S. 2335--ANTI-TERRORISM ACT OF 1986

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 3, 2011
• Sequence Number: 3
• Publication Date: April 17, 1986
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
Senate
The Senate met at 10 a.m., on the
expiration of the recess, and was
called to order by the President pro
tempore [Mr. THURMOND].
PRAYER
The Chaplain, the Reverend Rich-
ard C. Halverson, D.D., offered the fol-
lowing prayer:
Let us pray.
Righteous God, trouble comes in like
a flood-like an avalanche threatening
to bury us: Libya and the Middle East,
Nicaragua and Central America-oil
crisis and farm crisis, with chain reac-
tions exploding in many different di-
rections-budget deadline and dead-
lock like an irresistible force meeting
an immovable object-an incompre-
hensible national debt-unfavorable
balance of trade with potential trade
wars seething-and a host of other in-
transigent domestic and international
issues that challenge and provoke-
and the Senate right in the middle of
all of it. Help us to see, wise Father,
that God alone is big enough to
handle this cosmic mess and He is
ready to enable those who bear the
burden to find resolution. In His name
Who is the way, the truth, the life.
Amen.
RECOGNITION OF THE
MAJORITY LEADER
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
distinguished majority leader, Senator
DOLE, is recognized.
Mr. DOLE. I thank the President
pro tempore, Senator THURMOND.
SCHEDULE
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, under the
standing order, the leaders have 10
minutes each, to be followed by special
orders for not to exceed 5 minutes
each for Senators HAWKINS, CRAN-
STON, WILSON, DIXON, ROCKEFELLER,
BINGkMAN, CHILES, LEVIN, RIEGLE,
BAUCUS, GORE, and PROXMIRE.
Mr. President, I would indicate that
the list for special orders seems to be
growing on a daily basis. I would hope
sometime in the next few weeks we
can reach some agreement for dividing
special orders for the morning and
afternoon, or limiting the amount of
time for special orders. Special orders
today will require 1 hour and 5 min-
utes.
Following the execution of the spe-
cial orders, there will be a period for
THURSDAY, APRIL 17, 1986
the transaction of routine morning
business, not to extend beyond the
hour of 11:30 a.m.
Mr. President, we are hoping we can
move the rollcall vote from 11:30 to 12
noon. I will make that request, if the
minority leader has no objection.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the vote on the hydroreli-
censing bill occur at 12 noon rather
than 11:30 a.m.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
COCHRAN). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, as soon as
we complete action on the hydrorell-
censing bill, which will just be the
vote, we will move to S. 1923, the
bankruptcy judges bill. It is my under-
standing that that will not take more
than a couple of hours.
We have completed action on the
Federal Deposit Insurance Act. That
will leave the technical amendments
to the crime bill. I think I am in a po-
sition to say there will be no votes to-
morrow. Maybe we will lay something
down today and there might be some
debate tomorrow, but I think this is a
particularly bad week for Members on
both sides who want to visit their
home States.
Mr. President, I hope Members will
cooperate and try to clean up these
minor bills that are on the calendar.
I want to thank the Senator from Il-
linois [Mr. DIXON] for his cooperation
on the Federal Deposit Insurance Act
last night. That action will be helpful
to Senator BOREN and others with par-
ticular problems in-their States.
Mr. President, I see no reason why
we could not complete our work fairly
early this evening. However, there will
be rollcall votes today.
S. 2335-ANTI-TERRORISM ACT
OF 1986
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I will in-
roduce later today a bill that will clar-
strengthen the President's hand in
dealing with international terrorism
directed at our country and our citi-
zens. I am honored to be joined as an
original cosponsor of this bill by the
distinguished Senator from Alabama
and chairman of the Judiciary's Sub-
committee on Security and Terrorism,
JEREMIAH DENTON. In addition to his
work on this bill, Senator DENTON has
a number of other important legisla-
tive initiatives on the matter of terror-
ism.
I would also note that I have worked
closely in developing this legislation
with three distinguished Members of
the House of Representatives: Con-
gressman JOE BARTON of Texas, who
first suggested a bill and came up with
the basic concepts we have included in
it; and Congressmen DUNCAN HUNTER of
California, and BOB LIVINGSTON of Lou-
isiana, each of whom has made valua-
ble contributions to the final product.
Those three Congressmen will be in-
troducing the bill in the House today.
NOT A "QUICK FIX"
In light of ongoing events involving
Libya, this is obviously an appropriate
time for the Senate to consider legisla-
tion related to terrorism. And, as my
remarks will indicate, the substance of
this bill will have direct bearing on sit-
uations such as the one we see unfold-
ing in Libya.
But it is important to emphasize
that this bill is not any kind of "quick
fix" reaction of the Libyan situation. I
and my cosponsors have been consid-
ering terrorism legislation for several
months and have been working on this
bi'l for several weeks. It deals with an
issue broader than Libya and more en-
during than Qadhafi. Terrorism is a
long-term problem and requires a
long-term solution. Passage of the bill
will provide one more important tool
to help find that solution.
