CHECK THE VOTING RECORDS OF YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES ON IMPORTANT VOTES A public service of The Conservative Caucus 450 Maple Avenue East * Vienna, Va. 22180 * 703-938-9626 1998 Edition

Your representatives are accountable to the Constitution and to you.   Only by monitoring their voting records can you separate the rhetoric from the reality of their actions; and by taking action you can help ensure their votes will indeed be more faithful to the Constitution and to you.  Contact your representatives to thank them for pro-Constitutional-government votes and challenge their votes which violate the Constitution.  Alert other citizens so they may also be aware of the voting records--and can themselves take action--by calling, faxing, or e-mailing to talk shows and writing a letter to the editor of newspapers.  Read more citizen lobbying tips in our lobbying guide, and please support our continued activities.  Complete voting records are available at Thomas.

Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin of October 31, 1998

WHERE DO YOUR SENATORS AND CONGRESSMAN STAND?
WITH YOU? --- OR WITH CLINTON, GINGRICH, AND LOTT?

"The Gingrich-Lott-Clinton budget agreement...is a comprehensive betrayal of Constitutional obligations and a rejection of the conservative policies for which many Americans thought they were voting in supporting Republican control of Congress in 1994 and 1996." Howard Phillips October 20, 1998
More information on the Federal Budget

"Clinton-Gingrich Republicans":

"Clinton-Lott Republicans":

ACTION: Let them know where you stand. Call 202-224-3121 and ask for your legislator by name or E-Mail your message.

House Opponents of Budget Deal:

Senate Opponents of Budget Deal:

KNOW YOUR ENEMY?

These 90 members of the United States Senate have voted against the Constitution of the United States, as well as the liberty and independence of our nation, in voting affirmatively (Roll Call No. 259, 90-3, September 2, 1998) for the Foreign Operations Export Financing and Related Agencies Appropriation Act of 1999 providing $17.9 billion in additional financing for the IMF:

90 U.S. SENATORS VOTE TO SUPPORT $17.9 BILLION IMF BAILOUT OF GLOBALIST PLUTOCRATS:

Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin of September 30, 1998

No thanks to the Republican leadership, Bill Clinton's unconstitutional "fast track" proposal was defeated in Congress on September 25, 243 to 180.

151 REPUBLICANS VOTE WITH CLINTON ON TRADE

According to The Washington Post (9/26/98, p. A10), only "29 Democrats voted for the legislation, while 171 voted no and three others voted present. On the Republican side, 151 members voted for it and 71 voted against it, while one independent also opposed it."

SEVENTY-ONE HOUSE REPUBLICANS REJECT GLOBALIST PRESSURE TO SURRENDER TO CLINTON THE CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATION OF CONGRESS TO REGULATE COMMERCE WITH FOREIGN NATIONS

The 71 Republicans who wisely voted (Roll Call no. 466, 9/25/98) against the unconstitutional scheme which contradicts the stipulation that "Congress shall regulate commerce with foreign nations" are listed below:

If your Congressman is not listed above, ask him why he wants to unconstitutionally assign Bill Clinton the power to negotiate unamendable trade agreements.

Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin of August 15, 1998

RED CHINA REPUBLICANS RESCUE CLINTON TO EXTEND MFN FOR PEOPLE'S LIBERATION ARMY

FREE TRADE FANTASY PREFERRED TO NATIONAL SECURITY REALITIES

"‘China has produced intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads aimed at every American city, purchased by Chinese communist dictators with American dollars taken from American workers,’ said Rep. James A. Traficant Jr., Ohio Democrat....

