Speakers at a February 3-4 closed-door meeting of the Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA), a group composed of foundation and corporate backers of the environmental movement, called on environmental groups to use children's health concerns as a tactic for promoting their regulatory agenda. Participants in the meeting were shown a commercial featuring a dramatization of a parent taking an asthma-stricken child to an emergency room. The voice- over said, "The cost of dirty air is children who literally cannot breathe." EPA Administrator Carol Browner underscored the message of the commercial by noting that reports of childhood asthma are rising. Perhaps even more illuminating, speakers at the meeting seemed to suggest that the environmental movement is losing ground to free market environmentalism. For example, Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) suggested that pollution taxes be advanced as a way to deal with pollution not only because they would raise revenues, but because they could be sold as a "market mechanism." Another speaker suggested that the environmental movement must learn to talk about "local control" or they will lose the debate. Devolution of regulatory authority has long been advocated by free market environmentalists.
House Majority Whip Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) discussed two policy statements he's recently made, one on delaying tax cuts until the federal budget is balanced and the other advocating impeachment of activist federal judges. On taxes, DeLay said his concern was that negotiations with the White House over tax cuts could force Congress to agree to White House nanny state targeted tax cuts, whereas if Congress and the White House were to balance the budget first Congress would be in a stronger position to cut taxes without micro-managing the lives of Americans.
On judicial impeachment, DeLay called for reigning in judges who use their power to promote specific political outcomes, such as a judge in Texas who decided to overturn an election by throwing out the votes of active duty military personnel on the grounds that the soldiers voted absentee.
REP.CHARLES KEY COMMITTEES: STATE CAPITOL BLDG. CRIMINAL JUSTICE ROOM 508 EDUCATION OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73105 BANKING & FINANCE (405)521.2711 WILDLIFE House Of Representatives March 12, 1997 Dear Concerned Citizen: My name is Charles Key and I'd like to share some personal and inside information with you. I'm an Oklahoma State Representative. I humbly ask you to spare a few minutes to read some things that you have probably never seen before on TV or read in the newspapers about some shocking events associated with the Oklahoma City bombing. Regardless what city or state you're from, you will likely be affected more than you may ever know by that bombing and pending trials. On April 19, 1995 when I heard the news (and literally heard the explosion) of the Murrah building I was dumbfounded. As the realization sunk in that so many people and children were killed, I, along with millions of others watching news coverage, felt that indescribable, overwhelming sensation in the pit of my stomach. Yet, as the "story" unfolded, my spirits were lifted as I saw example after example of shear human compassion and an outpouring of unblemished, unconditional love flow forth in a far greater degree than I had ever seen in any venue of life, including and especially in political circles. Put more bluntly, that sacrificial selflessness and unity was the very antithesis of the type of behavior that so typically embodies politics. How refreshing it was to see people helping people without the proverbial ugly political head rearing up asking, "What's in it for me?" or "Why should I do that?" As the weeks passed, I saw God breathed compassion by the citizens of Oklahoma and from many other states who joined in to help. Those memories will never leave my mind and nothing can eradicate the great amount of good that was done by those thousands of acts of kindness. NOT PRINTED AT STATE EXPENSE --------------------------------------------------------------------- As a matter of fact, it is that very visible love that helped me hang on for the two tough years that followed. (I hope you will take the time to read more about those years in the following pages.) Over the next few weeks, inconsistencies began emerging. Stories kept changing and although I couldn't see the emerging political angle, I could sense it. Consider the following facts which caused me to become initially concerned. Fact #1: The initial A.P.B. (All Points Bulletin) was for Middle Eastern John Does in a brown pick-up truck. The Jordanian brought back from London who had apparent bomb making materials in his suitcase and other John Doe suspects who were described as Middle Eastern. Fact #2: Those Middle Eastern reports quickly