REAFFIRMING THE PRESIDENT'S AUTHORITY
Let me briefly outline the contents
of the bill. As I noted, its central pur-
pose is clarifying the extent of the
President's authority to deal with ter-
rorism, thereby strengthening his
hand as he copes with this problem.
Personally, I do not believe this bill
gives the President any new authority.
In my view, the President's constitu-
tional role as Commander in Chief, his
clear obligation and authority to
defend the United States and its citi-
zens and our country's right of self-de-
fense embodied in the Constitution
and specifically included in the United
Nations Charter already endows the
President with decisive, independent
power to respond to terrorist acts and
to the threat of terror against America
and Americans.
But I am aware that some dispute
that view. Certainly, our current
debate-an unfortunate debate, in my
opinion-over whether the President
? This "bullet" symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.
Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
 Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
S 4424 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
adequately consulted the Congress
prior to the recent air strikes on Libya
and whether and how the War Powers
Resolution of 1973 applies to the cur-
rent situation reflects the fact that
there is honest disagreement on this
issue.
Harry Truman is famous for saying
that the "buck stops" in the Oval
Office. Maybe that was true in Tru-
man's day. But today every Senator
seemingly insists on putting in his 2
cents' worth on that buck. This is no
way to make or implement policies on
terrorism.
So it is very important to make clear
in law-and equally important to make
clear to the world, including the
world's terrorists-that the President
does have extensive, flexible authority
to do what is necessary to strike back
against terrorists and to preempt
planned terrorist attacks against the
United States and its Citizens. By
passing this legislation, we will cement
the authority in law and send a strong
message around the globe: The Presi-
dent has the power to act and has the
political backing of the American Con-
gress in doing what he must. And if
that message is sent now, through pas-
sage of this bill, perhaps in the future,
the President will not have to send as
many of the kind of messages our F-
111's delivered to Qadhafi this week.
DEFINITIONS OF "TERRORISM" AND
"TERRORIST"
What, exactly, does the bill do? It
defines terrorism as a "form of aggres-
sion" against the United States. As
such, it broadens the conception of
terrorism from being just another
kind of criminal act and calls it what it
is-an attack on our country and our
national interests. In that way, the bill
will underscore that the President's
powers as Commander in Chief come
directly dnd automatically into play
when terrorism occurs or is being
planned.
The bill defines "terrorist" and "ter-
rorist organization" to include all of
those people and groups which can be
shown to be directly involved in the
planning or conduct of terrorist acts
or which directly support such plan-
ning or acts. It is not only the bomb-
throwers we have to deal with; it is ev-
eryone in the network, up to and in-
cluding governments like Libya's,
which openly and aggressively espouse
state-sponsored terrorism as an instru-
ment of policy, and people like Qadha-
fi, who masquerade as legitimate na-
tional leaders.
USE OF ALL APPROPRIATE MEASURES
When such groups or people engage
in specific acts of terror aimed at
Americans, or when the President has
clear evidence that they intend to, the
bill reaffirms his authority, notwith-
standing the provisions of any other
law, to "use all such antiterrorism and
counterterrorism measures as may be
necessary to prevent the loss of lives
of U.S. citizens," including use of
"deadly force."
Should the President utilize the au-
thority affirmed in the bill, he would
be required to report to the Congress
within 10 days, specifying "in detail
the terrorist threat or terrorist act
which justified" his action.
AUTHORITY LIMITED TO TERRORISM SITUATIONS
Perhaps the best summation of the
bill is that it affirms the President's
very broad authority but only in the
relatively narrow-but, of course, criti-
cal-field of dealing with terrorism.
The bill has no application-and
makes no judgment, one way or the
other-on the question of Presidential
authority to deal with other threats to
our Nation or other international situ-
ations. The bill does not seek to
expand, or in fact expand, any Presi-
dential authority in these broader na-
tional security or foreign policy fields.
I have my own views about what the
President can do in those areas, and
each Senator undoubtedly has his or
her own views, too. But this bill pur-
posely avoids those issues. The ques-
tion of terrorism and our ability to
deal with it is too urgent to get bogged
down in an endless re-debate of the
War Powers Resolution of 1973.
PARTIALLY SUPERSEDES WAR POWERS
RESOLUTION
Having said that, though, let me
make clear that this bill would super-
sede the War Powers Resolution in
those instances-but only in those in-
stances-when the President might
use, or contemplate the use of, Ameri-
can military forces to deal with terror-
ism.
NO SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT FOR CONSULTATIONS
In such circumstances, the bill would
eliminate the near requirement-and I
say "near requirement" because even
the War Powers Resolution qualifies it
by saying "in every possible in-
stance"-for prior. consultations with
Congress before using American
forces.
Let me also stress here that, in elimi-
nating the legal requirement for the
consultations, I am not suggesting
there should be no consultations. On
the contrary, such consultations are
very desirable and helpful, to both the
President and the Congress, whenever
they are feasible and can be conducted'
in a manner consistent with the Presi-
dent's overriding need to avoid jeop-
ardizing the safety of our armed
forces.
