable housing and community development needs of our citizens in a time of dwindling Federal resources. It is imperative that we protect our needy poor and working class residents whom these programs are intended to serve. I believe this bill balances the social purpose of public and assisted housing programs while also responding to Federal fiscal constraints. I look forward to working with all Members of the Banking Committee on a bipartisan basis to ensure the swift passage of this important housing initiative.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I submit a resolution commemorating September 24 through September 30, 1995, as National Dog Week. Dogs have always been a source of comfort and companionship to men, women and children of all ages. They play an important role in the lives of many and provide valuable services such as seeing eye dogs, drug detection dogs and dogs that locate missing persons. Dog ownership requires a serious commitment by the owner, but the rewards are great. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise to cosponsor the Public Housing Reform and Empowerment Act of 1995. I wish to salute Senators Connie Mack and Kit Bond for their successful leadership in the development of this legislation. Without their guidance and direction, there would not be a public housing reform bill before you today. Both Senators are to be commended for their strong commitment to improving housing conditions in America. Mr. President, ``The Public Housing Reform and Empowerment Act of 1995'' is an important first step in the lengthy process of addressing the housing concerns of our nation. It represents a significant starting point in the passage of long overdue reforms of the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD]. Given limited Federal resources and the need to balance the budget within 7 years, Congress must find more cost-effective ways to provide affordable housing. This bill represents a concrete step in the fulfillment of Congress' responsibility to the American taxpayer to ensure that every Federal dollar is maximized to its greatest potential. Substantial input from HUD, public housing authorities, tenant associations and other interested parties has been received and incorporated into this legislation. However, I look forward to additional examination of this bill and further improvement of its provisions. Mr. President, the Honorable Senator from Florida has outlined the provisions of the bill in great detail. I would like to comment on several guiding principles of the legislation. First, it would reform the public housing system through the devolution of control from the Federal Government to the public housing authorities and their tenants. It would consolidate programs, streamline program requirements and provide greatly increased flexibility to public housing authorities. The bill also provides incentives to facilitate the transition from welfare to work and empower public housing tenants. This will allow our nation's public housing residents a greater opportunity to achieve economic independence. Furthermore, the bill would streamline the demolition and disposition process of distressed housing projects through the repeal of the one-for-one replacement requirement and other measures. The bill recognizes that public housing is most effective when there is a viable income mix among its residents. Federal preferences would be repealed. High performance public housing authorities would be allowed to establish rents with protections provided for very low- income families. The ``Brooke Amendment,'' which does not allow a rent greater than 30 percent of tenant income, would be waived in some instances. I will continue to closely analyze the impact, both immediate and future, which such a waiver would have on the tenants whom we are committed to serving. Also, special protections should be considered for elderly and disabled individuals living on fixed incomes. The safety and security of the residents of public and assisted housing is a paramount objective. To that end, the bill would allow public housing authorities increased access to criminal conviction records and permit greater flexibility in the eviction of drug criminals. Public housing authorities depend on drug elimination funding to provide police to safeguard law-abiding tenants. I will continue to closely examine the practical effects of the bill's provision which would fold the drug elimination grant program into a block grant. ``The Public Housing Reform and Empowerment Act'' officially embarks us on the reinvention of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the redirection of our Nation's housing policy. I would like to personally congratulate Senator Mack for his initiative and steadfastness in producing a public housing reform bill which is thoughtful and well-balanced. As chairman of the Banking Subcommittee on Housing Opportunity and Community Development, he faces the strong challenge of reforming the Department of Housing and Urban Development. I strongly support the Senator's deliberate and measured approach to addressing the complex and difficult housing issues before us. HUD is at a crossroads. HUD's fiscal crisis, poor management, and lack of capacity have placed the Department in a situation in which it can no longer continue with business as usual. HUD is expected to do too much and has too many varied and competing constituencies. We must determine which current functions should be transferred to other Federal agencies or other levels of government and which programs, if any, should be preserved within HUD. The Banking Committee and its Housing Subcommittees will continue to evaluate proposals for HUD reorganization and elimination. Congress will seek to thoroughly address a myriad of housing issues. I would like to acknowledge Senator Lauch Faircloth, chairman of the Banking Subcommittee on HUD Oversight and Structure, for his diligence in his oversight role of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. His forthright views on the future of HUD effectively serve to widen the debate on the Department's potential for reform. Additional legislative initiatives to reform HUD will be offered. However, reforms must be made with caution and careful consideration of budgetary and social impacts. Congress must assess fully the potential ramifications of statutory change on State and local governments and entities, the capital and bond markets, property owners and managers, local communities, and program recipients. We must remember that the fundamental goal of this process is to address adequately the affordable housing and community development needs of our citizens in a time of dwindling Federal resources. It is imperative that we protect our needy poor and working class residents whom these programs are intended to serve. I believe this bill balances the social purpose of public and assisted housing programs while also responding to Federal fiscal constraints. I look forward to working with all Members of the Banking Committee on a bipartisan basis to ensure the swift passage of this important housing initiative.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University. In October of this year they will be celebrating their 40th anniversary. The Albert Einstein College of Medicine was established in 1955 and has become one of the Nation's leading centers for medical research and education. From an original class size of 56 students to a student body today of over 1,000 students this institution has produced a long line of outstanding graduates. Admissions to the program has always been extremely competitive and as recently as 1994, 9,000 candidates applied for 176 spots. A full-time faculty of over 1,000 teaches, delivers health care, and conducts studies in every major medical speciality and area of biomedical research. Particular areas of excellence in research for which the Albert Einstein College of Medicine is widely renown include Alzheimer's Disease, neuroscience, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, liver disease, AIDS, immunology and molecular genetics. Congratulations to the Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University on their 40th anniversary.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Texas and the distinguished senior Senator from New York, who are opposing this amendment. This amendment is not about welfare reform. It is about pitting region against region, about enriching certain States at the expense of others, about taking money from States which have made an effort to deal with the plight of poor children and poor adults and just identifying 15 States and saying we are going to give you more money so we can buy your votes. That is wrong. Let me tell you what it does to our State of New York. It costs us, as Senator Moynihan has indicated, $4.5 billion over 5 years. It will cost us nearly $1 billion in the first year alone. Let us talk about maintenance of effort. Senator Santorum has spoken to it. We have to maintain an effort at 80 percent. Under this amendment, the State of New York will spend $600 million a year more than it gets from the Federal side. Let us talk about rich and poor, about poverty, and what people are worth and are not worth, as it relates to the Northeast and Midwest. We sent $690 billion more in taxes to Washington than we received in the past 14 years. I thank my distinguished colleague, the senior Senator from New York, because under his stewardship, the coalition put these numbers together. Let us talk about the State of New York. In the last 14 years, during the same period of time, we sent $142.3 billion more to Washington in taxes than we have received in what we call ``allocable spending.'' Let us look at the State of Florida. They have gotten back from Washington $38.5 billion more during that same period of time than they sent down to Washington in taxes. Now we see nothing other than a raid on New York, and its poor children in particular. Maybe what we should do is discuss an amendment to reallocate some of the Federal funds that flow to States such as Florida to give relief to those disadvantaged States in the Northeast and Midwest--New York, Pennsylvania and others--that already get less than their fair share of Federal allocable spending. Instead we have before us an amendment that would transfer more money to Florida at the expense of poor children in New York. So I urge defeat of this amendment. It is a bad amendment.