vanished. Why?... Fact #3: The 1200 pound ammonium nitrate bomb "grew" continuously from 1200 to 2400 to 4800 pounds. Fact #4: The early reports told us about explosives inside the Murrah Building. Remember how the rescue effort was "put on hold" while the bomb squad entered the building to search for and take out those intentionally placed internal explosives? Then those reports were described in detail by local U.S. Congressmen and bomb experts interviewed in studio by the media. Fact #5: Those reports also disappeared or were explained away as dummy or 'for show' items. Fact #6: Those who dared oppose the REVISIONIST NEWS ACCOUNTS, were ostracized, mocked, discredited, dark-cornered, etc. I know, I was one who dared to be politically incorrect. Fact #7: The ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) had field agents assigned to the office at the Murrah Building. Yet, on the day of the bombing, not one of those agents were killed. They were mysteriously, uncharacteristically absent from the building that morning. At some point it became painfully apparent that there was more wrong than right with the federal investigation. That is when I had a very tough decision to make. Should I sit and do nothing and remain in my comfort zone simply "playing the part" of the caring politician for the photo op's? Or should I really do the right thing even if it meant giving the phrase "politically incorrect" a whole new dimension? It didn't take long after discussing it with my wife to determine that I had to do the right thing -- no matter what the consequences were to be. Having come to that conclusion, I decided to go forward to search out the truth and tell it to a waiting world.. Little did I know the onslaught I was about to embrace. Before I go on to tell you what I did that I believed was right, allow me to tell you what some in the establishment news media and political circles claimed I was doing wrong. Major media has launched unheard of attacks against our desire to conduct constitutionally sound and proper investigations. The Daily Oklahoman and the Tulsa World have published nine separate editorials viciously attacking me, Glenn Wilburn and all those who have stood up and demanded all of the truth about this terrible crime. An editorial from the Daily Oklahoman entitled, "DROP IT, MR. KEY even had the audacity to say; "As we argued when Key first set out on this course, the Legislature and its staff had no business investigating the bombing. It was, and is, poorly equipped to do so. The same can be said of a panel of local citizens" . . . The same day Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson issued a personal attack saying that I was proposing a "wasteful witch hunt" and was pushing "the worst kind of paranoid conspiracy pandering" People in powerful positions have repeatedly attacked those of us who have been scrutinizing the federal investigation. Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating was a former FBI agent himself and spent most of his career in the services of Federal Departments of the Treasury, Justice and HUD (Housing and Urban Development). At one time in his career his responsibilities included the overseeing of the ATF and other federal law enforcement. Gov. Keating went so far as to say that "raising questions would not bring one whit of intelligence to the process." He later escalated his attacks saying those of us who were raising serious questions were "howling at the moon" and "off the reservation." All of these people are literally robbing the victims family members and survivors -- and all of us -- the opportunity and right to know the truth. For nearly two years the negative media coverage seemed unending. And although I never vowed not to do any fundraising, going hat in hand was about the last thing I wanted to do. After all, I wasn't searching for cash, I was searching for answers. I shudder to think what sort of creative headlines would have appeared had I operated an active fundraising campaign in the wake of that tragedy. In retrospect, I now believe I may have done a disservice by not fundraising. First, had I acquired cash reserves for the very worthy cause I was working on, it would have aided tremendously in fighting the formidable disinformation and smear campaign waged by "faceless forces" that appear to have pockets of unending depth and the mass media at their beck and call. Second, had I done fundraising, my own family and others wouldn't have gone into debt by this largely self-funded effort. WE NOW FACE OUR GREATEST CHALLENGE Glenn Wilburn, who lost two grand children in the tragedy, and I filed a petition in November, 1995, to have a local county grand jury impaneled to investigate the bombing. This independent grand jury would be fully autonomous of the federal investigation, and would double in the capacity of a watchdog of the federal investigation. Here