But this is an age when madmen like
Qadhafi have sophisticated weapons
which can instantly annihilate large
numbers of American military person-
nel and, regrettably, when almost
every word uttered in the deepest se-
crecy on Capitol Hill ends up shortly
thereafter on the evening news and in
the morning paper. In this environ-
ment, like it or not, we simply cannot
undermine the President's ability to
act against terrorism by requiring him
in every case to thrash out with some
or all of 535 Congressmen the details
of sensitive antiterrorist military oper-
ations before they are underway.
April 17, 1986
EXTENDS PERIOD FOR PRESIDENTIAL REPORT
The bill would also supersede the
War Powers Resolution in a second
way-but, again, only when the issue
at hand is terrorism-by extending to
10 days (from the resolution's 48
hours) the time during which the
President would have to report to Con-
gress on action taken pursuant to the
authority outlined in the bill. That ad-
ditional time would provide the oppor-
tunity for a more comprehensive,
useful report.
NO ARBITRARY TIME LIMITS
Finally, contrary to the 60- and 90-
day limits of the War Powers Resolu-
tion, the bill would not put any time
limit on the President's use of forces
in a terrorist situation. It would be my
presumption that use of this author-
ity, in situations such as we have just
seen in Libya, would almost always be
for operations of very short duration,
well under any 60- or 90-day time-
frame. But prudence dictates, to me at
least, that we not build in any artifi-
cial limits on the President's flexibility
to do what is necessary, when it is nec-
essary.
THE CHALLENGE OF TERRORISM
Mr. President, international terror-
ism is one of the most serious chal-
lenges which confronts our Nation and
our President. To deal effectively with
it, the President needs two things
above all else. First, he needs the clear
and indisputable authority to strike at
terrorism and terrorists with his full
powers as Commander in Chief. This
bill will reaffirm unequivocally that he
has that authority.
Second, he needs the political sup-
port of the Congress and the people of
the United States in doing what must
be done. Passage of this bill will make
it clear to everyone, everywhere-
friend and foe alike-that our Presi-
dent has that political support.
Mr. President, I urge all of my col-
leagues to join with Senator DENTON
and me in passing this bill promptly
and decisively.
Mr. President, as an original cospon-
sor of the War Powers Act of 1970,
with Senator Javits, I ask my col-
leagues to take a look at the debates
and report on the War Powers Act. I
do not think we ever dealt with state
international terrorism. In 1970 and
1973 when the War Powers Act was
passed, that was not a matter of great
concern. Terrorism had been around
for a long time but it was not concen-
trated, widespread, or state sponsored.
Mr. President, in effect what we seek
to do, is to clarify the President's au-
thority to make certain the President
will be able to respond to an act of ter-
rorism without a long consultation
with Members of Congress, and that it
will not in any way compromise our ef-
forts or compromise the security of
the American forces.
Earlier in my statement, I outlined
what I believe to be a number of areas
of concern. We are not trying to give
the President new authority. The au-
Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
 Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
April 17, 1986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
thority is limited to acts of interna-
tional terrorism. The bill will outline
what an act of terrorism is. It defines
who may be participating in terrorism,
whether it is a group, whether it is an
individual, or whether it may be a gov-
ernment that is involved.
So I hope my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle will have an opportu-
nity to take a look at this bill. It is not
partisan. It is nonpartisan; and I hope
that we could have a number of co-
sponsors, Republicans and Democrats.
I will be joining Senator DENTON in
writing my colleagues a note to outline
the provisions.
I am hoping that later today the bill
can be introduced and jointly referred
to Foreign Relations and Judiciary but
that has not been cleared by the dis-
tinguished minority leader. I will do
that later.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the bill be printed in the
RECORD at this point, followed by a
fact sheet.
There being no objection, the bill
and fact sheet were ordered to be
printed in the RECORD, as follows:
S. 2335
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Anti-Terror-
ism Act of 1986".
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) FINDINGS.- The Congress finds and de-
clares that terrorsim is-
(1) a form of aggression which results in
the killing of innocent persons, the loss of
civil liberties through intimidation and coer-
cion, or the loss of property;
(2) a form of aggression that has as its
goal the furtherance of a political or ideo-
logical objective by violent means;
(3) directed against the orderly and demo-
cratic conduct and security of all people;
(4) a threat to the national security and
national interests of the United States;
(5) a threat to the safety of all United
States persons; and
(6) a threat to the continued and effective
operation of the Government of the United
States.
