Scott Klug: “this House is supposed to debate issues, and that is what the fight on this rule is all about, the sense that many of us…”

“this House is supposed to debate issues, and that is what the fight on this rule is all about, the sense that many of us would like to debate foreign policy issues and the way that U.S. Government money gets spent on foreign policy issues, but we are never allowed to do it. Yesterday I offered an amendment to trim back funding for the International Fund for Ireland in fiscal year 1995 from $19.6 million to $10 million. A number of my colleagues think this is a terrific idea. It was originally set up in 1986 as part of a joint agreement with the European Community, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States, to help fund economic development projects on the Irish Republic-Northern Ireland border. Speaker Foley, for example, has said, ``In my judgment, this contribution represents some of the best value for U.S. dollars spent abroad under the U.S. Foreign Assistance Act.'' However, the former chairman of it, Sir Charles Brett, said that this has grown out of a ``muddled but benevolent desire to believe that money could buy peace,'' and that he did not think of the purpose or potentialities of the fund had at all been clearly worked out before it came into existence. Last year, of the $20 million that we sent to the International Fund for Ireland, $8.6 million went to encourage tourism to Ireland, including production of a golf video, construction of a theater, and pony trekking centers across the country of Ireland.”