in Oklahoma, we are very fortunate to be one of only two states that have a constitutional guarantee that the people of a county can cause a grand jury to be impaneled whenever they feel there is a need simply by circulating a petition. It is and always has been a common occurrence in our state. In fact there are county grand juries meeting as I write this letter. The Presiding State District Judge, Dan Owens, tried to stop us from petitioning to impanel the grand jury and we were forced to appeal his actions to a higher court. That is where the latest and some of the most intense criticism has come from recently. One year after our appeal, we finally got a written opinion from the Court of Appeals in the Tulsa district. On December 24, 1996 the court ruled not only in our favor, but they did so unanimously. But wait--there is more. Not only was it unanimous, but the court issued the decision "For Publication." That means that it was such a clear-cut case in regard to the state constitution, statutes, and previous case law, that it constituted a precedent- setting case to be used in lawbooks, most likely for many years to come. Yet, why is there such extreme opposition to keep this independent grand jury from being allowed to assemble? I believe the answer is because some in our federal law enforcement agencies (i.e. ATF and FBI) had prior knowledge that certain individuals were planning to bomb the Murrah Federal Building! I believe that because of at least four reasons: I) Six different individuals have come forward and reported seeing the bomb squad in the immediate vicinity of the Murrah Building early on the morning of the bombing. 2) The Oklahoma City Fire Department received a call from the FBI the Friday before the bombing and was told to be on the alert for a possible terrorist attack on a government building. 3) Bruce Shaw, who had frantically come to look for his wife inside the smoldering building, was told by an ATF agent, "You won't find any ATF agents in the building because they were warned on their pagers not to come in this morning and they're now in a debriefing." This conversation was corroborated by his boss who accompanied Bruce to help him find his wife. 4) Carol Howe, a paid informant for the ATF has recently come forward to confirm that she informed the ATF that two individuals, Dennis Mahon and Andreas Strassmier, were planning to bomb the federal building in Oklahoma City. She also said that the likely date for the bombing was April 19! Prior knowledge on the part of some individuals in the federal government may also be why the federal prosecutors barred every single witness to John Doe(s) from the Federal Grand Jury. Of the more than 20 witnesses to one or more John Doe(s), none - not even one - were allowed to tell the Grand Jury what they saw. Additionally, when the prosecution's list of witnesses was unsealed several weeks ago, we found that the one witness who will be allowed to testily in the trial to McVeigh being in the company of a John Doe can't describe in any way who he saw. Indeed, the best witnesses who can positively place McVeigh in downtown Oklahoma City that morning saw him with one or more individuals and are able to describe to some degree what that person or persons looked like. Those witnesses will not be allowed to testily at McVeigh's trial. Incredible? Did you hear that right? Yes, you did. As bizarre as it sounds, Federal Prosecutors were not allowing any of those witnesses to be seen or heard by the Federal Grand Jury. This gives "blind justice" a whole new meaning. To make this even more clear, the Federal Grand Jury wanted to interview both the eye witnesses and the sketch artist who drew the John Doe composites but they were flatly refused by the federal "authorities." Clearly they were blatantly deprived of their basic Constitutional rights as grand jurors. Why? Just what is it that they are trying to accomplish? Or, perhaps more pointedly, just who are they trying to protect? And what all are they trying to hide? Let's not forget, elected officials are supposed to be the servants of the people and not the other way around. Just what's going on??? And how are they getting away with it?!!!!! Our efforts to impanel a county grand jury are important for numerous reasons. One of the reasons that concerns me most is that I fear that the record of McVeigh's trial will comprise the "official story" of what happened If the evidence of prior knowledge and other perpetrators is not presented in this case, I fear that the government will be successful in shaping the official story to permanently exclude that evidence. The 1993 New York World Trade Center bombing is a case in point. Because certain tapes implicating the role of the FBI in allowing the attack to take place were ruled inadmissible in court, many people do not know that the FBI indeed had knowledge prior to that