Tom Harkin: “Again, this amendment does not preclude increased subsidies as long as we only pay our fair share. That is the point I…”

“Again, this amendment does not preclude increased subsidies as long as we only pay our fair share. That is the point I was making prior to the Senator's comments. But, again, is the Senator arguing that, again, this is going to cost a lot more than the $400 million that the administration has suggested--that this could really balloon in the years ahead? That is what I am concerned about. What is this going to cost? We are told it is only going to cost us $400 million. But now I hear the Senator saying maybe, if a country there decides to buy some expensive military hardware, we will want to jump in and subsidize our sales, so, therefore, we don't give it? I mean, nothing is given? It is not free; the taxpayers pay for it. And that bothers me. It doesn't preclude the sale of weapons; it just means it must be a fair share. Again, I probably agree with the Senator that my amendment would preclude the kind of giveaway programs that cost our taxpayers a lot of money in order to maybe help one of these countries modernize to the point where they may not need it. But as long as it is free to them and costs our taxpayers, why not give it to them?”