On the recordJune 27, 1996
I wanted to just talk for a moment or two about the amendment of the distinguished Senator from Georgia dealing with NATO expansion. Obviously, the immediate step that both NATO and the United States and Central Europe have talked about is the potential of the Czech Republic, Poland, and Hungary jointly. There are other countries that wish to join as well, and in time they will be evaluated and pass the standards that have already been developed. While this amendment is put in the framework of asking a whole series of new studies, I compare it to the old-style Mississippi literacy test because it is this Senator's belief that they are designed to have the same effect. That is to take on the pretense of a study or ascertaining a fact, but in reality to simply flatly prohibit anyone from ever entering. I understand that is not the intent of the Senator from Georgia, and I do not mean to attribute that intent to him, but that is my belief of its impact. I wanted to deal specifically with one of the issues raised, and that is the cost. The amendment discusses a study done by the Congressional Budget Office as to what it might cost to defend Central Europe. Mr. President, the question is not the cost of defending Central Europe in the event of a military conflict. With all due respect, it is the difference in cost of defending Central Europe if they are part of NATO and if they are not part of NATO. You do not have to have a CPA to figure out this question.
Source
govinfo.gov