(b) PURPOSES.-It is the purpose of this
Act-
(1) to protect United States persons from
terrorism; and
(2) to grant the President under appropri-
ate circumstances the authority to punish
terrorists or terrorist organizations for acts
committed against United States persons.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act-
(1) the term "terrorism" means activity,
directed against United States persons,
which-
(A) is committed by an individual who is
not a national or permanent resident alien
of the United States;
(B) involves violent acts or acts dangerous
to human life which would be a criminal
violation If committed within the jurisdic-
tion of the United States; and
(C) is intended-
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian popu-
lation;
(ii) to influence the policy of a govern-
ment by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government
by assassination or kidnaping;
(2) the terms "terrorist" and "terrorist or-
ganization" mean an individual, group, or
any combination thereof which are involved
in an act of terrorism;
(3) the term "national of the United
States" means-
(A) a natural person who is a citizen of
the United States or a natural person (other
than an alien) who, though not a citizen of
the United States, owes permanent alle-
giance to the United States; or
(B) a corporation or other entity which is
organized under the laws of the United
States, if natural persons (described in sub-
paragraph (A)) own, directly or indirectly,
more than 50 percent of the outstanding
capital stock or other beneficial interest in
such legal entity;
(4) the term "United States" means the
several States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Com-
monwealth of the Northern Mariana Is-
lands, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American
Samoa, and any other territory or posses-
sion of the United States; and
(5) the term "United States person"
means any individual, organization, corpora-
tion, or entity which is either a permanent
resident alien or national of the United
States or subject to its domestic jurisdiction.
SEC. 4. OFFENSE OF TERORISM.
(a) OFFENSE.-Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, whoever organizes, at-
tempts, commits, procures, or supports the
commission of an act of terrorism shall be
considered to have committed an act of ag-
gression against the United States and may
be pursued with deadly force.
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF PRESIDENTIAL
AcTIor.-Notwithstanding any other provi-
sion of law and except as provided in subsec-
tion (d), the President is authorized to un-
dertake actions to protect United States per-
sons against terrorists and terrorist activity
through the use of all such anti-terrorism
and counter-terrorism measures as he deems
necessary.
(C) DURATION OF AUTHORITY.-Notwith-
standing any other provision of law, subsec-
tion (b) shall apply-
(1) to all terrorists wherever they may be;
and
(2) until such time as the President deter-
mines that no terrorist poses a threat to
United States persons.
(d) CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATION.-The au-
thority granted to the President under this
Act may be exercised in the United States
only in accordance with the provisions of
the United States Constitution.
(e) INTERPRETATION.-Nothing in this Act
may be construed as granting any authority
to use deadly force within the United States
which authority would not exist in the ab-
sence of this Act.
SEC. S. REPORT.
The President shall submit a report to the
Congress not later than 10 days after the
President takes any action under section
4(b). The report shall describe in detail the
terrorist threat or terrorist act which justi-
fied such action.
FACT SHEET ON TERRORISM BILL
ELEMENTS OF THE BILL
Defines terrorism as an act of aggression
by a foreigner, aimed at U.S. citizens and
corporations, with the purpose of influenc-
ing our policy.
Gives the President clear-cut authority to
deal with specific acts of terrorism with all
appropriate means, including deadly force.
Gives the President authority to act to
preempt as well as respond to specific acts
of terrorism.
Makes clear terrorists include not only
actual "bomb throwers" but also those who
organize, lead, fund and support terrorists.
Requires the President to report to Con-
gress within ten days of utilizing his author-
S 4425
ity, specifying in detail the terrorist threat
or terrorist act that justified his action.
Supercedes the War Powers Resolution
by: (1) imposing no time limit, such as the
60 and 90 day time limits in the resolution,
on the President's use of force in a terrorist
situation; (2) requiring no prior consultation
with Congress; (3) and extending the report-
ing period from 48 hours to 10 days.
PROTECTIONS IN THE BILL
Limits the authority to terrorist situa-
tions.
Insures, through the reporting require-
ment, that the authority will be used only
to combat specific acts of terror.
Does not expand the President's tradition-
al powers to conduct foreign policy-only to
react to terrorism.
Applies only to acts by foreigners and has
no impact on the rights of Americans.
Mr. DENTON. Mr. President, I rise
today to voice my strong support for
the "Anti-Terrorism Act of 1986,"
which I am pleased to cosponsor to-
gether with the distinguished majority
leader from Kansas. I congratulate
Senator DOLE for his leadership in in-
troducing this important legislation,
which I believe is an essential factor in
the continuing development of a com-
prehensive U.S. policy to combat inter-
national terrorism.
Mr. President, a consistent thrust of
mine as a Senator has been to develop
improvements in the credibility of the
United States ability to act promptly
against terrorism with unity of resolve
and proper regard for the separation
of powers within our Government.
Terrorism can be discouraged only if
would-be terrorists believe that the
President of the United States has the
power to take appropriate action
promptly, with the backing of the
Congress, irrespective of the political
party of the President or the party in
majority in either House of Congress.
In this regard, I believe that this bill
is one of the most important intro-
duced since I have been in the Senate.
The bill defines terrorism as an act of
aggression against the United States,
thereby triggering the President's au-
thority as Commander in Chief of the
Armed Forces, to pursue terrorists
with deadly force, if necessary. As
such, the bill does not create new au-
thority for the President, but rather,
as Senator DOLE has so eloquently
stated, clarifies the extent of the
President's authority to deal with ter-
rorism.
