Jesse Helms

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. I thank the Senator. I yield the floor.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. HELMS. If the Senator will yield, I think he has done a good day's work. I commend him. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to discharge H.R. 1757 from the committee, and all after the enacting clause be stricken and that the language of S. 903, as amended, be inserted, and the bill be read the third time.

Mr. HELMS. Very well. I give that assurance to Senator Sarbanes.

Mr. HELMS. In connection with the pending amendment to be voted on shortly by the distinguished Senator from Utah, I hope that my request will be approved that we await the arrival of Senator Biden, because he may want to have some comments on it, too. So in that context, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HELMS. I suggest we go to the vote.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for his amendment and I, of course, share his concern with the increasing number of United Nations treaties that impose regulatory burdens and, as he puts it, infringe on the rights of the American people. In fact, the pending bill, S. 903, addresses many of his concerns. I demanded that this legislation prohibit any funding to the United Nations until the Secretary of State certifies that the sovereignty of the United States has not been violated. A lot of people giggled about that. But as the Senator knows, it is a very real problem, potentially. As the Senator also knows, many of us have worked for months to develop this comprehensive United Nations reform package. I think the Senator will understand, and I find myself in a position where I simply must be faithful to the deal into which I have made entry and participated. Senator Biden has been so cooperative. He is sticking to his bargain and I shall stick to mine. This bill requires a number of key reforms at the United Nations, but it certainly does not require every reform that I wanted. Let me say again to the Senator from Wyoming, I support his efforts but I cannot support any amendment to change this package. But I will assure him that the Foreign Relations Committee this week will have hearings to consider United Nations climate change negotiations, and will hold additional hearings on actions by the United Nations that impose international regulatory burdens on the American people.

Mr. HELMS. Just one moment, Mr. President. I suggest that the Cloakrooms be notified of the proximity of the vote.

Mr. HELMS. Is there not a pending amendment?

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HELMS. I thank the Senator and I assure him we will not forget his interests. Amendment No. 392

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I send to the desk a series of amendments on behalf of myself and the distinguished Senator from Delaware, Mr. Biden, and I ask that these amendments be considered en bloc. And these en bloc amendments make technical conforming changes to the bill. I understand there is no objection to these technical changes to the bill. I now ask unanimous consent that these amendments be adopted en bloc. I know that the distinguished Senator from Delaware will be delighted to say OK.

Mr. HELMS. I thank the Chair. Amendment No. 399

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, Senator Lugar has repeatedly said it is the right thing to do, to vote for his amendment. It is the right thing to do, almost implying that those of us who do not agree with him have, indeed, a character defect. Let me tell you about the Lugar amendment. The effect of the Lugar amendment would be that the United Nations would have absolutely no incentive to reform--none--no incentive to cut the burden on the American taxpayers by reducing our regular budget assessment to 20 percent; no reduction in our peacekeeping assessment; no inspector general in the big three specialized agencies to root out waste, fraud, and corruption; no U.S. seat on the U.N. budgetary committee; no budgetary reductions in the specialized agencies; no sunset provisions for obsolete programs; no GAO access to U.N. financial data; no budgetary reform, and so on and on. It may be the right thing to do in Senator Lugar's opinion, but I expect that it is going to be the wrong thing to do, to vote for the Lugar amendment, when the tally is made in just a few minutes. Have the yeas and nays been ordered on the amendments? I believe we did that last night. I yield the remainder of my time. Vote On Amendment No. 383

