From bigxc@prairienet.orgFri Feb 24 04:14:13 1995
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 95 11:40:26 CST
From: Brian Redman <bigxc@prairienet.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list <conspire@prairienet.org>
Subject: Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 4 Num. 07


              Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 4  Num. 07
             ======================================
                    ("Quid coniuratio est?")
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 
THE MEXICAN RESCUE PACKAGE
 
[From The Congressional Record -- House, H1271-H1278, Feb. 6, 1995]
 
[...continued...]
 
MR. TAYLOR of Mississippi:
Again, Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that in the past 
couple of weeks this chamber has taken some steps toward getting 
our financial house in order.
 
Regardless of where you stand on it, the House has passed a line- 
item veto. The Speaker as we speak is holding a press conference 
bragging about how that is somehow going to save the House of 
Representatives from itself, but we passed it.
 
A few weeks ago we passed the balanced budget amendment, which I 
supported, because I think we have to be accountable. We passed 
earlier on the first day a resolution calling for an audit of 
every single House office and every single budget within the 
House of Representatives.
 
But going back to what Mr. Sanders says, if it makes sense and 
the Speaker will support an audit for a congressional office that 
has a budget of about $600,000, don't you think he would support 
an audit of a fund that has $35 billion in it; we think $35 
billion, because no one really knows for sure, and it is the 
taxpayers' money. It is not the Speaker's money, it is not the 
money of the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Sanders], and it is 
certainly not my money.
 
But don't the taxpayers deserve to know where it came from, where 
it is going, and don't they deserve an up-or-down vote of their 
elected representative on how this money ought to be spent, 
especially when our Nation's veterans are being told, "There is 
not enough room in the military hospitals for you;" especially 
when every university within short order in the continental 
United States is going to get a letter saying "Don't ask for as 
much money as you got last year, money is tight;" especially when 
highway funds are getting ready to get cuts; especially when 
everybody's State's budget, at least the money they receive from 
the Federal Government, is going to get cut?
 
How on Earth can we say domestically we want all you people to 
share in the pain, but if you are south of the Rio Grande, or if 
you happen to be a big shot up on Wall Street, here is a blank 
check for $20 billion, and here is $15 billion more when you need 
it? And the vote tomorrow morning is the only chance the people 
in this body are going to get to have an accounting on that.
 
I hope the Speaker will rule that this resolution is in order. 
But if he does not rule it is in order, then we have got to 
wonder whose side is he on. Is he on the side of accountability 
or is he on the side of hiding all of this from the public?
 
I had an interesting call today from an Under Secretary of the 
Treasury, and he will meet with a number of us tomorrow morning. 
Interestingly enough, he said, "You know, I can't give you all 
that information publicly." Why? I can understand a military 
secret being kept from the public, we would not want our enemies 
to know our capabilities of our weapons or troop strengths, but 
why should not the public know how their money has been invested 
and where it has been invested and what kind of return they have 
on it, and what kind of promise we have to get this money back? 
That troubles me. That is sort of like the old Washington 
mentality, "We know it all and those folks back home don't know."
 
Tomorrow morning, the Members of this body will decide who they 
are with, whether they think the people of America are smart 
enough to know and ought to know where their money is coming 
from, and where it is going, or whether they just think a couple 
of guys, the Speaker, the President, the minority leader, a 
couple of guys from the Treasury Department, whether they think 
they alone ought to have the responsibility for $35 billion. That 
is really what the vote tomorrow morning is all about.
 
No. 1, I would certainly encourage the Speaker to rule that this 
resolution is in order so that we can have a vote on it. But, No. 
2, if he decides that he will not rule it in order, then I think 
he ought to at least be man enough to give us an hour to decide, 
to make our pitch in front of the full body before any sort of a 
motion is made to table it [i.e. kill it], because the people of 
America deserve to know what in the heck is going on, and they 
deserve an opportunity to fix this problem.
 
I want to thank the gentlewoman and both gentlemen for their 
time.
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
I want to thank the gentleman from Mississippi for being the lead 
sponsor of this privileged resolution. The people of Mississippi 
should be very proud of the gentleman, an independent, strong- 
minded Member who stood up to the most powerful interests in 
America, both political and economic.
 
In response to something the gentleman said, let me just mention 
that I received a letter this week from a woman from Coral 
Gables, Florida. She supports us in our efforts to get a vote on 
this measure tomorrow. She sent this beautiful letter really 
saying the people of America understand what is going on and 
encouraging us in our efforts to get at the truth and to get the 
figures for the American public.
 