Such clarification is absolutely nec-
essary in view of the second guessing
frequently engaged in by some Mem-
bers of Congress and the media which
clouds the President's existing author-
ity to order military strikes when nec-
essary to prevent terrorist attacks on
Americans. Even now, in the wake of
the strike conducted against Libya this
week, we hear expressions of doubt
about the President's authority to
take such action. The bill introduced
today will ensure that the President
does not speak with an empty voice in
acting against terrorism. This unfortu-
nately has been the practice in the
past on occasion when 535 Secretaries
Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
 Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
S 4426
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 17, 1986
of State undercut foreign policy deci-
sions which the Chief Executive
sought to implement.
I believe that prompt enactment of
the "Anti-Terrorism Act of 1986" will
demonstrate that we are finally on the
road to developing an effective policy
against terrorism. For far too long,
United States policy toward terrorism
has been fragmented, reactive, defen-
sive and ad hoc, dealing with each inci-
dent as though it were an isolated oc-
currence, entirely unrelated to other
terrorist acts. This approach has ig-
nored the voluminous record devel-
oped by the Senate Judiciary Subcom-
mittee on Security and Terrorism.
Over the past 5 years, the Subcom-
mittee has held numerous hearings on
terrorism which have yielded abun-
dant and conclusive evidence of a net-
work, a global unity, in the sources of
support, strategy, tactics, and goals of
international terrorists. The thrust
and power of this network amounts to
a new, highly effective form of low in-
tensity warfare which is being waged
by various nation-states-including,
particularly, Libya, Iran, Syria, North
Korea, and Cuba-to erode the influ-
ence and strategic position of the
United States and Western democra-
cies, in general, and to enhance the
power of the Soviet Union, its client
states and allies, in particular.
This reservoir of information regard-
ing the global and interrelated nature
of terrorist activities has not been
tapped sufficiently by the Congress,
the public or the executive branch.
Thus, our spasmodic and ad hoc policy
toward international terrorism has
persisted, despite the publicly declared
policies and intentions- of terrorist
groups and the states, such as Libya,
which support them.
However, the events of the last sev-
eral.weeks have focused American and
European attention as never before on
the strategic and operational coordina-
tion of international terrorists. De-
spite protestations to the contrary by
Qadhafi, United States and European
intelligence services were able to con-
firm that the terrorist attack on the
West Berlin disco received support, en-
couragement, and direction from
Libya and other sponsors of interna-
tional terrorism outside Germany.
Presented with such intelligence, the
President must be able to act quickly
to prevent a terrorist attack, if possi-
ble. If prevention is not possible in a
given case, the President must act to
punish, while the gun is still smoking,
the terrorist group or groups involved
and the nation-states which have fa-
cilitated their criminal acts. The bill
introduced today will make it clear
that the President is authorized to
take such actions, and that we in the
Congress stand behind him.
In addition to defining terrorism and
clarifying the President's powers to
deal with terrorists, the bill's defini-
tion of "terrorists" and "terrorist orga-
nizations" would cover not only the in-
dividuals and groups who actually per-
petrate an act of terrorism, but also ACTION ON THE BUDGET
the leaders of a state which organizes RESOLUTION
or supports the act. The bill makes
any offense of terrorism committed
against a U.S. person an act of aggres-
sion against the United States, itself,
which may be pursued with deadly
force.
Finally, in order to protect Congress'
oversight responsibility, the bill re-
quires the President to submit a report
to the Congress within 10 days after
the President takes any action under
the bill against terrorists or terrorist
activity.
The "Anti-Terrorism Act of 1986" is
landmark legislation which could at
least cause the tide of terrorism to
ebb. Its enactment will demonstrate to
terrorists that Congress and the Amer-
ican people are solidly united in sup-
porting prompt action by the Presi-
dent to prevent terrorist acts and
punish terrorists. The act will evi-
dence, as well, the growing consensus
in this country which is helping to de-
velop a sound and consistent U.S.
policy against terrorism.
I urge my colleagues to support
prompt consideration and passage of
this legislation.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, on this
side we ran the hot line about chang-
ing the time for the vote and there
were no responses. I took that to mean
that there would not be any problems.
I now learn that a Senator has called
to say he can be here and vote at 11 or
1, but cannot be here at 12. Will the
distinguished majority leader review
this matter and see if that vote could
be changed?
Mr. DOLE. Yes.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank
the distinguished majority leader.
Mr. President, before the distin-
guished majority leader leaves the
floor, I think his statement earlier was
clear enough but I want to be sure
that I understood it. I believe the dis-
tinguished majority leader indicated
there definitely would not be any roll-
call votes tomorrow. Am I correct?
Mr. DOLE. That is correct.
Mr. BYRD. Does the distinguished
majority leader contemplate a session
tomorrow?
Mr. DOLE. I am not certain of that,
but I will give that information. I am
certain there will be no rollcall votes
tomorrow.
Mr. BYRD. I thank the majority
leader.
