	id AA16553; Wed, 15 Feb 95 02:55:54 CST
Subject: Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 3 Num. 98


              Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 3  Num. 98
             ======================================
                    ("Quid coniuratio est?")
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 
THE MEXICAN RESCUE PACKAGE
 
[From The Congressional Record -- House, H1271-H1278, Feb. 6, 1995]
 
[...continued...]
 
MR. BROWN of Ohio:
You know, as bad as we thought, as bad an idea as we thought the 
bailout was 3 weeks ago, in the last few days, with Alan 
Greenspan and the Federal Reserve raising interest rates in this 
country, it only exacerbates the problem in Mexico. If you 
remember 2 weeks ago, 3 weeks ago, Mr. Greenspan was all over the 
Congress, lobbying, talking to Republicans, talking to Democrats, 
meeting with Speaker Gingrich, talking to the President, 
everybody he could, about this Mexican bailout on the one hand. 
Then on the other hand we began to hear stories that he was 
leaking out that the Federal Reserve is about to increase 
interest rates.
 
When that happens, when interest rates are increased in this 
country, which happened last week, in addition to what it does to 
home buying, homebuilding, the cost of credit, the costs to 
borrowed money for small businesses, all the hurt that puts on 
the economy, what it does with the Mexico situation is simply 
pull the rug out from under this whole bailout situation whereas 
the price, the cost, as the dollar gets stronger, the peso by 
definition gets weaker, which means that the $16 billion or so 
that Mexico already owes back to western investors gets more 
expensive so that it decreases the chance of pay back. It means 
those loan guarantees and direct loans may in fact not be paid 
back, but increases the chances there, and at the same time it 
undercuts the whole ability of the Mexican Government to get back 
on its feet in the Mexican society.
 
It simply does not make sense that the Federal Reserve did both 
of those things, or the Federal Reserve Chairman did both of 
those things the same month.
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
If I might reclaim my time just for a second, does it not 
interest you that over the last year the Federal Reserve of our 
country raised interest rates six times, and during that period 
of time, of course, it became more lucrative for funds to be 
drawn into the United States and away from Mexico? This was all 
going on at the same time. We were asking ourselves why are 
interest rates going up in the United States when there is no 
inflation.
 
 
MR. BROWN of Ohio:
American investors were benefiting. There were incentive for 
American investors to pull their money out, and that is what 
accelerated the whole downward plunge of the peso. You couple the 
politics of NAFTA, that the Mexican Government and the American 
Government did not want any peso devaluation during NAFTA, the 
Mexican government did not want any peso devaluation, although it 
could have been done in small increments during their own 
Presidential elections. So the politics of Mexico and the easy 
availability of money sent to Mexico, and the American bankers 
and American investors sending their money down there, the 
Mexicans glad to receive it, certainly with the NAFTA stamp of 
approval, yes, our Government was saying it is O.K. to invest 
there, all played into this.
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
If I might yield time to the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. 
Sanders].
 
 
MR. SANDERS:
I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio. We are back together again, 
right.
 
 
MR. DeFAZIO:
After hours.
 
 
MR. SANDERS:
Fourteen months ago many of us, all of us, and many other of our 
colleagues told the American people that we thought the NAFTA 
agreement was going to be a disaster. On the other side we had 
the President, we had the Republican leadership, we had virtually 
every major corporate newspaper in America, who were telling us 
what a wonderful deal NAFTA was going to be for American workers, 
for Mexican workers, and for the people in general.
 
Fourteen months have come and gone, and sadly, sadly, virtually 
every concern that we had at that time has proven to be true. And 
after the 14 months, instead of our friends who supported NAFTA 
coming forward and saying, "O.K., we admit it, we made a mistake, 
we were wrong, everybody is wrong, they were wrong"; but instead 
of coming forward and saying they were wrong, what they now come 
forward and say is, "Hey, we need a $40-plus billion loan 
guarantee to Mexico, because NAFTA has been such a success that 
the Mexican economy is disintegrating, their Government is 
extremely unstable, and therefore, at a time when small business 
in America is in trouble and we do not offer them loan 
guarantees, family farmers in America, we do not offer them loan 
guarantees, we have a $200 billion deficit."
 
And what irritates me very much is every single day on the floor 
of this House, Members of Congress say, "Hey, we have to cut back 
on Social Security, on Medicare, on Medicaid, on nutrition 
programs for hungry children and hungry senior citizens. We have 
got to do that." We do not have enough money. And yet apparently 
there is not quite that concern for putting $40 billion of 
taxpayers' money at risk for this bailout.
 
