Senate Floor Discussion on UNFPA funding (June 25, 2002)

 

Statement by Senator Bingaman 

 

 

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, now I will focus on the U.N. population fund. Last year I voted for the Foreign Operations conference report. I thought the funds provided there were inadequate to meet our pressing needs as we talked about them, but I recognized that the roughly $15 billion would provide help to millions of desperately poor people around the world and at the same time help improve the short-term and long-term security of our own country. I voted for that bill.

   Here we are 7 months later and some of the most important funding provided in that bill, the $34 million provided for the U.N. population fund, is still sitting at the Department of Treasury. It is not helping poor people. It is not helping to make America more secure. It is just sitting at the Treasury Department.

   The United Nations Population Fund works in over 150 countries, where it helps give women around the world access to reproductive health care and family planning services as well as services to ensure safe pregnancy and delivery. This population fund, the U.N. population fund, plays a critical role in helping prevent the further spread of AIDS. The withholding of U.S. funds, which is what we as a country are engaged in right now, only exacerbates the general inadequate health of poor women worldwide. It leads to more unwanted pregnancies and to deaths of more and more women during childbirth.

   Last fall, the Bush administration provided an extra $600,000 to the U.N. population fund to help women in Afghanistan, and these funds were very welcome and were certainly used, substantially to provide safe birthing kits, which are very important. They were also used to open and upgrade maternity hospitals, which is very important.

   I want to make clear that the population fund does not perform abortions. It does not support the performing of abortions in any way. Anyone who suggests that they do has not studied the situation in depth.

   The House of Representatives passed a conference report on the fiscal year Foreign Operations bill which included $34 million for this purpose. It was an overwhelming vote. The Senate approved $40 million for this purpose, also with a lopsided vote. But now, because of hearsay, because of unsubstantiated allegations that have been disproved many times, the administration is holding up this critically important funding.

   It is the most desperate women in the world who are adversely affected by this action; it is not the United Nations itself. The women who would benefit from this funding are the most adversely affected.

   I believe very strongly that the administration has been willing to follow the law and speed the appropriation of funds for these purposes in the past. I cannot understand why we are not moving ahead this year. The emergency supplemental appropriations bill that is presently being conferenced provides an excellent opportunity for us to resolve this issue.

   I urge the Senate conferees to ensure that language included in the supplemental passed in the Senate be included in the conference report. That language requires that this money, the $34 million that was appropriated last December, be released unless the President certifies by July 10 that doing so would violate U.S. law.

   This is fair. More important, it is the intent of Congress. It is the law of the land. I urge the administration to follow through in the conference.

   I will be glad to yield to my colleague, but I believe my time has expired.

 

   Mr. REID. I say to the Chair, this half hour is under the control of the Democrats. It is the minority's time this morning so we have whatever time we need, I say to my friend from New Mexico.

   I ask my friend two questions. The first is on pension reform. The Senator is the leader of a task force appointed by the majority leader. I acknowledge the fine job he has done.

   Would the Senator indicate if it is true that a lot of attention has been focused on pensions and how employees are treated as a result of the Enron debacle?

 

   Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response to the question of my friend from Nevada, that is exactly right. I think the entire country was appalled to see what happened to the pension savings, the retirement savings of various Enron employees when that company collapsed. Accordingly, we have spent a lot of time discussing how to ensure that these funds that are in a pension fund for a worker can be safeguarded so we can avoid this situation in the future. That part of the problem has gotten a lot of rhetorical attention, at least. We have still not taken the necessary actions to solve it. I hope we are able to do that in the next few weeks as we consider the legislation that has come out of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and also legislation that is, I understand, going to be marked up in the Finance Committee.

 

   Mr. REID. Would the Senator also acknowledge what people are saying, that it seems so unfair that people who were working at Enron, who weren't so-called bosses, wound up with very little, whereas the bosses, the corporate leaders, ended up with millions and millions of dollars? Isn't that something they are talking about in New Mexico?

 

   Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response to the question, it certainly is something that is a great concern in my State. I think people tend to lump all these issues together, understandably, because they are all part of a very much larger problem. One is the inadequate protection of the retirement savings of workers. Another issue is the inequity in compensation between the top officials of some of these corporations and the average worker. A third is the very unfair severance package arrangements that are made when some of these companies go bankrupt.

   How does it happen that the top officials wind up getting severance packages, in spite of the financial difficulties of the company, while the people at the very bottom get virtually nothing?

   Mr. REID. Madam President, let me ask the Senator from New Mexico, the chairman of the task force, it is true, is it not, that one of the things you are working on is legislation in conjunction with the committees of jurisdiction to make sure that in the future when this takes place there will be equity as far as employees are concerned?

 

   Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response to that, we are trying to figure out what can be done in this regard. We essentially do not think Government should be dictating at what level companies compensate workers. But we do think the various laws we pass in Congress should be written in such a way that we don't provide additional benefits for extremely lavish compensation to high officials and inadequate compensation to people who are working every day in the bowels of these companies.

 

   Mr. REID. I also say to the Senator, based on the second part of the statement he made, I congratulate, commend, and applaud the Senator from New Mexico for bringing to the Senate's attention something that has been going on now for several years; that is, the inability of the United Nations to help poor women around the world with just basic information and educational opportunities as to why they get pregnant, and as to why they are not taken care of when they are pregnant. But does the Senator acknowledge that this has turned into some abortion issue that has nothing to do with family planning on the international scene? Is that true?