bombing and could have prevented it--yet they allowed the plot to continue resulting in the deaths of six innocent people. Unfortunately the transcripts of that court case have become the "official story" of what happened in that bombing. Another reason that I feel that the OKC bombing case is important and directly effects you is that the government has gone to a new level of operating out of the bounds of the law and is becoming more and more arrogant. A few weeks ago, ABC was getting ready to run a major story on the prior knowledge issue. The Justice Department became aware of it and contacted some of the executives at ABC. After acknowledging the validity of the story they put extreme pressure on ABC not to air the report saying, "The people couldn't handle the truth." I don't know about you but that kind of arrogance sickens me and leaves me with a eerie feeling. The government must not be allowed to get away with yet another botched job! The Government must be held accountable. The good news... In spite of the seemingly inpenetratable and insurmountable forces acting against us, on February 18, 1997 the Oklahoma State Supreme Court miraculously ruled in favor of allowing the independent local county grand jury and against the Federal Government's attempt to quash the rights of the people. Now the forgotten families, survivors, and victims who died from the blast will have their right to a County Grand Jury and a full, open and truthful investigation. The bad news... Any day now the courts will give us the formalized written order to begin passing the petitions to impanel the independent jury, but we're just about stone broke. For nearly two years, I never conducted so much as a single fluid-raiser to properly investigate this worst terrorist act in the history of both our state and the nation. I also know how tapped most people are these days, but I believe at this point, I don't have much of a choice. We now need funds to secure copies of voluminous government documents, and to pay independent investigators, as well as money to print, publicize and distribute signature forms to complete the legal requirements to impanel the County Grand Jury. In short, this effort is now bigger than what I can handle fiscally or physically. May I count on your help? Enclosed is a simple straight forward form asking for whatever financial assistance you can afford to give. Please do what you can. We will put you on our mailing list to keep you up to date on the petition drive and signature gathering process. The clock is about to begin and we have limited time by law to gather signatures. And you know that the big players within the Federal Government are not likely to help us. That is why I am counting on you. Thank you for being patient and open-minded enough to read this letter. Together we can get the truth out, make a real difference and God willing, see justice prevail. May I please count on your help? Sincerely, Rep. Charles Key P.S. Elements within the federal government and in the establishment media have done virtually everything in their power to block an independent county investigation of the Oklahoma bombing tragedy. On February 18 the Oklahoma Supreme Court cleared the way for the people to investigate the Federal Government and their investigation of the bombing. Next week we must begin obtaining signatures. Will you please stand up and be counted? PLEASE FILL OUT THE ENCLOSED REPLY CARD AND SEND IT BACK TO ME RIGHT AWAY. It only takes a few moments, and it will make a real difference in the effort to uncover the truth about the Oklahoma bombing. Thank you for your time and concern. Oklahoma County Grand Jury & Bombing Investigation Fund Post Office Box 75669 Oklahoma City, OK 73147
The original budget amendment would have:
1) Repealed the $15.00 Brady background check fee currently being charged by the Ohio Attorney General. This fee is not authorized by Federal or Ohio law and should not be.
2) Prohibited the expenditure of any government funds for the creation, maintenance or expansion of any records on gun buyers from information obtained through Brady background checks. This prohibition shall even apply to funds from private sources which come under the control of any government agency or personnel.
3) Made it a felony of up to five years in prison and a fine of not more than $100,000 for officials who kept illegal records.
Rep. Mottley (R-41) offered an amendment to strip the important penalty protections in #3 above. Anti-gun bureaucrats who try to keep illegal registration records will be emboldened by this weakening of the Young Amendment.
The Ohio legislature will have to put teeth -- and that means felony penalties -- into the prohibitions on illegal record keeping on gun owners.
The action now turns to the Ohio Senate. Expect an attempt to strip the Young Amendment from the budget in the Senate, probably in committee.
Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation and Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy led a discussion about the Senate Republican Leadership's apparent willingness to schedule a vote on the Chemical Weapons Treaty. The treaty is opposed by many for 1) national security reasons, 2) because major chemical weapons made by Russia aren't covered, while ours are, and 3) because it would permit a United Nations-style international bureaucracy to inspect any site in the U.S. upon demand -- including U.S. private businesses, and thus is considered to be both a threat to the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens and a threat to the sovereignty of the United States. "This is the kind of stuff we would have gotten from Hugh Scott, or Howard Baker," said Weyrich. Referring to conservative syndicated talk host Michael Reagan's March 17 decision to leave the Republican Party as a protest of weak-kneed policies, Weyrich added: "If this is going to be what is going to continue to go on, Michael Reagan won't be the last person to leave the Republican Party." Gaffney distributed a one page sheet "The Case Against the Chemical Weapons Convention." Contact Paul Weyrich at 202/546-3000 or Frank Gaffney at 202/466-0515 or email@example.com (http://www.security-policy.org).
In September of 1996, President Clinton signed into law, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Buried at approximately page 650 of the new national Defense Bill, also known as Public Law 104-208, Part B, Title IV, the American public was given a national ID card. With no fanfare, no publicity and no scrutiny, the bill easily avoided the watchful eyes of even its most aggressive opponents.
The Coalition to Repeal the Fingerprints Law, a Georgia grassroots movement trying to rid the state of the new requirement to give digital fingerprints in order to obtain a state ID or driver's license, recently found the national ID tie. The group found that the national law not only mandates a national ID card, but found how it is to be used.
In Section 401-403, pilot programs have been initiated by the U.S. Attorney General, one of which is the "Machine Readable Document Pilot Program". In this particular program, employers would have to "procure" a document reader linked to the federal government's Social Security Administration in order to have the potential employee swipe their new driver's license/national ID card through the reader. Then, it would be up to the federal government to either approve or disapprove the applicant for employment.
Section 326 and 327 provide $5,000,000 per year grants to each state participating in any of the three pilot programs. The money has been allocated through the Criminal Alien Tracking Center and is called the Criminal Alien Identification System. The "automated identification system", which is to be used by "Federal, State, and local law enforcement" and will "provide for recording of fingerprints of aliens previously arrested and removed". The grants run from "fiscal years 1997 through 2001".
Additionally, Section 656 of the new law states that "after October 1, 2000, Federal agencies may only accept as proof of identity driver's licenses that conform to standards developed by the Secretary of the Treasury", after consultation with state motor vehicle officials and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators. The AAMVA sees digital fingerprinting as the best way to go in driver's license identifiers.
Fearing that all Americans were about to be digitally tattooed under the government's paranoiac guise of catching everything from aliens to dead beat dads, Congressman Dick Armey (R-TX) was one of the first to voice his opinion. Armey called the move, "an abomination and wholly at odds with the American tradition of individual freedom". Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) joined Armey in signing a letter denouncing the computer registry and tracking system and Jack Kemp announced in the New York Times that this was, "an anti-privacy, anti-business and anti-American approach" and that "it was no way to run immigration policy". Of course, all this was said before the bills were snuck through in the last defense bill. There is a possibility at this time, they don't even know the proposed legislation became law.
For the first time in American history and reminiscent of Communist countries, our government would have the ability to grant approval before a private company enters into private employment contracts with private citizens. Because of the nature of the employment system alone, personal information would be accessible to local agencies and anyone who even claims to be an employer. The government would have comprehensive files of all American citizen's names, dates of birth, place of birth, mother's maiden names, Social Security numbers, gender, race, driving records, child support payments, divorce status, hair color, eye color, height, weight, and anything else they may dream up in the future.
On May 10, 1995, a hearing was held by the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration entitled, "Verification of Applicant Identity for the Purposes of Employment and Public Assistance". The hearing was chaired by Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY) and attended by Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and John Kyl (R-AZ). Robert Razor of the Secret Service Financial Crimes Division gave the Subcommittee an explanation of the emerging biometric technological role in personal identification. He said, "The use of biometrics is the means by which an individual may be conclusively identified. There are two types of biometric identifiers: physical and behavioral characteristics. Physiological biometrics include facial features, hand geometry, retinal and iris patterns, DNA, and fingerprints. Behavioral characteristics include voice characteristics and signature analysis."
Now the people of America not only must have digital tattoos on their driver's licenses, we must also give information to the government when boarding commercial aircraft, called personality profiles, along with a government ID card. Of course, this guise is in order to catch some would be terrorist. Dianne Feinstein, author of the national ID law, explained in a Capitol Hill magazine that it was her intention to see Congress immediately implement a national identity system where every American is required to carry a card with a "magnetic strip on it which the bearer's unique voice, retina pattern, or fingerprint is digitally encoded." She also stated that "fifteen years ago, they would have torn the building down". We probably would have if we had known about it. I hope she doesn't mind that Georgia left out the magnetic strip and replaced it with two dimensional bar-coding.
During closing remarks of the May 10 Subcommittee meeting, Senator Alan Simpson stated, "There is much to do here, but I was just saying to Ted [Kennedy] before he left, a hearing like this fifteen years ago, would have torn the building down. And here we are today, just a bunch of us, kind of sitting around and no media, no nothing. This is fine with me. I get tired of them on this issue."
Based on other federal mandates, the Associated Press reported in the Wichita Eagle on March 6, 1997 that the "Federal government mandates a registry of new employees: State lawmakers balk at bill required by Congress to ease child support collection. A bill designed to increase state collection of child support payments was described as a "Big Brother" move and drew little support from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. But the federal government says the legislature must pass it or the state could lose as much as $29 million in federal funds." The bill referred to requires the state to set up a "new hires directory" that would require all employers to report to the state information about every newly hired employee. The directory would be made available to the Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services for child support collections. In the article, they reported that "the date in Kansas and other states, although confidential, would be available to a national directory of new hires." They further reported that all people would be listed, regardless of age and even those that have no child support obligation.
The Senate Judiciary Committee in Kansas was quick to offer comments condemning the federal mandate. Senator Mike Harris from Wichita, the committee chairman said, "This is the most potentially significant, far-reaching piece of legislation that has come through this committee". The legislators from both parties referred to "Big Brother" and George Orwell's novel, "1984". Kansas State Senator Paul Feleciano of Wichita said, "If ever we give witness to Big Brother watching over us, this is the beginning of it". Sen. Ed Pugh of Wamego had sharper words for the bill. He said, "I don't see how it can be drafted by someone in a free society. It's a perfect example of the ends justifying the means." These Kansas lawmakers are not referring to the Immigration Act, but to another new federal law, the Welfare Reform Act. If Kansas refuses to have a state bill in place later this year, they will loose as much as $29 million in federal funds for child support collection. Senator Pugh said it is a "wholesale assault on Constitutional rights".
The new driver's license requirement mandating fingerprints for Georgia driver's and those wanting ID cards passed the state legislature with virtually no public or media attention in April of 1996. The first known announcement was on the local Atlanta news announcing an October 1996 date to begin fingerprinting. Cyndee Parker, now a coordinator for the Coalition to Repeal the Fingerprint Law in Georgia began the campaign to repeal the egregious law.
Many Georgia lawmakers joined in on the repeal efforts. Representatives Mitchell Kaye, Brian Joyce, Vernon Jones and Senator Pam Glanton were the first to help lead the repeal efforts in the General Assembly of Georgia. Eight bills were drawn by the House and one by the Senate. Mitchell Kaye refers to the law as, "tracking us like a can of dog food".
Due to the Governor's and House Speaker's manipulations, all eight House bills were held hostage by the House Motor Vehicle's Committee and were never voted on. The Senate overwhelmingly passed a Senate Bill, only to find it placed as hostage, along with the other bills in Motor Vehicles. On the last night of the Georgia Session, Senator Glanton amended another driver's license related bill and it also was never voted on by the House due to the same manipulations, illegal rule changes and an incredible amount of confusion on the House Floor. Governor Miller stated numerous times during the year that he would veto any repeal effort. House Speaker Tom Murphy was happy to see that the Governor did not have to get out his veto pen.
The Coalition will now take their story around the state using town hall meetings. The repeal effort has made very strange political bedfellows, with such groups as the ACLU, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the Libertarian Party of Georgia, the Christian Coalition, American's for Lawful Government, ABATE a motorcycle rider's education group, and many other diverse groups, totaling about 20 in all and growing rapidly. The Coalition believes that once Georgian's know about the federal implications, the groundswell will grow so large that the Governor will have no choice but rid the state of the obviously federally mandated bill. The group says that at least the State of Washington was honest with its citizens when proposing the same fingerprinting legislation. Right in Section 1 of the Washington bill, they state this is a national ID card in conformity with federal mandates.
Georgia just slipped theirs through unnoticed by lawmakers and the public, the same way the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act was. The group also had to notify their United States Congressional Representatives and Senators, as they were unaware of the facts as well. Both State and Federal Representatives and Senators had absolutely no knowledge they had passed the new laws until the Coalition brought it to their attention.
The Coaltion to Repeal the Fingerprints Law can be reached at 404-250-8105 or visit their web site at www.mcwebs.com/repeal/
Despite claims to the contrary by United Nations' Secretary General Kofi Annan, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and President Clinton, the United States owes nothing to the U.N. In fact, according to a March 1996 General Accounting Office (GAO) report titled "Peace Operations, U.S. Costs in Support of Haiti, Former Yugoslavia, Somalia and Rwanda," the U.N. owes the U.S. some $3.5 billion for assistance in peacekeeping operations.
On March 5, following up on the GAO's finding, Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R.-Md.) and the Coalition to End the U.N. Entitlement, which is a member of the American Sovereignty Protection Association (ASAP), held a press conference to announce the United Nations Erroneous Debt Act (HR 934), a bill sponsored by Bartlett and 52 other congressmen. The measure would essentially prohibit any U.S. payment to the U.N. until, as Bartlett said, "our overpayments are either reimbursed or properly credited." The bill has been referred to the House Committee on International relations, and hearings have not yet been scheduled.
According to the GAO report, during the period 1992 to 1995, "the incremental cost reported by U.S. government agencies for support of U.N peace operations in Haiti, the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Somalia was over $6.6 billion." The funds, which came primarily from the Department of Defense and various federal agencies, were used to provide military supplies, transportation, humanitarian relief and other services to the U.N. Of the $6.6 billion, however, the United States was credited with only $1.8 billion against assessed contributions to the U.N. during the period 1992 to 1995. This means, in effect, that after subtracting the $1.3 billion in "dues" that the United States allegedly owes as a U.N. member, Annan and friends owe the United States a total of $3.5 billion.
"Today, the Congress and the American people are sending a clear message to the U.N.," Bartlett said. "Unless it fixes its books, becomes accountable for its spending, and reforms its bloated bureaucracy, it will not get a single penny of American taxpayers' money."
Cliff Kincaid, director of ASAP, chastised the U.N. as "the real global deadbeat," and offered suggestions as to how the United States could come up with the money it owes the U.S. Perhaps, he said, Kofi Annan could take a voluntary pay cut from his annual salary of $280,075, or the organization could rescind former U.N. Secretary General and Nazi collaborator Kurt Waldheim's $102,000 salary. In any case, Kincaid said, "We must set up our own national version of a Neighborhood Watch program" to monitor the delinquent and derelict world body.
Report available at: http://www.gao.gov/AlndexFY96/abstracts/ns96038.htm