Date: 1981-12-11
Speaker: PHILIP M. CRANE (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman. I rise reluctantly in opposition to the amendment offered by my distinguished leader. the gentleman from New York. and I rise in support reluctantly of the amendment offered by my colleague. the gentleman from Oklahoma. I say reluctantly in both Instances. because I always favor cuts. particularly In giveaways and. frankly. It would be my position that we should not be Involved In IDA at all. As a result. my colleague. the gentleman from Oklahoma. who has recommended a very modest reduction here. I think. does not go far enough. For all that. I will support any proposition that reduces these levels of funding. Now. Ithink there are a couple of comments that have been made In this debate that need to be explored. We have heard. and it has come from our side. the Idea that these figures are presumably sacrosanct. that If we touch IDA funding. that somehow that Is- going to throw the delicate balance off presumably reached by Members on both sides of the aisle of t~he committee. presumably between Members of this body and the body at the other end of. this building or presumably at the level of the White House where they might conceivably contemplate vetoing this legislation if It lost $300 million in funding levels for IDA. With over $2 billion In this bill for Israel. which I totally support. and with about $11/2 billion in this bill In direct assistance for Egypt. which I totally support. I think it is totally unrealistic for anyone to believe that the difference of $300 million In an IDA giveaway funding level Is going to Jeopardize the survival of those very important. valuaLie programs. The second thing I have heard Is that somehow Mr. Reagan is keeping a scorecard. to which I would reply. that is his problem. You know. the fact Is that we are put Into somewhat of a unique position as Republicans on this debate. because we have as a party historically and consistently argued against for. eign giveaway programs. Now. the assistance to Israel Is not a foreign giveaway. The assistance to Egypt Is not a foreign giveaway. But we exercise absolutely no control over these moneys that we shovel around the world through the IDA program. It ih In no way enabling us to control foreign policy internationally when we give money In this manner where there Is no direct American control. I heard the question raised. Well. what enemies of the United States are recipients? I do not view South Yemen as a friend of the United States. I do not think Syria is particularly friendly. I do not view Iraq as particularly friendly. In short. there are nations who are beneficiaries of our largesse who I do not necessarily see as great friends of the United States. but in addition to that. take India. You know. this Is basically a giveaway program for India. There Is no nation that is a recipient of IDA funds that Is In double digit figures as far as the percentage of IDA moneys that they receive except for India. which gets better than 40 percent. Now. you would suppose that India Is a hurting nation. right? If that Is so. why 1as India Invested heavily In our national debt. drawing those high interest rates? At the expense of overburdened Americanswho are sufferIng excessive interest rates at home. who are. paying excessive rates of taxation and who In many instances cannot evbn qualify for loanswe are providing a direct giveaway to a country that Is turning around and InvestIng in American Indebtedness so as to capitalize on the high Interest rates? I think there are all kinds of moral questions involved In our actions here. I have heard the argument of my distinguished colleague.. the gentleman from Illinois . .that we cannot put enough money Into solving our problems here at home. To be. sure. we cannot. but we simultaneously cannot put enough money Into the world to solve the worlds problems. As a result. I would suggest that at a time when we are told we may be running a $100 bilion deficit In fiscal year. 1982. that this Is the -time to make some modest movement In the direction of trying to deal with some of our domestic. problems and dealing with those domestic problems will not be accomplished by continuing to provide such Irresponsible dispersal of hardearned tax dollars of. American citizens as IDA provides. Charity does indeed begin at home. One other point I would like to make is that we did riot. we. I say we noy. from A partisan perspective. did not create this program. We have as a party consistently opposed giveaways. Now. there have been exceptions to that and I know that the administration may find itself in an awkward position. to which I say. that is their problem. We In this body are the policymakers. All money bills originate here. and to the extent that power resides In this. the peoples body. It is a responsibility of the House of Representatives to make this sort of decision. Finally. the last question I would ask Is. How do you give away what you do not have?