The first point I would like to make this evening in terms of 
this bailout is it is very interesting who is for it and who is 
against it. Polls indicate, I think the latest poll I saw is that 
some 80 percent of the American people are against this bailout. 
Maybe some of the viewers would say, well, obviously all the 
Mexican people are for this bailout.
 
Wrong. Polls indicate, as I understand it, that a healthy 
majority of Mexicans are against the bailout because they are 
concerned about the sovereignty of their nation.
 
 
MR. BROWN of Ohio:
If the gentleman will yield, including one of the major 
presidential candidates in Mexico who has come out against and 
spoken at a rally of literally tens of thousands of Mexicans, I 
would add.
 
 
MR. SANDERS:
So you have the American people against the bailout, you have the 
Mexican people against the bailout. And one of the frustrations 
that all of us share is that we know that, if that vote had come 
to the floor of the House, the U.S. Congress, House and Senate, 
Republicans and Democrats, and the only independent, were all 
against the bailout.
 
 
MR. TAYLOR of Mississippi:
How did the gentleman vote on this issue?
 
 
MR. SANDERS:
Well, that is a very interesting question. I was about to vote no 
for the bailout. Unfortunately, it never came to the floor of the 
House. I have not yet voted on it.
 
 
MR. TAYLOR of Mississippi:
How did Ms. Kaptur vote on the issue?
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
On this bailout issue, we have not had a chance to vote on it.
 
 
MR. TAYLOR of Mississippi:
How did the Speaker of the House vote on the issue?
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
The Speaker of the House has not had a chance to vote on this 
matter.
 
 
MR. TAYLOR of Mississippi:
The chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, the chairman of 
the Committee on Appropriations?
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
The chairman of the Committee on Appropriations I spoke with the 
other day. There has been no bill referred to his committee. 
There is not a bill that has been brought up here to the 
Congress.
 
 
MR. TAYLOR of Mississippi:
Twenty billion dollars of American tax dollars, and there was not 
a vote in the Congress of the United States. Is that what you are 
telling me?
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
There has not been a vote here in the Congress of the United 
States.
 
 
MR. TAYLOR of Mississippi:
When will Congress get a chance to vote on this?
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
We were trying very hard to get a vote, hopefully tomorrow. We 
introduced a bill on Friday. Because the Speaker will not bring 
up the bill, we have to use very unusual procedures to force a 
bill on the floor, which we expect will come up tomorrow sometime 
after 11 o'clock, under very prescribed rules where we will have 
very little opportunity to debate. But we have not been able to 
get any hearings in the committees of any significance. We have 
not been able to get a bill. The executive branch did this 
completely on their own, without the Congress being involved.
 
 
MR. TAYLOR of Mississippi:
Ms. Kaptur, is it really fair to say the executive branch did 
this entirely on their own? Let us go back the 13 months that my 
friend Mr. Sanders made reference to. What was then minority 
whip, now Speaker of the House Gingrich's position on NAFTA?
 
 
MS. KAPTUR:
Mr. Gingrich was a very strong supporter of NAFTA, and in fact 
when NAFTA got in trouble, he ended up rounding up the votes to 
ultimately pass it. There were I think 43 votes that were 
switched at the end.
 
 
MR. TAYLOR of Mississippi:
So again going back to what Mr. Sanders had to say, what 
incentive then does Speaker of the House Gingrich have to bring 
this to a vote? After all, his folks got their $20 billion. The 
American people are left holding the bag. Four hundred and 
thirty-five Congressmen never voted on it. Folks back home do not 
know if they were for it or against it. What recourse is there 
for a Member of Congress who feels like his constituents have 
gotten the short end of this stick and that his constituents' 
children have gotten the short end of the stick? After all, they 
have already lent $20 billion. But it is my understanding, please 
correct me if I am wrong, there is $35 billion in this fund. That 
means there is $15 billion still to be left at the whim of the 
President. To put that as a reference to the citizens of this 
country, $35 billion is roughly what this Nation will spend on 
its veterans this year. Yet, you are telling me, without a vote 
in this body, up to $35 billion can be pledged by the United 
States, with little or no guarantee that it will ever be repaid. 
As a matter of fact, I have heard the Mexicans have made only one 
debt payment one time in the past dozen years or so.
 
                   [...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"        
--------------------------------------------------------------