 

   Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, my response to that question is the Senator from Nevada is exactly right. I think there is important assistance that the overwhelming majority of the House and Senate would like to see provided worldwide to these poor women who need assistance to deal with their very real issues of giving birth and planning their families for the future. We have appropriated money. That money has been appropriated now for 7 or 8 months, and it is sitting at the Department of the Treasury. I don't understand why they can't go ahead and spend that money as it was intended. I hope very much that happens in the very near future.

 

   Mr. REID. I say to my friend from New Mexico, if someone is really concerned about abortion, it would seem to me they should consider ways to help women be educated so there are less unintended pregnancies. Isn't that one of the main goals of international family planning?

 

   Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response to that question, that is clearly my understanding of the main goal of international family planning. It is a worthwhile goal. I think clearly we do not want desperately poor families and desperately poor women to find themselves with unwanted pregnancies because of lack of information. What we are trying to do is get assistance to this population fund so that we can provide good information and assistance to these desperately poor women.

   Mr. REID. Will the Senator also acknowledge that where we have had international family planning in the past healthier babies are born and less babies are born? Is that a fair statement?

 

   Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, again, in response to the question, I believe there is a record of success with many of these programs, and with many of the efforts that have been made to this population fund. I think it makes good sense for the United States as the largest, most prosperous country in the world to participate with other countries--with our friends and allies around the world--in supporting this effort. That is all we are trying to do. Our support is not overwhelming as compared to a lot of countries. But it is important, and we should provide it.

 

   Mr. REID. I also ask my friend, is it not true that the Congress, in good faith, has appropriated these moneys, and now they are being held up by the administration?

 

   Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response, that is certainly my information. My information is that the money was appropriated, and that it was appropriated last December when we passed the foreign operations appropriations bill. There is no reason that money should not be released for the intended use. That is what the law requires. I hope very much that the administration will move ahead. We are fast approaching the date when we are going to do another foreign operations appropriations bill. I don't think we serve the intended purpose by just delaying and delaying the use of these funds.

 

   Mr. REID. It is fair to say, is it not, that each day that goes by there are more people around the world and more women around the world who have this lack of information and unintended pregnancies and complicated pregnancies that could be helped by virtue of these moneys if, in fact, they were coming forward.

 

   Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, again, in response to the question, I think it is easy for us to believe, when we are sitting here in a nice air-conditioned Senate Chamber, that there is no urgency and think these are all sort of theoretical problems out there and there is no urgency in getting about trying to deal with them. I think the reality is very different for a lot of the women to whom my friend in Nevada is referring.

   The reality is they have to either have assistance now or live with the consequences of not having the assistance. For that reason, I think it is very important we move ahead immediately.

 

   Mr. REID. Madam President, I yield the remainder of our time to the Senator from Montana, Mr. Baucus.

 

   The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator is recognized for 4 minutes.

   Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, parliamentary inquiry: I wanted to know how much time there is in morning business, and if there is any time

for the Republican side in morning business time.

 

   The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. There are 4 minutes remaining. There is no time reserved for the minority side.

 

   Mr. WARNER. Madam President, parliamentary inquiry: I would like to request of our leader--I am endeavoring to reach Senator Levin. I understand he will soon be available to give me some guidance as to what he desires as Chair. We are anxious to move ahead on this bill. I realize certain of our colleagues have extremely sensitive matters to speak to--the tragic wildfires experienced out West and the Amtrak situation. I am not sure what my good friend from Montana is going to address. But, at the same time, I am hopeful that with the support of our leadership, we can outline a course of action today so the Kennedy amendment--I spoke to Senator Kennedy late last night--can be voted on at a time that is convenient, preceded by, say, maybe 30 minutes of final remarks by Senator Kennedy and our side; that we are able to go to the missile defense amendment, which I shared with the chairman last night; and, that we have today at least, say, 4 hours of debate on that with the hope we will vote this afternoon somewhere around 5 o'clock.

 

   Mr. REID. Madam President, I would say to my friend, the

   comanager of this bill, that Senator Levin isn't due here until 10:30. We are supposed to take up the Defense bill at 10:30.

 

   Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I am not hearing the Senator.

 

   Mr. REID. That is when we are supposed to take up the Defense bill. He will be here at or about 10:30. We, through staff, asked last night if the Republicans wanted any time for morning business. They said they didn't want any; they have a conference this morning. That is why the one-half hour was devoted to the Democrats. Had they wanted more time, we would have come in one-half hour earlier.

   I ask unanimous consent that--we used all of Senator Baucus' time in this colloquy--Senator Baucus will be recognized for up to 5 minutes to speak as if in morning business.

   I say to my friend from Virginia if Senator Hutchison and Senator Craig wish time, I am sure Senator Levin would have no problem giving them 5 minutes each. Is that fair enough?

 

   Mr. WARNER. I think that is fair enough.

 

   Mr. REID. Following the statement of the Senator from Montana, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Texas be recognized for 5 minutes, and following her the Senator from Idaho be recognized for 5 minutes.

 

   The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?

 

   Mr. WARNER. Reserving the right to object, I think that is a very good reconciliation in the interest of time. But let us say we would return to the bill at 10 minutes to----

 

   Mr. REID. Why don't we return when we finish the morning business, which would be about a quarter till?

 

   Mr. WARNER. That is fine.

 

   Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, reserving the right to object--I ask the indulgence of my friend--if I could have about 7 1/2 minutes.