GOP'S POLITICAL OPPORTUNISM OVERRIDES DUTY TO PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE

"Several factors made the climate slightly better for the pro-business free-traders this time around:

GLOBALIST PROFITEERS DARE NOT CALL IT TREASON

" Pro-business Republicans – backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and businesses in their districts – opted not to entangle the debate with the investigation over U.S. technology transfers to China and reports that the Chinese military actively sought to infiltrate American politics." Source: The Washington Times, 7/23/98, p. 1

ARMEY, BOEHNER, DeLAY, DREIER, DUNN, LINDER, LIVINGSTON HELP LEAD CONSERVATIVES ASTRAY

The 149 Republicans who joined (H.J. Res. 121, Roll Call no. 317, 264-166, 7/22/98) with President Clinton to give Beijing a $60 billion annual boost in income to finance its military buildup were:

MORE REPUBLICANS BACK ADDITIONAL U.N. BAILOUT

Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) was disappointed over the August 5 vote on his amendment to the Commerce/Justice/State appropriations bill to delete the $475 million in so-called "back dues" to the United Nations put in by the Republican appropriators.

ATTN: CHRIS SMITH. YOU CAN'T BE "PRO-LIFE" AND "PRO-U.N." SIMULTANEOUSLY

As the Associated Press reports (The Washington Post, 8/5/98, p. A7), "The House voted yesterday to provide $250 million next year for the Legal Services Corp....By a 255-170 roll call, Democrats and moderate Republicans united to add $109 million to the $141 million a spending bill had contained for the agency's budget....The Legal Services Corp. is an annual target of conservatives, who believe it pursues an activist, ideological agenda." (Editor's note: In 1995, Newt Gingrich and Dick Armey pledged repeatedly that, in the context of their "gradualist, incremental" strategy, they would see to it that the LSC would be completely zeroed out by Sept. 30, 1998.)

WHY DO "PRO-FAMILY" CONSERVATIVES SUCH AS STEVE LARGENT AND CHRIS SMITH VOTE TO UNCONSTITUTIONALLY FUND PRO-ABORTION, PRO-HOMO ACTIVISTS?

IGNORANCE OF THE LAWS THEY PASS IS NO EXCUSE

Remember, a vote to fund the unconstitutional Legal Services Corporation is a vote to subsidize some 25,000 full-time evangelists for abortion, homosexuality, higher taxes, more welfare, racial quotas, liberalized immigration policies, and all the rest of the Left-wing agenda.

The Wall Street Journal (8/5/98, p. A4) reports that "the margin of victory represents a high-water point for the corporation under GOP rule....

BIG BUSINESS BACKS LSC, "CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS" SIT ON SIDELINES

"Despite their insistence on the cuts, conservatives failed to show up for the House floor debate to defend them. And Legal Services has found new support among the GOP's business allies....

93 REPUBLICANS VOTE TO USE YOUR MONEY TO UNDERWRITE SUBSIDIES TO VIETNAM'S MARXIST-LENINIST TYRANNY

By a margin of 163 to 260, the Republican House of Representatives rejected a motion to overturn Bill Clinton's decision to provide U.S. government credits and investment guarantees to Communist Vietnam.

ARMEY, BATEMAN, BOEHNER, DUNN, GOODLATTE, HASTINGS, KASICH, LARGENT, LIVINGSTON, NETHERCUTT, PAXON, ROGAN, AND WHITE BACK CLINTON ON AID TO HANOI

OPIC, EX-IM, AND USDA ARE CONDUITS TO STRENGTHEN RED REGIME

As stated by former conservative Phil Crane (R-Ill.), "the waiver...allows Vietnam to be reviewed for possible coverage by U.S. trade financing programs such as OPIC, Eximbank, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture."

MORE JOBS FOR THE VIET CONG

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) argued in favor of rejecting the Clinton-GOP-Big Business lobby to aid the Vietnamese Communists: "The President is waiving the Jackson-Vanik requirements in order to extend American tax dollars, our tax dollars to subsidize or insure private corporations who want to do business in Vietnam, who want to make money by investing in a Communist dictatorship....what we are going to be doing is spending tax dollars with this waiver to guarantee American businessmen to go in and use cheap slave labor under a dictatorship to manufacture goods to export to the United States to put our own people out of work."