RECOGNITION OF THE
MINORITY LEADER
Mr. BYRD. On several occasions I
have stated the feeling that the
budget resolution should be called up
and debated on this floor and that
there should not be further delay.
There are many reasons, Mr. Presi-
dent, for avoiding further delay. One
important consideration has been
brought to my attention. I had the op-
portunity to meet on Tuesday with a
group of presidents from colleges and
universities around the country, in-
cluding one or more in my own State.
These were both large and small insti-
tutions. They warned me of the con-
cerns which delay in acting on the
budget will occasion.
Mr. Joseph Murphy of the City Uni-
versity of New York put it to me suc-
cinctly: "While nothing happens,
something bad happens." That "some-
thing bad" is the uncertainty in which
students all around the country are
finding themselves because they do
not know what to plan in terms of stu-
dent aid.
This is the time of the year when
students make decisions about attend-
ing colleges and universities next fall.
Delay in making decisions about the
level of Federal support for student
aid programs could affect hundreds of
thousands of students nationwide.
Some students, faced with this uncer-
tainty, may plan a course of part-time
instruction rather than full time.
Worst of all, some students may decide
to forgo college entirely because of the
lack of certainty that aid will even be
available. And this is true for many
students who will need to depend on a
Pell grant.
It is not only the students who are
put into this state of uncertainty by
failure to produce a budget; counselors
in high schools are also unable to
advise students on the wise course of
action concerning their college plans,
and financial aid officers in the col-
leges and universities are unable to
plan for the coming term.
We know that the President's draco-
nian budget cuts in higher education
programs are dead. The President's
budget was rejected in the House. In
the Senate it was rejected in the com-
mittee. But what do we ft? I was told
in this meeting to which I have re-
ferred that 70 percent of the Pell
grants in West Virginia, indeed a simi-
lar amount nationwide I was told, have
been affected by the Gramm-Rudman
legislation.
If the Senate does not get to work
on a responsible budget, we may see
even deeper cuts for next year. Stu-
dents in West Virginia and around the
country need to know what the Senate
and the House will do about the stu-
dent aid on which they desperately
depend for their education.
The bipartisan budget reported by
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the Budget Committee is more respon-
the previous order, the minority leader sible in the area of education than the
is recognized. President's budget-which has already
Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
 Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
April 17, 1986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE H 1931
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speak- _ ^ 1150 by Libyan terrorism a week ago, was
er, today I, Congressmen DUNCAN not just defending American interests,
HUNTER, and BOB LIVINGSTON, together THE FBI: FIDELITY, BRAVERY, he was defending European interests
F introducing in the House of Repre- AND INTEGRITY as well. And our European allies have
sentatives the Antiterrorist Act of (Mr. OXLEY asked and was given told us we ought to resort to diploma-
1986. Senator DOLE and Senator permission to address the House for 1 cy.
DENTON are introducing identical legis- minute and to revise and extend his It is their failure to join us in eco-
lation in the other body. This legisla- reniarks.) Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to nomic sanctions and in evicting the
tion is one part of a long-term strategy Libyan embassies from the face of
to deal with terrorism. take this opportunity to express my Europe that forced upon America this
As signaled earlier this week, our
President has decided to fight back
against terrorists, and we need to give
him the explicit authority to do so.
There is some question that under
the existing War Powers Act our Presi-
dent may have to consult with Con-
gress before he initiates any counter-
terrorism activities. Doing so may
make it much more difficult to fight
back against terrorism.
Our act does two things specifically.
It redefines terrorism as an act of ag-
gression against the United States of
America, its citizens, and American
corporations. Number two, it explicitly
excludes antiterrorism activities from
the jurisdiction of the War Powers
Act.
Terrorists do not have to conduct
committee meetings before they
decide to strike; we should not require
our President to do so either, as he at-
tempts to fight back.
Every American citizen is a potential
victim of terrorism. Let us give our
President the authority to effectively
fight back and prevent, if possible, any
more Americans from becoming actual
victi+ns of terrorism.
IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 281
(Mr. SIKORSKI asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. SIKORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise
to speak in support of H.R. 281, the so-
called double-breasting legislation and
in opposition to weakening amend-
ments.
The opponents of H.R. 281 are using
some unpoetic poetic license in their
debate, and I would like to take this
opportunity to set the record straight.
H.R. 281 does not expand labor law
into new areas. It does not deny work-
ers freedom of choice. It is not a
power-grabbing attempt by unions to
give them undue influence in the in-
dustry marketplace. Its only purpose
is to define already existing provisions
of labor law that deal with prehire
agreements which have been subvert-
ed by antiworker members of the cur-
rent National Labor Relations Board.
H.R. 281 is needed to end these
abuses and to restore to labor relations
the original intent of Congress when it
passed the Landrum-Griffin Act in
1959.
deep sorrow to the families of the two action, the least desirable, but only
FBI agents, Benjamin P. Grogan and available alternative.
