We agree that all such countries should join that organization. Mr. Chairman, as I stated earlier, one of the strengths of the IDCP and the Panama Declaration is in its enforcement mechanisms, which are better than any other international marine resource program operating today. As noted earlier, this innovative approach provides for direct and active participation by industry and NGOs in the implementation of the program. Moreover, if H.R. 408 is passed, we will be in a strong position to ensure that countries effectively enforce the program's requirements. Enforcement of a strong dolphin protection program highlights the difference between those who support the Panama Declaration and those who oppose it.
Enforcement is always an issue.
If that occurs, the tuna fishery in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean would suffer from lax compliance, lax enforcement and minimal penalties. Our law now is based on the days when a U.S. fleet dominated the fishery and has no positive incentives for good fishing behavior, for strong enforcement of the rules, or for strong penalties for their violation that are relevant to others in the fishery. The Panama Declaration and H.R. 408 will, however, strengthen the standards, provide an incentive for adhering to them, and provide the United States with leverage to ensure that the standards are observed. The fact is, Mr. Chairman, that after four years of adhering to the MMPA's current stringent dolphin protection program and seeing no prospect of relief in terms of access to the U.S. market, the foreign fleets and governments do not have a compelling incentive to continue pursuing an effective compliance and penalty regime, and the United States has little leverage. Because of our failure to implement the Panama Declaration to date, some of the countries involved are reevaluating their participation in the program.