Jim Traficant (D-Ohio) added "we are rewarding Communists that screwed our soldiers and screwed their own people who tried to help our men...."

CONCERN FOR POWs AND MIAs TAKES SECOND PLACE TO GREED

And Congressman Sam Johnson (R-Tex.) observed that "this resolution is not about Vietnam. It is about honoring and respecting the over 58,000 American soldiers who gave their lives battling communism so we could remain free. It is about our soldiers who still remain missing in action. It is about keeping the hope alive for the families who still wake up every morning asking the same question: What happened to my child, my husband, my brother, my father?

Should Federal executive branch officials have authority to preclude employment at taxpayer expense of persons who engage in corrupt homosexual conduct? Or should they be forced to hire and promote employees whose claim to fame is that they are practicing sodomites? The overwhelming majority of the House of Representatives agrees with Bill Clinton that homosexuals should be guaranteed a newly discovered "right to work" on the Federal payroll.

HEFLEY FAILED TO GAIN SUPPORT OF REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP

As reported in The New York Times (8/6/98, p. A18), the "House today soundly rejected a measure that would have blocked President Clinton's directive banning job discrimination against Federal workers who are gay....

"The amendment, sponsored by Representative Joel Hefley, Republican of Colorado, would have undone Mr. Clinton's May 28 executive order adding homosexuals to groups that may not be discriminated against in Federal employment. The executive order sought to make uniform a Federal employment policy that is already in effect at many agencies."

REPUBLICANS ACCEPT UNCONSTITUTIONAL CLINTON SCHEME TO "LEGISLATE BY EXECUTIVE ORDER"

"Mr. Hefley said he sought to rein in Mr. Clinton. He said he believed that the President had abused his power in issuing a blizzard of executive orders during his two terms....

"Mr. Hefley also said that this particular executive order banning discrimination would lead to affirmative action, quotas and special privileges for homosexuals, a contention that a number of conservative Republicans rejected."

TOO MANY "CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS" THINK TOLERANCE OF CRIMINAL CONDUCT IS A VIRTUE

"Only a handful of Republicans tonight chose to speak out in support of the amendment. Instead, several Republicans took the floor to criticize the measure....‘Homosexuals are taxpayers, too, and deserve an equal break in terms of fairness in employment,’ said Representative Dana Rohrabacher, a conservative California Republican, amused that he stood in the unfamiliar company of Democrats. ‘There is no reason for the Federal Government to discriminate for or against an individual.’"

WHY WAS DANA ROHRABACHER A SPOKESMAN FOR BARNEY FRANK?

The Wall Street Journal (8/10/98, p. A16) points out that no "fight was more divisive than the failed attempt to overturn Mr. Clinton's executive order on discrimination. The debate matched Rep. Joel Hefley, a flinty Colorado conservative, with Rep. Barney Frank, a gay, liberal Massachusetts Democrat. But Mr. Frank turned the tables by yielding time to a succession of Republicans who spoke against the amendment. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California, a former Reagan speechwriter, opened for Mr. Frank, followed by Virginia Rep. Tom Bliley, chairman of the House Commerce Committee...."

CAUGHT BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG

"‘It's a vicious cycle from both sides,’ complained Mr. Rohrabacher, looking back. Republicans are caught, he said, between conservative allies who paint homosexuals as ‘perverts’ and a gay-rights lobby that attacks the religious right as ‘bigots.’ Rejecting Mr. Clinton's directive would have been ‘unjust and unkind,’ said the Orange County conservative...."

BATEMAN, COX, DAVIS, DREIER, GOSS, McCOLLUM, AND ROHRABACHER REJECT "LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE" FOR BIBLE-BELIEVING CHRISTIANS

CLINTON'S ANTI-10TH AMENDMENT "FEDERALISM" EXECUTIVE ORDER WAS ALSO AT ISSUE IN THIS KEY ROLL CALL VOTE

And, of course, as is usually the case, there were implications in this vote for more than one issue. As Congressman Hefley pointed out in floor debate, earlier "this year Bill Clinton issued two executive orders that mandate profound policy changes....both orders contained policy decisions which, if left unchallenged, will have far-reaching implications. I oppose these orders and am offering an amendment that would prohibit the use of funds to implement, enforce or administer either of these orders.