Jerry Dove, who were killed in a To our European allies I say, we are
bloody gun battle in Miami on April ashamed of you. You should, at the
11. In the same incident, five agents very least, be quiet and, in fact, be
were wounded during an attempted doing more than that by backing up
arrest of suspected bank robbers. This our action. Until you have a better
is a great and tragic loss to the Bureau way, please be silent.
and to the entire law enforcement
community. In 1917, "Lafayette, we are here;" in
These agents were performing rou- 1986, "Lafayette, where are you?"
tine surveillance when they spotted a
stolen car with a license plate match-
ing one suspected of being used in
recent Miami-area holdups. Special
Agent Joseph V. Corless, a former col-
league and supervisor of the bank rob-
bery squad when I was an agent in
New York, stated that the agents ra-
dioed for backup and, when they had
sufficient assistance, attempted to pull
the car over. It was at that point that
the agents were fired upon by ma-
chine-guns from the suspects' vehicle.
These agents were professionals.
They followed the proper procedures
and reacted wisely and competently.
They knew the risks, but they unfor-
tunately lost their lives in the per-
formance of their duty. As a former
FBI special agent, I also am aware of
the dangers involved in the line of
duty, the risks that agents take every-
day, and the selfless behavior they dis-
play when confronted with a life-or-
death situation. While it is difficult to
express the proper sentiments in a 1-
minute statement, I again offer my
condolences to the families of the two
slain FBI agents and commend their
bravery and that of their wounded col-
leagues.
Fidelity, bravery, integrity, that is
what the FBI is all about.
LAFAYETTE, WHERE ARE YOU?
(Mr. SCHUMER asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Speaker, in
1917, Gen. Blackjack Pershing arrived
on the shores of France and told a
war-torn Europe, "Lafayette, we are
here."
Today America asks, "Lafayette,
where are you?"
The American people are perplexed
and vexed to see pictures nightly on
their TV screens of Europeans demon-
strating against the American action
in Libya. Congress is concerned and
confused when the foreign ministers
of France and Germany and Italy con-
demn American actions, but give us no
alternative in its place. After all, Ken-
neth Ford, the brave sergeant killed
LIBYA-NICARAGUA CONNECTION
IN CENTRAL AMERICA
(Mr. BILIRAKIS asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I
would like to share with this House,
Mr. Speaker, a news item on television
this morning. Film reports from Ma-
nagua showed Libyan soldiers march-
ing in solidarity with their Nicaraguan
counterparts and denouncing the
United States.
I think it is important to note that
this is the very first time that the
presence of Libyan troops has been
openly displayed by the Sandinista
government.
This should be a lesson to those crit-
ics who misplace their naive faith in
the empty words of good will from the
Sandinistas. In this case, Mr. Speaker,
actions speak much louder than words.
I find it hard to believe that these
Libyan troops are emissaries of peace
or are there to encourage the Conta-
dora process. However, perhaps they
are there to share their expertise in
agriculture and irrigation with the
agrarian reformers in Managua.
After all, the green revolution in
Libya has made private ownership of
land illegal, and the Sandinistas have
demonstrated that they are eager to
follow this same path.
I point this incident out, Mr. Speak-
er, even as we in this House continue
to debate the true intentions of the
Nicaraguan Government in Central
America. As Managua echoes with the
boots of Libya-a nation engaged in
active terrorist warfare against the
United States-let us fix in our minds
the picture of those soldiers marching.
Can a Libya-Nicaragua connection be
the hope for the future of Central
America? The hope for our hemi-
sphere?
I say no, Mr. Speaker, and I say the
best way to stop such a connection is
to grant the freedom fighters the
wherewithal to oppose this disturbing
alliance. Thank you.
Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
 Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3
H 1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 17, 1986
rREPUBLICANS DUCK CONTRA Her actions will fortify and inspire us population steadily rising, steps must
VOTE to continue our fight against terror- be taken now to prepare the VA
(Mr. FRANK asked and was given ism. health care delivery system for the in-
permission to address the House for 1 The United States and the United creasing demand for services. Conse-
minute.) Kingdom have long been allied in the quently, I am introducing the Elderly
Mr. FRANK. Mr. Speaker, history great World Wars against tyranny and Veterans Care Act of 1986.
gets rewritten very promptly these are joined in the North Atlantic alli- This legislation provides a tax credit
days. We are being told that the ance to deter aggression. to the families of elderly veterans who
reason the Republican Members of the A loyal ally understands that coun- need home-based health care. The
House voted for the Hamilton substi- tries have interests beyond their own credit covers such expenses as home
tute yesterday was because of their borders, and our British friends recog- health aids, adult day care, respite
sense of outrage at a procedure which nize this. And for that, they have care, nursing care, and medical or
would have tied one piece of legisla- America's enduring gratitude, health-related equipment and sup-
tion to another. That is the least plau- Mr. Speaker, I urge all my col- plies.
