H 4870 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE May 11, 1995

Mr. Speaker, in his report to the U.N.

Security Council on January 17, 1995,

Secretary General Boutros BoutrosGhali stated; ‘‘UNMIH will consist of

civilian, military and civilian police

components under the control of my

special representative, Mr. Lakhdar

Brahimi.’’ This statement by the Secretary makes it clear he expects that

General Kinser will work under the direction of the United Nations. In his

report to Congress on February 1, 1995,

President Clinton indirectly acknowledged this by stating ‘‘the UNMIH

commander will work for the U.N. Special Representative of the Secretary

General.’’

The administration, Mr. Speaker,

will respond to my concern by stating

that General Kinzer will have operational control of all forces in Haiti.

This is a considerable improvement

over the situation in Somali, but it is

still not good enough. We all remember

Somalia, where United States soldiers

were shot down and dragged through

the streets while under a foreign command, in an event forever etched in

American minds.

Mr. Speaker, my concern is best illustrated by the current situation in

Bosnia. Lt. Gen. Rupert Smith has the

same operational control in Bosnia

that Gen. Kinzer has in Haiti. Serbian

gunners attacked Butmir last weekend

killing 10 and wounding 50. Mr. Speaker this area was well within the exclusion zone. Lt. Gen. Smith requested

NATO support enforcing the U.N. resolution protecting Sarajevo by ordering

air strikes. With the planes in the air

U.N. Special Representative Akashi rejected the request. Mr. Speaker, I ask

you how can Lt. Gen. Smith protect his

troops and their commitments when

his military judgment is overruled by a

U.N. representative.

Mr. Speaker, operational control is

simply not good enough. We must take

additional steps to assure General

Kinzer and our troops will not be overruled by the U.N. civilian command

when ordering military action.

The second concern I have deals with

the revised rules of engagement under

UNMIH. The rules of engagement approved by the Security Council are significantly more restrictive than the

rules under U.S. command of the Multi

National Force. The rules of engagement of UNMIH were mandated by the

United Nations; not by the United

States. Any changes to the current

rules of engagement must go through

the Secretary General and the Security

Council, not through Gen. Kinzer or

any other American. Mr. Speaker, how

can the administration assert U.S.

command of our forces when policy is

evolving not out of the Pentagon, but

the United Nations.

The record of U.N. ‘‘peacekeeping operations’’, Mr. Speaker is poor at best.

The situation in Bosnia illustrates

multiple scenarios were operational

control was called into question by the

U.N. Special Representative. Moreover,

we should never be forced to accept

U.N. mandates for rules of engagement

that place unreasonable restrictions on

our forces. This is not what the House

intended under the National Security

Revitalization Act. We must take action to restore the integrity and safety

of our forces. We must work quickly to

protect our forces from the action

taken by the administration, before we

are forced to accept another tragedy at

the hands of the United Nations.

fb 2045

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.

WELLER). Under a previous order of the

House, the gentleman from Illinois

[Mr. LIPINSKI] is recognized for 5 minutes.

[Mr. LIPINSKI addressed the House.

His remarks will appear hereafter in

the Extensions of Remarks.]

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a

SAVING MEDICARE

fprevious order of the House, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. FOX] is

recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to give a brief review

of how this Congress is fighting for our

senior citizens across the country.

First, we rolled back the Social Security tax increase of 1993. Second, we

have raised the income eligibility level

above $11,200 for those under 70. Over

the next 5 years, Mr. Speaker, seniors

will be able to earn income up to

$30,000 without ever having a deduction

from their Social Security. Third, Social Security is off the table, Mr.

Speaker, when it comes to this budget.

And fourth, now House Republicans are

determined to save Medicare by using

new approaches, new managements,

and new technologies to improve it,

preserve it, protect it, and eliminate

the fraud and abuse.

The Clinton Administration’s Trustees Report on Medicare warns that the

Medicare trust fund starts to go broke

in 1996 and could be bankrupt by 2002.

The current Government-controlled

Health Care Finance Administration

system has much waste and fraud. The

General Accounting Office estimates

$44 billion a year in Medicare and Medicaid fraud.

Our legislation will obviously make

sure that these changes are made so

that a strong Medicare system is what

we have restored.

We also want to give senior citizens

an incentive to fight waste and fraud

by paying them 25 percent of any waste

or fraud that they find on their bills.

We want to strengthen and empower

our senior citizens.

Republicans will also increase Medicare spending from $4,700 per retiree

today to $6,300 per retiree in 2002. That

is a 34-percent increase in Medicare

spending per retiree. There is absolutely no cut in Medicare spending.

We will preserve the current Medicare system for seniors who want it,

but no one will of course be forced into

a system they do not want. We will create a series of new choices so senior

citizens can control their own future,

Mr. Speaker. Any good ideas citizens

have would be appreciated by their

Representative on Commerce and Ways

and Means Committees as they develop

a new and improved Medicare system.

As for me, Mr. Speaker, I will be

heading a Medicare preservation task

force for the purpose of preserving, improving, and protecting our Medicare

system for our seniors.

Together we can create a Medicare

system that offers the best care at the

lowest cost with the senior citizens

having the greatest control over their

own health care. We will improve Medicare so it can be protected and saved.

previous order of the House, the gentleThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a

fwoman from North Carolina [Mrs.

CLAYTON] is recognized for 5 minutes.

[Mrs. CLAYTON addressed the House.

Her remarks will appear hereafter in

the Extensions of Remarks.]

previous order of the House, the genThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a

ftleman from California [Mr. BECERRA]

is recognized for 5 minutes.

[Mr. BECERRA addressed the House.

His remarks will appear hereafter in

the Extensions of Remarks.]

BUDGET RESOLUTION

fThe SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a

previous order of the House, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. DURBIN] is

recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Speaker, we have

heard comments today about the action of the House Budget Committee

early this morning in enacting a budget resolution which basically sets the

spending goals for Congress for the

next year. But before I address that, I

would like to remind those who are listening that just a few weeks ago on the

floor of this House of Representatives,

as part of the so-called Republican

Contract With America, the Republicans by and large with a few Democratic votes enacted a tax cut, yes, a

tax cut during a period of high Federal

deficits.

Many people, including a number of

Republicans, questioned the wisdom of

cutting taxes when in fact we are in

the red. But the Republicans were determined to do it and went ahead with

their plan. Their plan, unfortunately,

did not cut taxes primarily for middleincome and working families. No; primarily the tax breaks went to wealthy

corporations and wealthy individuals.

In fact, for 1.71 million Americans the

Republican plan will result in a $20,000

tax break.

Now you cannot give away those Federal taxes without it costing you something, and in fact over the next 7 years

that Republican tax break is going to