Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. All right.

Mr. PERCY. If the Senator will yield, would it be possible to have a 10-minute rollcall on any of those rollcall votes?

Mr. BROOKE. Could we back them up and have the three-well, we have to vote on the substitute.

Mr. CASE. Why not vote now and then we can have the discus sion. [Laughter.]

Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I would suggest, if we can get an agreement on the time, we do that as of now.

Mr. BROOKE. All right.

Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Thirty minutes to the two Senators, the Senator from Massachusetts and the Senator from Idaho, and 20 minutes to the Senator from Maryland, on the three amendments and the substitute by Messrs. Brooke and McClure respectively. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Leahy). Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Now, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on the disposition of those amendments there be a time limitation on Mr. Helms' amendment.

Mr. HELMS. One hour, equally divided, and we will not use that. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. All right.

One hour, equally divided, with respect to the amendment by Mr. Helms.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be a 30-minute time limitation with respect to an amendment by Mr. Curtis, to be equally divided.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I would prefer not to take any more time and to let the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts proceed.

Mr. MCCLURE. Would the Senator from West Virginia yield for a question?

Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I beg the Senator's pardon.

Mr. McCLURE. Would it be possible to ask unanimous consent that it be in order to order the rollcall votes on those reservations which the Senator from Massachusetts and the Senator from Idaho are going to offer so that we can get that ordered now?

Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to ask for the yeas and nays on the amendments by Mr. Brooke and Mr. McClure and on any tabling motions that may be made with one show of seconds at this time.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays were ordered.

UP UNDERSTANDING NO. 26

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amended version of my understanding regarding foreign assistance in Panama and ask for its immediate consideration.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The understanding will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Brooke), for himself and Mr. Harry F. Byrd, Jr., proposes and unprinted amendment understanding numbered 26.

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the understanding be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The understanding is as follows:

Before the period at the end of the resolution of ratification, insert a comma and the following: "subject to the understanding, which is to be made a part of the instrument of ratification, that nothing in the Treaty, in the Annex or Agreed Minute relating to the Treaty, or in any other agreement relating to the Treaty obligates the United States to provide any economic assistance, military grant assistance, security supporting assistance, foreign military sales credits or international military education and training to the Republic of Panama".

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, the change from the original understanding is technical in nature, altering the term "foreign military credit sales" to read "foreign military sales credits."

This understanding states that the United States has no obligation to provide any form of foreign assistance to Panama as a result of these treaties. The foreign assistance issue is to be handled independent of the treaties and their associated documents. In addition, the intent also is to indicate to Panama that no U.S. commitment exists regarding foreign assistance as a result of the negotiations that led to these treaties.

As the Senate has already agreed to an identical understanding during its consideration of the Neutrality Treaty, I do not believe there is any need to go into the matter in any depth. I understand that the floor manager of the treaty is prepared to accept this understanding and, therefore, I yield back the remainder of my

time.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, the understanding to which the Senator addresses himself is the understanding that was added to the previous treaty. It is completely consistent and consonant not only with representations made to us by the Executive but also with our full understanding of the situation, and we therefore are happy to accept that understanding, for the reasons that the Senator has stated in his presentation with respect to it.

Mr. BROOKE. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. SARBANES. Was time assigned to the reservation, Mr. Presi

dent?

Mr. BROOKE. I am working under a time agreement.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland has a total of 20 minutes.

Mr. SARBANES. With respect to all the reservations?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. With respect to all the reservations.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it.

Mr. SARBANES. Is it possible to go to a vote at this point on this amendment to the articles of ratification in the form of an understanding, without yielding back our time that is allocated for debate on other reservations?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If the Senator is talking about a voice

vote, yes.

Mr. SARBANES. I am prepared to go to a vote. If the Chair will put the question, I think we are prepared to vote.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the reservation offered by the Senator from Massachusetts.

The reservation was agreed to

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the reservation was agreed to.

Mr. BROOKE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

UP RESERVATION NO. 27

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment to the resolution of ratification and ask for its immediate consideration.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Brooke) proposes an unprinted reservation numbered 27 to the resolution of ratification.

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the reservation be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The reservation is as follows:

Before the period at the end of the resolution of ratification, insert a comma and the following: "Subject to the Understanding, which is to be made a part of the instrument of ratification, that before the first date of the three-year period begin ning on the date of entry into force of this Treaty and before each three-year period following thereafter, the two parties shall agree upon the specific levels and quality of services, as are referred to in Article III, Paragraph 5 of the Treaty, to be provided during the following three-year period and, except for the first three-year period, on the reimbursement to be made for the costs of such services, such services to be limited to such as are essential to the effective functioning of such canal operating areas and such housing areas referred to in Article III, Paragraph 5 of the Treaty. If payments made under Article III, Paragraph 5 of the Treaty for the preceding three-year period, including the initial three-year period, exceed or are less than the actual costs to the Republic of Panama for supplying, during such period, the specific levels and quality of services agreed upon, then the Commission shall deduct from or add to the payment required to be made to the Republic of Panama for each of the following three years one-third of such excess or deficit, as the case may be. There shall be an independent and binding audit, conducted by an auditor mutually selected by both parties, of any costs of services disputed by the two parties pursuant to the reexamination of such costs provided for in this Under standing."