sible explantion I have heard for any- leagues to join us in cosponsoring this Credit amounts will be determined
thing in a long time. very important resolution, by a sliding scale based on annual
They did that yesterday for one income, similar to the dependent care
simple reason. They were going to lose AMERICA NEEDS A SENSIBLE tax adopted by Congress in the Eco-
on the McCurdy amendment. The OIL IMPORT POLICY nomic Recovery Tax Act of 1981. Fam-
American people will not support the (Mr. TAUZIN asked and was given ilies with $10,000 or less in income wil'
President's right to wage war by proxy permission to address the House for 1 receive a credit for 30 percent of thr,
in an unlimited way down there. So minute and to revise and extend his home health care expenses they incur,
they knocked over the table because remarks.) up to a maximum credit of $1,050.
they did not like the way the cards Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, following Low-income families who do not, pay
were being dealt, the U.S. air strikes against Libya, enough taxes will have any unusable
Before anyone believes that they Colonel Qadhafi sent his minister to credit refunded directly to them. The
were upset at the notion of tying one the OPEC meeting in Geneva demand- maximum amount of credit would be
thing to something not fully related,
ing an oil embargo against the United gradually reduced based on income
remember that this is the party which States of America. over $10,000, with families having
gave us this year with their over- It is, of course, history now that the $50,000 or more in adjusted gross
whelming vote a new subsidy for to- Geneva meeting denied and, in fact, ig- income ineligible for credit. Conse-
bacco farmers as part of the recQncili- nored that request We should not be quently, the most needy families re-
ation bill. These are the people who surprised by that. ceive the greatest relief.
gave us the Gramm-Rudman mistake The fact is that the United States is - This legislation is important because
as part of a bill to extend the debt only about 10-percent dependent upon it represents a practical solution to the
limit. These are the people, many of OPEC oil today. We should, however, VA health care problem without for-
them who were here then, who voted be reminded that in the late 1970's, saking our longstanding commitment
for Gramm-Latta, which took a whole when we were approximately 30-per- to the men and women who have
range of unrelated things and made cent dependent upon OPEC oil, a simi- served this country. This measure pro-
them into one very inconsistent whole. lar request for a U.S. oil embargo was motes a compassionate alternative to
There has not been a time since I have not only heeded, but adopted, with institutionalized medical services by
been here that the Republican Party awful effects on this economy. providing for care in the most natural
has objected to the tactic of tying one Now my father when I was very environment-the veteran's own home.
thing to another. young gave me a good piece of advice. Moreover, by granting the tax credit
They were going to lose the vote yes- He assured me that through my life I directly to the family, the proposal
terday, so they kicked over the table, would make a number of mistakes, but recognizes the temendous sacrifices
and now they are pretending to be he cautioned me not to make the same they make as the primary caregiver to
procedurally outraged. They are a mistake more than once. We in Ameri- elderly veterans. It also recognizes the
very unlikely set of candidates for that ca ought to consider my father's need for Congress to relief the con-
particular vestment. good advice as we approach the end of tinuing financial pressure on the
GREAT BRITAIN DESERVES OUR
ENDURING GRATITUDE
(Mr. ROWLAND of Connecticut
asked and was given permission to ad-
dress the House for 1 minute and to
revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. ROWLAND of Connecticut. Mr.
Speaker, my colleague from Missouri
[Mr. SKELTON] and I have introduced a
resolution today putting Congress on
record as giving its highest praise and
thanks to Great Britain and Prime
Minister Margaret Thatcher for aiding
the United States against Libyan ter-
rorism.
When the time came to confront
ruthless terrorists, Britain stood with
us. No other ally wears that badge of
courage.
Mrs. Thatcher took enormous per-
sonal political risks to do what was
right. By taking a stand in support of
fry *5ople everywhere, Mrs. Thatcher
risked criticism from political oppo-
nents. She chose a courageous moral
path rather than political expediency.
this decade. Should we allow ourselves
to become so dependent upon OPEC
oil that the next request by the minis-
ter from Libya for an oil embargo
against the United States would not
only go unignored, but in fact heeded,
and the United States might find itself
in that same awful position
It is time now, America, to wake up,
to guard against that type of depend-
ence on foreign oil. It is time now to
adopt a sensible oil import policy for
America.
^ 1200
ELDERLY VETERANS CARE ACT
OF 1986
(Mr. RIDGE asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. RIDGE. Mr. Speaker, ensuring
adequate health care for our elderly
veterans is fast becoming one of the
most critical issues of the decade.
With the average age of the veteran
health care delivery system of Medi-
care and Medicaid.
The Veterans' Administration pre-
dicts that there will be more than 7
million veterans over the age of 65 by
1990. The VA itself has recommended
the creative development of program
initiatives to help meet the health-
care needs of our maturing veteran
population. My bill meets this chal-
lenge by providing more flexible care
for veterans, while making more hos-
pital beds available for critically ill pa-
tients.
Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to intro-
duce this important legislation, and I
invite my colleagues to join in support
of the Elderly Veterans Care Act.
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
LABOR LAW AMENDMENTS OF
1985
(Mr. ACKERMAN asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Approved For Release 2011/03/04: CIA-RDP87B00858R000600950003-3