"This action amends President Richard Nixon's 1969 executive order by adding sexual orientation to the race, color, religion, sex, disability, age, and national origin as classes of Federal employees which are entitled to affirmative action programs...."

A VOTE AGAINST HEFLEY WAS A VOTE FOR PRO-HOMO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

"President Nixon's executive order set forth the policy of government...to promote the full realization of equal employment opportunity through...a continuing affirmative program in each executive department and agency. The Nixon order further provides that the head of each executive department and agency shall establish and maintain an affirmative program....

48 REPUBLICANS VOTE TO USE YOUR TAXES TO SUBSIDIZE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE

48 Republicans joined 175 Democrats and one Independent in gaining a 224 to 198 victory for New York Democrat Congressman Nita Lowey's proposal (Roll Call no. 290, 224-198, 7/16/98) to make available Federal funds for so-called family planning devices, including abortion-inducing devices, and to preclude participation of health care plans which exclude contraceptives.

HOUSE NARROWLY (214-212) KILLS FEDERALLY FUNDED HOMOSEXUAL HONEYMOON HOMES

Congratulations to retiring California GOP Congressman Frank Riggs, whose amendment denying the city of San Francisco $265 million in Federal housing money was approved on a 214 to 212 vote (Roll Call no. 349, 7/29/98). The basis for the denial is the policy of the San Francisco city government using Federal tax dollars to subsidize housing for "live-in homosexual partners".

According to The New York Times (7/30/98, p. A14), Riggs said "the policy wrongly elevated unmarried homosexuals to the same status as married hetero-sexuals."

33 REPUBLICANS GET INTO BED WITH THE "GAY" LOBBY

25 DEMOCRATS SHOW COURAGE BY VOTING TO STOP USE OF FEDERAL TAX DOLLARS FOR LAVENDER LOVENESTS

Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin of June 30, 1998

The Washington Post reports (6/18/98, p. A4) "The House voted 219 to 209 yesterday to abolish the current tax code by Dec. 31, 2002, in a largely symbolic act that one of its chief sponsors said would force politicians to make tax reform the centerpiece of the next presidential election.

"The bill, authored by Republican Reps. Steve Largent (Okla.) and Bill Paxon (N.Y.), directs Congress to enact a new tax system by July 4, 2002. Largent acknowledged that the current Congress cannot force a future Congress to act, but said the bill would spur tax reform in the 2000 election year....

"House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), who held a news conference on the West Front to highlight his support for the Tax Code Termination Act, argued that the code had to be eliminated because it had become ‘a monstrosity.’"

BUT SOME REPUBLICANS EVEN FAVOR KEEPING THE IRS IN PERPETUITY

Unfortunately, there are some members of Congress who even oppose terminating the tax code four years down the road. The 20 Republicans who voted (H.R. 3097, Roll Call no. 239, 6/17/98) to keep the IRS and the present tax code were:

HOUSE GOP LEADERSHIP KILLS RESOLUTION TO WITHDRAW FROM BOSNIA

According to The Washington Post (3/19/98, p. A4), the "House, in a 225 to 193 vote, rejected a vigorously contested resolution yesterday that would have forced President Clinton to withdraw U.S. troops from Bosnia within 60 days or obtain authorization from Congress to leave them there."

BOSNIAN INTERVENTION IS UNWISE AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL

"Rep. Tom Campbell (R-Calif.), who sponsored the bill, said it was time for Congress to assert its ‘constitutional responsibility’ over a military operation that began more than two years ago and recently was extended indefinitely. While his resolution was intended essentially to test the constitutionality of the 1973 War Powers Resolution, it drew support from members wishing to protest the open-ended nature and growing cost of U.S. involvement in Bosnia."

