Tom Harkin

I appreciate the correction of the Senator from West Virginia. Back to my point; the Senator from Delaware is right. If this amendment had been in effect 40 years ago, we couldn't have been in Greece. But that was during the cold war. That…

I want to briefly touch on an issue the Senator from Connecticut mentioned, and that is lobbying by defense contractors. At the outset, I want to say that I have not been contacted by any either. I don't know that my staff has; at least…

Is the Senator then saying that the cost of this is going to escalate greatly in the future, that it is not $400 million, it is going to be something much above that because we are going to subsidize a lot of sales? Is that what the…

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…

I think all we are saying is that the other members of NATO have to be as fully involved financially in upgrading and modernizing their force structure as the taxpayers of this country. I basically would submit that this amendment is more…

That is right. Exactly. Why is that? Because England, France, and all of these countries' forces are modernized. They are fully integrated into NATO. Those are the three countries that are going to have a lot of money for interoperability…

I am talking only about subsidies to the national military budgets, the national expenses of those three countries to meet their national commitments.

I will not argue constitutional principles with the Senator from West Virginia, I know that. But treaties under--I forget the article--treaties become the law of the land.

Again, I respond to the Senator from Delaware. Again, what he is basically arguing for is giving a blank check to the American people. I disagree with the Senator on the point that he just said about conventional structure. We are talking…

After a treaty is signed. And keep in mind, treaties override the Constitution of the United States. Once those decisions are made, we are going to have to meet, as the Senator from Virginia said, our moral obligations.

I think the analogy that the Senator from Delaware uses is totally wrong. Let me provide, I think, a more correct one. This amendment in no way limits how much total defense dollars we can provide to these three countries--not at all. It…

I believe it is important now to limit our taxpayers' exposure rather than a blank check. If there is an emergency in the future, if something does happen, yes, the Appropriations Committee will respond. The Foreign Relations Committee and…

I will respond with a couple of things. First of all, I have to ask again the question: Can these three members, these three nations, can they afford membership in NATO or can they not? Can they afford to bear the burden or can they not…

Again, I think the arguments, if I might respectfully say so, of the Senator from Delaware are arguments that we would have heard on the Senate floor in the 1950s and the 1960s and the 1970s. The Senator's arguments pertain to a world that…

Yes, out of our taxpayer dollars, subsidies to those countries. But it has nothing to do with our military expenditures for our nation's forces stationed in Europe.

It is talking about the subsidy. It is not talking about what we spend ourselves in terms of our own military. It is talking about what subsidy we provide to these countries.

Well, wait a second. I do not think the answer is yes. What GAO said is NATO enlargement could entail costs in addition to those countries in the Partnership for Peace, for example, others who may not be invited to NATO but because of the…

I thank both Senators from North Dakota for their strong voices and strong support for the crop insurance program. To sum it up, our farmers, our refugees, our asylees, should not be penalized because of the delay on the part of the House…

I would like to speak just for a few minutes about the issue of the NATO expansion that has come to the floor today. I am hopeful at the outset that even though the bill has been laid down, the Senate will be given time for due discussion…

Basically, we see this figure bandied about that it is going to cost $1.5 billion. That is common costs. There are other national costs to which we have committed to subsidize. Already, just in the past 2 years, the figures that we have…

I am pleased today to join many of my colleagues in support of the ``Women's Health Research and Prevention Amendments of 1998.'' This legislation, introduced by my distinguished colleague, Senator Bill Frist, and cosponsored by nearly all…

For example, I want to read a couple of things from the article. It says: House Majority Leader Dick Armey has thrown his weight behind a bill that would ban human cloning permanently. ``This is the right thing to do, at the right time…

Last evening, President Clinton did the right thing, did the right thing for this country and did the right thing for our farmers and for people who live all across rural America

First, let me commend my friend and colleague, Senator Kennedy, for his long-time commitment and leadership on this issue, among many others, but especially on this issue

I think that gives us some hope that we can work together here, we can negotiate out some differences, and we can come up with a bill that the President will sign and that will, indeed, benefit our producers.