H 5388 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 23, 1995

you ask people if we spend too much on

foreign affairs, in one recent poll, 79

percent said yes. The second question

was, how much do you think we should

be spending, and they consistently said

about 5 percent, and indeed we are

spending 1 percent.

There will be honest debates as to

whether we are giving too much support for one country or another, but

the fact of the matter is it is cheaper

to support nations in peace than it is

to buy more bombers and missiles, and

I believe that we are on the right

track.

CHANGE IN STUDENT LOAN

fPROGRAM

(Mr. POMEROY asked and was given

permission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, I think

it is dead wrong to turn our back on

our Nation’s students by eliminating

the in-school interest deferral on student loans. The student loan program

is not for children from wealthy families. It is for those who qualify, namely

those from middle- and low-income

backgrounds.

Watching Members of Congress my

age who I know back when they were

students took advantage of these programs now vote to repeal them to give

tax breaks to their rich friends makes

me sick. I think it is dead wrong for

those who took advantage of programs

now to vote to essentially pull up the

ladder and deprive those who follow of

the same opportunities that they had.

This hit to student loans comes at a

time when the importance of education

has never been greater, but the cost

unfortunately has never been higher.

We should not get to a point where our

college campuses bear a sign, ‘‘Only

the wealthy need apply.’’ But unfortunately the Republican plan financing

tax breaks by eliminating student loan

interest deferral brings us much closer

to that sorry state.

MORE ON THE STUDENT LOAN

fPROGRAM

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE asked and was

given permission to address the House

for 1 minute and to revise and extend

her remarks.)

Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I

spent some time in the district talking

to and working with students who simply wanted an opportunity to be educated.

I rise this morning to read a letter

just received from Eric Lee Nickell, a

Houston constituent of mine and a student at the University of Houston.

He writes:

DEAR REPRESENTATIVE LEE: I am a university student who is obtaining an education

with the aid of subsidized student loans. I am

afraid that this may not be possible for much

longer, judging from what I have heard of

the rescission bills currently working their

way through both Houses. My hope and the

hope of many thousands of students is that

you will consider the potential leaders and

scientists and doctors this country will lose

if they cannot obtain an education. Please

vote against any cut to student aid. Our future depends on you.

Mr. Speaker, considering the fact

that Republicans plan to eliminate 18.7

billion dollars’ worth of student loan

interest deferral will end up costing

students about $5,000 apiece, I want to

promise Eric that you will have my

support. I will fight against the loss of

student loans. Finally, I think Eric’s

letter speaks for itself.

fb 1240

GOP SACRIFICES FAMILIES FOR

THE WEALTHY

(Ms. DELAURO asked and was given

permission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. DELAURO. Mr. Speaker, Republicans are asking working families to

sacrifice in order to pay for their tax

giveaway to the wealthy. The GOP cut

in student loans will result in the largest increase in college costs in history

for working families—families like the

Baxters of West Haven, CT.

The Baxter children, Heather, Joe,

Heidi, Scott, and Donnie come from a

single parent family. Their mother,

Gail, has already worked to put one

daughter through college, and, next

fall, her four remaining children will

all be attending college. And, yes, Gail

and her children rely on student loans

to help pay tuition.

The Republican plan to cut student

loans by $18.6 billion will increase the

cost of a college education by an average of $5,000 per student. For the Baxters, that is an increase of $20,000. The

Republican budget asks the Baxters to

pay $20,000 more, so the richest 1 percent of Americans can pay $20,000 less.

That is wrong.

AMERICAN OVERSEAS INTERESTS

ACT IS MIXED BAG

f(Mr. PALLONE asked and was given

permission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, the

American Overseas Interests Act legislation that we will be debating today is

a mixed bag at best. In some respects

the bill represents a retreat from

America’s role of promoting democracy

in those lands that were formerly part

of the Soviet Union.

The bill authorizes $145 million less

than the administration’s fiscal year

1996 request and $76 million less than

the 1995 level. We need to draw a distinction between Russia and the other

Soviet Republics. After spending billions guarding against Moscow’s aggressive expansionism during the cold

war, I believe it is still an important

American interest to continue promoting the transition to democracy in the

former captive nations of the Soviet

Union.

Also I do want to express praise for

one provision of the bill included by

the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr.

SMITH], known as the Humanitarian

Aid Corridor Act. That act would withhold U.S. aid to nations which are

blocking congressionally approved humanitarian assistance to other countries. It requires all of U.S. aid recipients to allow unencumbered delivery of

humanitarian assistance.

The Republic of Turkey has imposed

a blockade on the neighboring Republic

of Armenia, preventing delivery of

food, medicine and other humanitarian

relief supplies from reaching Armenia.

Much of this aid originates in the United States.

This Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act

would prevent countries like Turkey

from receiving aid if they prevent this

aid from getting through.

ETHICS COMMITTEE

STONEWALLING

f(Mr. VOLKMER asked and was given

permission to address the House for 1

minute.)

Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Speaker, here we

go again, I am shocked and dismayed

that by a straight party line vote the

House Ethics Committee failed to appoint an independent counsel in the

case of our Speaker, NEWT GINGRICH. It

is obvious to me the majority members

of our Ethics Committee have made

the decision to stonewall this case.

Why? Well, Mr. Speaker, could it be because the chairwoman of the committee nominated Mr. GINGRICH to be

Speaker and also contributed to his

campaign?

Could it be that two majority members of the committee are involved in

GOPAC either as a contributor or a recipient? Could it be that one majority

member is a potential witness in one of

the cases against the Speaker involving influence peddling?

I remind my colleagues that Speaker

GINGRICH himself said an independent

counsel is required for any investigation into the position of the Speaker. I

quote ‘‘this investigation has to meet

an higher standard of public accountability.’’. The clouds are darkening

over our Capitol and can only be lifted

with the appointment of an independent counsel. The stonewalling must

PERMISSION FOR SUNDRY COMstop now, Mr. Speaker.

MITTEES AND SUBCOMMITTEES

fTO SIT TODAY DURING THE 5-

MINUTE RULE

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the following committees and their subcommittees be

permitted to sit today while the House

is meeting in the Committee of the

Whole House under the 5-minute rule.

The Committee on Agriculture; the

Committee on Banking and Financial

Services; the Committee on Commerce;