DEMOPUBS COMBINE TO BACK CLINTON, NATO, AND THE U.N.

"Leaders in both parties opposed the measure, suggesting it would send signals of uncertainty and confusion to the rest of the world and undermine the morale of U.S. troops. In testimony earlier in the day before a House panel, Defense Secretary William S. Cohen and Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright insisted the administration had a legal right to keep thousands of American soldiers on peacekeeping duty in Bosnia indefinitely and argued that the War Powers Act should not be tested on a peacekeeping operation."

$7 BILLION DIVERTED FROM DEFENSE BUDGET

"During the hearing, members of the House National Security Committee complained that the $7 billion spent on the Bosnia operation so far had curbed spending on new military equipment and contributed to an erosion of U.S. military readiness."

BATEMAN, BOEHNER, COX, DUNN, GILMAN, LARGENT, SOLOMON LINE UP WITH GINGRICH

Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin of May 15, 1998

J.C. WATTS LEADS GOP IN CRITICIZING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION WHILE VOTING TO KEEP IT

According to The Washington Post (5/12/98, p. A17), "After more than three years of decrying affirmative action – mandated preferences for minorities and women in jobs, education and other programs – while simultaneously refusing to abolish it, Watts has come to occupy a pivotal role in the House debate on the controversial issue. Even as Republican leaders have repeatedly given their blessing to measures aimed at rolling back such programs, the lone black Republican in the House has served as a bulwark against any dramatic change."

55 GOP CONGRESSMEN BACK WATTS BY VOTING TO KEEP RACIAL QUOTAS

"This phenomenon was on full display last week, when 55 Republicans voted along with almost the entire Democratic caucus to defeat California Republican Frank Riggs's amendment denying federal funds to public colleges and universities that rely on the policy in their admissions. The day before, Watts had joined liberal Democratic Rep. John Lewis (Ga.), also an African American, in circulating a ‘Dear Colleague’ letter urging members to vote against the measure...."

GOP MINORITY CONTROLS THE POLICY OF THE GOP MAJORTIY

"The true test on affirmative action came in early November, when the House Judiciary Committee met to mark up a bill sponsored by Rep. Charles T. Canady (R-Fla.) prohibiting the federal government from considering race or gender as a factor in federal hiring and contracting. House Republicans held an impassioned debate on the bill in a closed meeting, in which both Watts and Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-Tx.) objected strongly to the measure. Four Republicans then joined the panel's Democrats in tabling the bill.

"‘It was his objection last fall that really convinced us to hold off on this and talk about it more,’ said Rep. John Linder (Ga.), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee....

"Here in Washington, however, the sentiments of lawmakers like Watts and Bonilla still hold sway. In addition to affecting the leadership's decisions, Watts exerts influence over rank-and-file members as well."

STEVE LARGENT ABANDONS PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL JUSTICE TO FAVOR HIS FRIEND

"Watts's close friend Steve Largent (R-Okla.), for example, voted against the Riggs amendment, and fellow Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn was deeply conflicted about the issue shortly before voting in favor of the provision. According to Coburn, members of the Oklahoma delegation have held lengthy discussions about how to reach a common understanding on the subject."

"The affirmative-action ban would have prevented public colleges and universities that accept federal money from using race, sex or national origin in deciding which students to admit. It was proposed by Rep. Frank Riggs, California Republican, as an amendment to a $101 billion higher-education bill...." (Source: The Washington Times, 5/7/98, p. 1)

MYRICK, REDMOND, ENGLISH, ENSIGN, NUSSLE, PRYCE, SOUDER, AND WHITE VOTE PRO-QUOTA

According to The New York Times (5/7/98, p. A17) "The House tonight overwhelmingly passed an education bill that would make loans cheaper for millions of students but would soften the blow for banks through a new Federal subsidy. In a late night vote of 414 to 4, Democrats joined Republicans to approve the higher education reauthorization bill...."

UNCLE SAM HAS NO AUTHORITY TO LOAN OUT OUR MONEY

"Unlike interest rates on mortgages and car loans, which are set competitively by banks, the rate on college loans is fixed by Congress and is scheduled to be readjusted July 1. The current rate is 8.23 percent.

"In a bipartisan compromise that seeks to strike a balance between the concerns of students and banks, the House bill would create two separate interest rates for the loans, one for the students, 7.43 percent, and a slightly higher one for banks. 7.93 percent. The Federal government would make up the difference."

CAMPBELL, CRANE, PAUL, AND SCHAFFER STAND ALONE

WHY DOES GOP CONGRESS TAX US TO SUBSIDIZE MARXISTS, SODOMITES, ABORTIONISTS, AND ONE-WORLDERS?

First of all, there is no enumerated power giving Congress authority to appropriate funds for education.

Second, such appropriations are in violation of the First Amendment prohibition on Congress funding an establishment of religion.

Third, from a pragmatic standpoint, any conservative who votes to prop up what passes for "higher education" is funding an ongoing attack on the fundamental values on which America was founded.

Fourth, there is no authority for the Federal government with respect to the student loan program to serve as a banker, guaranteeing loans, either as a first resort or a last resort.

"HIGHER EDUCATION" SHOULD BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE FREE MARKET

We paid a high price for the Savings and Loan scandal, but the price we pay for underwriting Marxists, sodomites, feminists, and anti-private property environmentalists who have tenure at all too many colleges and universities is a far higher price indeed.

Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin of April 30, 1998

On April 28, the U.S. Senate approved sweeping legislation to pay $819 million in claimed back dues to the United Nations.

As reported by The New York Times (4/29/98, p. A10), the "vote, 51 to 49, was largely along party lines, with 49 Republicans joining 2 Democrats in support of the legislation, and 6 Republicans and 43 Democrats opposed. The House approved the same bill last month by a voice vote....

"At issue in the conference report is...[t]he provision, proposed by Reprsentative Chris Smith, Republican of New Jersey, [which] would prohibit Federal financing for international organizations that lobby foreign governments to change their abortion policies. Republicans say they have already compromised to the extent that the measure has just symbolic value."

HELMS ADMITS THAT SO-CALLED "PRO-LIFE" LANGUAGE WILL HAVE LITTLE PRACTICAL IMPACT

As described by The Washington Times (4/23/98, p. A17), "Republicans have once more softened anti-abortion language in the bill to pay almost $1 billion in U.N. arrears...."

Senator Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), who favors sending the money to the U.N. in return for the Clinton Administration accepting some of his ideas about State Department reorganization, acknowledges the irrelevance of the supposedly pro-life provisions in the bill saying, "What did Ronald Reagan's Mexico City policy do? It forbade any expenditure of U.S. taxpayer money going to any organizations that performed abortions abroad....The provision in this conference report does not do what the Mexico City policy did. As much as I wish it were otherwise, section 1816 will not cut off funding to organizations that perform abortions as required under President Reagan's original Mexico City policy. All section 1816 does is simply prohibit population control groups from using American taxpayers' money – which they will receive under current law anyhow – to lobby foreign countries to overturn their laws pertaining to abortion." (Source: Conference Report on H.R. 1757, 4/28/98)

A BILLION DOLLARS FOR THE U.N., EMPTY SYMBOLISM FOR CONSERVATIVES

Supposedly this was a pro-life vote, but, in fact, the correct pro-life vote would have been to deny all funds to the pro-abortion United Nations and to the population control advocacy and activist organizations which collaborate with it.

Once again, the Republican Party has abandoned principle to score meaningless political points against Bill Clinton, foolishly asserting that rhetorical limits on subsidies to pro-abortion groups somehow override the stupidity of giving those groups (including the U.N. itself) any money at all.