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, this understanding relates to the $10 million annual payment to Panama for services it is to provide to the Commission as anticipated in paragraph 5 of article III of the treaty. It replaces the previous understanding I submitted for Senate consideration on the matter. I am joined by Senator Harry F. Byrd, Jr., in offering this understanding.

As became apparent during hearings on this treaty and our consideration of it during the past month, a great deal of ambiguity existed regarding this payment for services. Estimates of the actual costs of the anticipated services in each of the initial 3 years the treaty would be in effect ranged from $4.4 million to $10 million or more. No provision existed in the treaty to insure that the quality of the services would be commensurate with need and stipulated payment. Nor was any attention given to establishing a procedure

y which differences between the two parties regarding cost and uality of services could be settled in a reasonable way. To ignore bese obvious problems would have been to tolerate unnecessarily ne of several tension-producing deficiencies in this treaty. We hould not do so in this instance. Thus, I am offering this undertanding which, hopefully, will accomplish the following:

First, it will provide for prior agreement between the two parties s to the levels and quality of services that are to be provided by Panama to the Commission. Such prior agreement will be required before the beginning of each 3-year period set forth in paragraph 5 of article III.

Second, it will limit the services to be paid to those essential to che effective functioning of the canal operating areas and housing areas to be operated by the Commission. This limitation is necessary to avoid a situation where necessary services might be purchased during the first 3-year period the treaty would be in effect if ratified in order to avoid any controversy with Panama over whether or not the full $10 million annual payment had been earned.

Third, it provides for a mechanism by which an excess payment or an underpayment to Panama could be adjusted for in a succeeding 3-year period. Specifically, if an excess payment over actual cost of services took place in any of the first 3 years the treaty was in effect, the rate of payment during the next 3-year period would be reduced by the amount of the excess. Conversely, if an underpayment resulted a similarly appropriate adjustment would be possible. This satisfies the principal of reciprocity that should characterize treaties and insures that the United States will receive appropriate value for dollar expended.

Fourth, it provides that any disagreement between the United States and Panama regarding the legitimate costs of the services actually provided would be settled by a binding audit by an independent auditor agreed upon by both parties. This should reduce the potential for lasting friction because of disagreements on this matter.

Mr. President, if the treaty is ratified, it will be important that we have taken every reasonable step to remove as many obstacles as possible to a successful U.S. effort to manage the Canal over the next 21-year period. This understanding is offered with that in mind. It imposes a necessary discipline on both parties.

I yield to the distinguished floor manager of the bill, and I reserve the remainder of my time.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, the proposal which the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts has made is an evenhanded one. It addresses that consideration, in that the audit which will be made provides and the provision covers an excess or a deficit. Therefore, I think the Senator has come forward with an evenhanded proposal.

He also directs himself to the very important question of specific levels and quality of service.

We are prepared to accept the understanding which the Senator from Massachusetts has offered.

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, I have asked for the yeas and nays, but I ask unanimous consent that a vote on that understanding

follow immediately the vote to be taken on the substitute motion by the Senator from Idaho (Mr. McClure) and, if necessary, on the reservation I have offered, to which that substitute will be offered. Mr. SARBANES. Did I correctly understand the Senator to say it would be immediately after?

Mr. BROOKE. Yes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair is a little confused. Is the Senator from Massachusetts asking for a voice vote on the reservation he has just discussed?

Mr. BROOKE. No. The yeas and nays have already been ordered. I am asking unanimous consent that the vote not occur until imme diately after a vote taken on the substitute motion of the Senator from Idaho (Mr. McClure) to the reservation that I will offer at this time; and, in fact, if the substitute motion is not agreed to, that there immediately follow a vote on the reservation.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

UP RESERVATION NO. 28

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, I send to the desk a reservation in the form of an amendment to the resolution of ratification and ask for its immediate consideration.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The reservation will be stated.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Brooke) proposes an unprinted reservation numbered 28.

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the reservation be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The reservation is as follows:

Before the period at the end of the resolution of ratification, insert a comma and the following: "Subject to the reservation that exchange of the instruments of ratification shall not be effective earlier than March 31, 1979, and the treaties shall not enter into force prior to October 1, 1979, unless legislation necessary to imple ment the provisions of the Panama Canal Treaty shall have been enacted by the Congress of the United States of America before March 31, 1979."

Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, this reservation relates to the link age between the coming into effect of the Panama Canal Treaty, if indeed it does come into effect, and the necessary implementing legislation. This present version of the reservation replaces reservation No. 12 that I previously offered on this matter. Senator Heinz and Senator Harry F. Byrd, Jr., also are sponsors of this reservation.

My original reservation would have forestalled the exchange of the instruments of ratification until such time as the appropriate implementing legislation had been enacted by Congress. However, upon further reflection, I have come to the conclusion that it makes sense to indicate certain time disciplines regarding the pas sage of the implementing legislation to which we will seek to adhere. What is suggested in this resolution would provide ample opportunity for us to act in a timely but not precipitous manner. By doing so, we could limit apprehensions that even after Senate ratification of the treaty, if we decide to take that action, Congress

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »