5 April 2000
Source:
http://usinfo.state.gov/cgi-bin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/latest&f=00040403.clt&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml
US Department of State
International Information Programs
Washington File
_________________________________
04 April 2000
(Spending bills process reduces time for other bills) (650)
By Bruce Odessey
Washington File Staff Writer
Washington -- The window of opportunity for passing export-control
legislation in the Senate may have already passed, says Senator Mike
Enzi, the bill's sponsor.
Enzi said, nevertheless, that he was still attempting to persuade
opponents of the Export Administration Act (EAA) reauthorization bill
to support it as an improvement over the status quo.
The senator answered reporters' questions April 4 after testifying
before the Senate Commerce Committee on the EAA, which would authorize
the U.S. Department of Commerce to control exports of advanced
technology such as computers and machine tools ("dual-use" items that
can have both military and civilian applications).
He said that since the previous EAA expired in 1994, members of
Congress have failed 11 times to pass a new bill, always divided
between the interests of business on one side and of national security
on the other.
Since the EAA expired, President Clinton has maintained the
export-control system by executive orders under emergency law called
the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
The bill that Senator Enzi helped shepherd through the Senate Banking
Committee, which approved it 20-0 in September, has stalled since then
because of opposition from the Republican chairmen of other
committees.
Opponents of the bill could attempt to defeat it by filibuster -- that
is, using Senate parliamentary rules to prevent the end of debate.
Enzi said that he expected enough senators -- more than the 60
required -- would vote to invoke cloture, or limit debate, if it came
to that. But he said even that option was a weak one because the
debate could still take up many hours, even weeks, of dwindling Senate
time.
The start of the annual spending bills process allows little time for
other major, controversial legislation such as the EAA, Enzi said.
In his testimony, Enzi called the inaction by Congress to reauthorize
the EAA "inexcusable and irresponsible. It has created an increasingly
dangerous situation. ...
"The U.S. has difficulty convincing other countries, even our
strongest allies, of the importance of multilateral controls when the
Congress has not passed a law authorizing the use of export controls,"
he said.
One of the bill's main opponents, Senate Governmental Affairs
Committee Chairman Fred Thompson, testified against the bill.
He criticized provisions of the bill that would decontrol items that
were available from foreign suppliers or from the U.S. mass market.
Supporters of the bill argue that these items cannot be controlled.
"The fact is, 'dual-use' items can be controlled," Thompson said. "The
keys to an effective export control system are simple: clear rules,
trained staff, state of the art resources, intensive background
checks, rigorous post-shipment verifications, and tough enforcement."
Citing alleged illegal diversions of controlled U.S. exports in China,
Thompson criticized the Clinton administration's implementation of its
regulations.
Enzi argued, however, that the EAA bill would provide the clear rules,
now absent, that Thompson said he wants.
In his testimony, Under Secretary of Commerce William Reinsch said the
administration leans toward supporting Enzi's EAA bill but has not
made any statement in support of it pending any changes to it.
He did say, however, that operation of the export-control system under
IEEPA has come under challenge in the courts, including two cases
seeking confidential business information from the Commerce
Department.
He said another challenge has arisen to the department's enforcement
of regulations against the Arab anti-Israel boycott because IEEPA does
not have specific language authorizing them.
Even if the Senate passed an EAA bill, it would still require passage
in the House of Representatives, where committees are only just now
having their first hearings on the issue in this session of Congress.
(The Washington File is a product of the Office of International
Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site:
usinfo.state.gov)