IT IS NOT PRO-LIFE TO SUBSIDIZE THE PRO-ABORTION UNITED NATIONS

PRO-ABORTION "POPULATION" GROUPS WILL STILL GET U.S. TREASURY SUBSIDIES

"The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 passed the House on March 26 on a voice vote after anti-abortion language the administration found objectionable was softened to allow U.S. aid to go to family planning groups that participate in, but do not sponsor, pro-abortion lobbying efforts...."

AND U.N. WILL GET $819 MILLION-PLUS

"As agreed upon in [an] historic bipartisan compromise last summer between Sens. Jesse Helms, North Carolina Republican, and Joseph R. Biden, Jr., Delaware Democrat, the bill would provide for $819 million to be paid in U.N. arrears....

"In November, in an effort to make the provision palatable to both sides of the abortion question, Rep. Christopher H. Smith, New Jersey Republican, offered a softer version of the Mexico City restrictions." (Source: Washington Times, 4/23/98, p. A17)

PRO-LIFE PRINCIPLES SOLD FOR A MESS OF POTTAGE

Judie Brown, Chairman of the American Life League, observes in her April 17 Communiqué (p. 2) that the reconstructed "Mexico City policy" is a sham. "New language passed by the U.S. House of Representatives includes a waiver that would affect only those organizations that violate the abortion laws of a foreign country, or lobby to legalize abortion. It would not affect groups that are involved in performing abortions."

More information about the U.N.

According to The Washington Blade (4/10/98, p. 18), the "United States Senate on April 2 gave voice vote consent to confirm attorney Elaine D. Kaplan, an open Lesbian, as head of the Office of Special Counsel, an independent federal agency that investigates reports of discriminatory actions against federal employees....She is a resident of D.C. and a member of Gay and Lesbian Attorneys of Washington...."

HOMOSEXUAL FAMILY GETS OFFICIAL RECOGNITION

"During the [Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs March 30] hearing, Kaplan followed what has become a tradition for nominees before a Senate confirmation committee by introducing her partner and their two children, ages 7 and 4, to committee members.

"The committee voted 9-0 to approve Kaplan's and [U.S. Postal Rate Commission nominee Ruth] Goldway's nominations on April 2, several hours before the full Senate approved the two nominations by ‘unanimous consent,’ or voice vote....

"Kaplan's position gives her jurisdiction over complaints filed by government employees alleging anti-Gay discrimination related to personnel matters."

BROWNBACK, NICKLES, AND SMITH ACQUIESCE

Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin of April 15, 1998

The Wall Street Journal reports (3/27/98, p. A2) that the "Senate overwhelmingly approved the Clinton administration's $18 billion request for the International Monetary Fund....

"The lopsided 84-16 vote gives the Treasury a badly needed boost....Senate Republicans backed the IMF by an almost 3-1 margin....

"The Treasury and IMF argue that they need the additional funding to cover future crises in developing nations. The IMF has committed tens of billions of dollars to shore up Indonesia, Thailand and South Korea...."

TRENT LOTT LEADS THE WAY

"Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R., Miss.), after winning concessions for shipbuilders at home, joined in support of the IMF....

"Sen. Lauch Faircloth (R., N.C.) lambasted the final package as ‘incredibly weak’ and mocked the IMF as a set of ‘silk-suited dilettantes’ given to a diet of ‘champagne and caviar at the expense of the American taxpayer.’"

CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS ARE LIBERAL WITH YOUR MONEY

Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin of March 31, 1998

A good part of the problem is that most members of Congress are so busy that they don't have time to read the bills---and even when they do find the time to read the text, they don't understand the "code words" which the liberals have been using for decades to advance their counter-cultural, revolutionary agenda.

IT IS NOW U.S. POLICY TO CHALLENGE TRADITIONAL AFRICAN CULTURE

H.R. 1432 includes among its objectives "strengthening and expanding the private sector in sub-Saharan Africa, especially women-owned businesses." In its statement of policy it asserts that "the Congress supports economic self-reliance for sub-Saharan African countries, particularly those committed to...the importance of women to economic growth and development." Later on we are told that this involves "improved economic opportunities for women as entrepreneurs and employees".