But it was very interesting. She attached a letter to her letter 
to me that had been written to her by the Chairman of the Banking 
Committee in the House 2 years ago, Congressman Henry Gonzalez. 
In this letter, and she even highlighted it in yellow ink for me, 
she quotes some of his statements which I think are so 
instructive I wanted to read them tonight, in which he said that 
during NAFTA, the NAFTA debate, that he endeavored to bring out 
that NAFTA was more than just a trade agreement. It is a free 
trade and finance agreement. And he underlined finance. And he 
was concerned that the finance and banking portions would turn 
out to be the driving force, backed by the largest banks and 
financial interests in this hemisphere. And he said NAFTA will 
have profound implications for the safety and soundness of the 
U.S. banking and financial services industries, the integrity of 
the basic banking laws of this country and counteraction against 
international money laundering.
 
Now that NAFTA has passed he said the stage may also be set for 
another savings and loan style bailout as United States bankers 
pursue risky investments in the unregulated Mexican market.
 
To his letter he then attached even more lengthy hearings that he 
has held in his committee. I just want to read one paragraph here 
by two gentlemen, Mr. Niko Valance and Mr. Andres Penaloza, who 
testified before his committee that the omission of an exchange 
rate stabilization mechanism in NAFTA was deliberate and a 
mistake. Mr. Valance argued that without an established exchange 
rate, stabilization mechanism, it is possible for foreign 
corporations to exert pressure on the Mexican Government to 
devalue the peso, thus lowering wages in terms of other 
currencies.
 
In addition, Mr. Davidson cautions that the relatively volatile 
currency in Mexico poses increased potential exchange and 
interest rate risks to U.S. financial institutions. The fact that 
these issues are not addressed in NAFTA was of considerable 
concern to many of the witnesses.
 
 
MR. DeFAZIO:
If the gentlewoman will yield, it is interesting to hear those 
statements from 2 years ago, because we have heard most recently 
from the proponents of NAFTA, the apologists for NAFTA, the 
Secretary of the Treasury and others, that no one could have 
anticipated the circumstances. But yet the gentlewoman is saying 
that letter from the chairman of the Banking Committee, a 
neighbor to Mexico who lives just over the border, who 
understands that country well and is sympathetic to the needs of 
that country, he discerned these problems. What was the date on 
that letter?
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
The date on the letter was December 6, 1993, but the respective 
sections from the *Congressional Record* were dated November 15, 
1993, remarks by Mr. Gonzalez on NAFTA, page H9661.
 
 
MR. DeFAZIO:
That is absolutely extraordinary. So perhaps a rational person 
could have anticipated that the peso was overvalued, that there 
were problems with political manipulations of the currency values 
in Mexico, and, in fact, that inextricably tying the fate of our 
economy to Mexico, which seems to be what our administration is 
telling us, was a mistake.
 
I would ask the gentlewoman if she noticed the statement in the 
Washington Post last weekend where the Speaker said there was a 
relationship between the minimum wage and the value of the peso 
in Mexico and Mexican workers, and said he was hesitant to 
support an increase in the minimum wage in the United States of 
America for people who work in this country because that would 
probably drive more jobs across the border.
 
So we have seen the value of the wages in Mexico, which were 
pitiful to begin with compared to U.S. wages, dropped by 50 
percent, and now we have to withhold any increase in the standard 
of living for the people of the United States because we might 
lose yet more manufacturing jobs to Mexico.
 
What happened to the promise of hundreds of thousands of jobs in 
America as we sold goods to the Mexican people? I am puzzled.
 
                   [...to be continued...]
 
 +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +
 
[Copies of The Congressional Record are normally available for 
viewing at your local library.]
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
     I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
If you would like "Conspiracy Nation" sent to your e-mail 
address, send a message in the form "subscribe conspire My Name" 
to listproc@prairienet.org -- To cancel, send a message in the 
form "unsubscribe conspire" to listproc@prairienet.org but with 
absolutely nothing in the subject line of the message.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt.
Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et 
  pauperem.                    -- Liber Proverbiorum  XXXI: 8-9 

 Brian Francis Redman    bigxc@prairienet.org    "The Big C"
--------------------------------------------------------------
    Coming to you from Illinois -- "The Land of Skolnick"        
--------------------------------------------------------------