Mr. HELMS. The Senator is quite welcome. Mr. President, I am very pleased with the progress that we are making today. Mr. President, just for the record, in 1985 a very distinguished Senator named Nancy Kassebaum, and Mr. Solomon on the House side, offered legislation using this very same approach. And it was in enacted into to law for the State Department Authorization Act for fiscal years 1986 and 1987. Who do you reckon was the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at that time? It was my very good friend, Senator Lugar of Indiana. If my memory serves me correctly, he supported Nancy Kassebaum, I, and all the rest of us who were interested in the same thing. The Clinton administration never requested some of the larger amounts of money involved in the so-called arrearage. Through a normal process of budgeting, the Congress overlooked paying this enormous sum for peacekeeping, principally to our allies in Europe. In fact, the nonpayment of U.N. peacekeeping expenditures in Bosnia was an explicit rebuff by the Congress to a policy, and any suggestion to the contrary is simply not so. But the Clinton administration never requested most of the funds in that budget. It never received congressional approval. The Congress to the contrary explicitly opposed these peacekeeping expenditures. But through a flawed mechanism at the United Nations the Clinton administration at that time could vote for the peacekeeping mission and then after the fact demand the Congress meet the so-called United States obligation to pay. So it is a confusing set of circumstances. But the argument that we are somehow being less than honorable in applying some demands is just not reasonable. Let's look at another thing. Do we really want to start down the path of who has spent how much on Bosnia? This is an argument which our allies are not going to win. Less than 2 years ago two Cabinet-level officials from the Clinton administration told the Foreign Relations Committee, of which Senator Lugar is a member, and I believe he was present at that time, that the cost incurred for the peacekeeping mission in Bosnia is ``going to be in excess of $1 billion, probably $1.5 billion.'' Just for the record, the United States has to date spent-- guess how much on Bosnia? Mr. President, $6.5 billion. Who is going to reimburse our military and our taxpayers for this expenditure? So where does anybody get off saying we are doing something dishonorable, or unwise, or unreasonable if we are protesting a lot of this stuff that is going on at the United Nations? Over $533 million of the so-called United States arrearages for peacekeeping is specifically related to the failed U.N. mission in Bosnia. In support of the amendment, it has been said that the United States did not have troops in Bosnia and, therefore, the United States has an obligation to pay those who did. That argument is not correct either. During the period of the U.N. effort in Bosnia, the United States maintained an aircraft carrier battle group off the coast of the former Yugoslavia, a substantial commitment of aircraft to police the no-fly zone over Bosnia, and a military hospital unit in Croatia at an estimated cost of at least $3 billion. Because the Congress prohibited President Clinton from associating our military with the U.N. disaster, the United States did not seek reimbursement for our efforts to contain hostilities in Bosnia. If we are going to start talking about paying bills for Bosnia and things like that, we can really, really have a strong argument, and I am going to insist that our military and our taxpayers get reimbursed as well. So, for me the alternative to the payment of these funds with the conditions in the reform package will not be the no strings attached approach advocated by the Lugar amendment. I will instead oppose any amendment for any reimbursement for the failed U.N. peacekeeping effort in Bosnia. And that is a debate, Mr. President, if we have it, that will be worth having. I reserve the remainder of my time.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. HELMS. I have three Senators on the floor wishing to speak. I ask them to stay as close as they can to 5 minutes. If they need to go a little over that, fine. First, Senator Hagel of Nebraska, then Senator Gregg of New Hampshire, and Senator Grams of Minnesota, all three of whom have been so helpful in the creation and production of this bill. I yield to Senator Hagel and then automatically the floor is yielded to the other two.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, just for the Record, I think I should emphasize that Judd Gregg from whom we just heard, the chairman of the Commerce, Justice, State Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, has worked with us every step of the way in crafting this U.N. reform provision. Senator Grams, from whom we just heard, is chairman of the International Operations Subcommittee of the Foreign Relations Committee, and is our congressional delegate to the United Nations. He has been so instrumental in negotiating the provisions on U.N. reform. I believe that Senator Robb is prepared to speak. If he needs an extra couple of minutes, I will yield them to him. Mr. ROBB addressed the Chair.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, if there be no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask the Senate stand in recess under the previous order.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and that any statements relating to the resolution appear at this point in the Record.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of Senate Resolution 81, and the Senate proceed to its consideration.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. I thank the Senator.