The bill fails to note that there are significant elements of African culture which in some cases support notions of male headship, consistent with the Biblical training received over centuries from Christian missionaries.

Using language straight out of the Economic Opportunity Act conceived by Lyndon Johnson, Sargent Shriver, Robert Kennedy, Michael Harrington, Saul Alinsky, and others, the GOP-sponsored bill says that "The African Development Foundation has a unique congressional mandate to empower the poor to participate fully in development and to increase opportunities for gainful employment, poverty alleviation, and more equitable income distribution in sub-Saharan Africa." Neither Karl Marx nor Hillary Clinton could have said it better.

IN THE NAME OF FREE TRADE, GOP CONSERVATIVES MAKE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS SUBSIDIZE "DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE" BY AFRICAN REGIMES WHICH BESTOW BENEFITS ON THEIR FRIENDS

This bill posits that the role of government is to redistribute the wealth with insufficient regard for private property rights and individual liberties. It also carries forward the concept of government by non-profit corporation, where left-wing activist groups become beneficiaries of U.S. foreign aid to advance their socialist, feminist, humanist, environmentalist, abortionist, and homosexual objectives.

THE "UGLY AMERICAN" HAS NOT LEARNED ANYTHING FROM LBJ'S DESTRUCTIVE "WAR ON POVERTY"

It would be outrageous to impose this regime on free Americans. What folly it is, then, for so-called conservatives to impose it on African societies with which they are scarcely familiar.

DOES FEDERAL FASCISM FOSTER COMMERCIAL PROFITS IN THE NAME OF FREE TRADE?

Such a blanket endorsement of AID's activities in recent decades merely reflects the failure of these members of Congress to do their homework. I would be surprised if many of these Republicans could, with a straight face, defend these programs to their constituents if their details were known to voters back home.

SUPPORT FOR WTO IS PUSHED AS A PRECONDITION FOR U.S. AID

Another factor in determining eligibility is "the extent to which such country has a recognizable commitment to reducing poverty". That's a familiar term to followers of the Great Society, and it's a code word for "distributive justice", which is a fancy term for redistributing the wealth.

U.S. TAXPAYERS PLACED AT RISK BY $650 MILLION OPIC EXPANSION

The bill obliges OPIC to initiate two or more equity funds, one of which would have assets of $150 million; the other of which would be funded at the $500 million level. It is stipulated that OPIC "shall ensure that the funds are used to provide support in particular to women entrepreneurs, and to innovative investments that expand opportunities for women and maximize opportunities for poor individuals."

GUESS WHO BENEFITS FROM "DEBT RELIEF"? GUESS WHO PAYS FOR IT?

IN THE NAME OF "FREE TRADE" GOP VOTES TO CREATE AN AFRICAN NAFTA:

Excerpted from Howard Phillips Issues and Strategy Bulletin of March 15, 1998

15 REPUBLICANS RESCUE FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION QUOTAS BY RACE AND GENDER

James Glassman asks in The Washington Post (3/10/98, p. A17), "[w]hat's wrong with the Republicans? They're now entering their fourth year in control of Congress – the first time that's happened since 1930. The economy is booming, the deficit has vanished and the president may be indicted or impeached. You would think this state of affairs would give them a little self-confidence, but GOP voices are confused, whimpering or downright inaudible. Bill Clinton, despite all his troubles, is setting the agenda."

"PLAY IT SAFE" POLITICS IS RISKY

"On Friday the Senate, with 15 Republicans concurring, voted to keep an affirmative-action program that steers billions of dollars in transit construction to companies owned by women and minorities. Rejecting these set-asides, which are discriminatory and costly, may be the right thing to do, but it would raise a ruckus – and we can't have that in an election year."

GOP SENATORS BOND, CAMPBELL, D'AMATO, MURKOWSKI, AND SPECTER VOTE TO KEEP QUOTAS