DEPARTMENT OF STATE AUTHORIZATIONS, 1982 AND 1983

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85-00003R000300020012-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 20
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 2, 2007
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: June 18, 1981
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

- - =roved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
June 1 S, 1951
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE
struction of such projects and 75 per-
cent funding for operations and mainte-
nance. Existing deep-draft commercial
port depths would be grandfathered and
would not be subject to operation and
,maintenance contribution.
Tile Navigational Part and Navigation
Improvement Act of 1981 avalild remedy
deficiencies affecting our Nation's ports
in eight areas.
First, it would assist funding for navi-
gation improvement projects.
Second, it would offer favorable tax
treatment for money expended by non-
Federal sources for navigation imprave-
ment.
Third, it would encourage s.n espedlted
review of deep-draft commere-;al ports
maintenance programs.
Fourth, it would expedite the process
for navigation improveme.~lts.
Fifth, it would expedite file environ-
mental review of projects.
Sixth, it would expedite the judicial
review of claims against such projects..
Finally, it give$ automatic authoriza-
tion for projects which receive no federal
contribution.
It is an honor for ms to tae a co-
sponsor of Senator Warners' bill, Naviga-
tionaI Port and Navigation Improvement
Act of 1981. I am deeply committed. to
the improvement of our ports and water-
ways and hope that the administration
and this congress will pass this legisla-
~i~qn realizing that the improvement o?
~prts is an investment that w1TI as-
11AAmPrica'.c future in the ~rarld trad-
terests.~
/'
DEPARTDJiENT OF ~TAT1i AIIT1'IORI-
ZATIONS, 1982 AND lSe~3
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
SPECTER). Under the preV10US Order, the
Senate will now resume consideration of
S. 1193, which the cleric c~-il1 state by
title.
The legislative cleric read as follows:
A bill (S. 1193) to authorize appropriations
for fiscal years 1982. and 2963 for the Depart-
ment of State, the International Communi-
cations Agency, and the Board for Interna-
tional Broadcasting, sad far other purpas~.
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill which had been rep~rteci from
the Committee on Foreign Relations with
amendments as follows:
S. 1193
Be i# enacted btf the Senate and House
of a4epresentatines of the Ylr_ited States op
America ixa Congress assembled,
TIT"i.E I-DEPARTMENT OF STATE
SHORT TITLE
SEC. 101. This .title may be cited as the
"Department of State Authorization Act,
Fiscal Years 1982 and 1983".
AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS
SEC. 102. (a) There are authorized to be
appropriated for the Department of State to
carry out the authorities, functions, duties,
and responsibilities is the conduct of the
foreign affairs of the IInited States and for
other purposes. authorized by law, the fol-
lOWing amOUntg:
(1) For "Administration oP Foreign Af-
fairs", $1,318.754,000 for the fiscal year 1982.
and ,$1,246,059,000 for the fiscal year 1983.
(2) For "International Organizations and
(
Conferences^, $523,808,000 for the fiscal year
1982 and $514,436.000 for the fiscal year 1983.
(3) For "Fllternational Commissions", $22,-
508,000 foz the fiscal year 2982 and ;22,432,000
for the fiscal year 1983.
(4) Foz "Mirction and Refugee Assist-
ance", $5&0,850,000 for the fiscal year 1982
and ffi467,750,000 for the fiscal year 1983, of
which not Tess than $18,750,000 shall be made
available only for the resettlement of Soviet
and Eastern European refugees is Israel
(b) Of the amounts authorized to be ap-
propriated by section 202 (a) (2 } of this Act
for the fiscal gears 1982 and 1983, $2,085,000
shall be available for each such fiscal year
only for expenses to operate and maintain
consular posts at Turin, Italy; Salzburg, Aus-
tria; Goteborg, Sweden; Bremen, Germany;
Nice, France; Mandalay, Burma; and Bris-
bane, Australia.
(c) Of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated by section 102(aJ(2) of this
Act, $45,800,000 shall be available fn fiscal
year 1982 and $45,800,000 shall be available
in fiscal year 1983 only for the Organization
of American State; for .the payment of 1982
and 1983 assessed United States contrihu-
tfons and to reimburse the Organization of
American States for payments under the tax
equalization program to employees who are
United States citizens.
(d} Of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated by section 202(a) (4j of this
Act, $1,500,000 shall be available in fiscal
year 1982 and $1,500,000 shall be available
in fisc~,l year 1983 only for the International
Committee of the .Red Cross to support the
activities of the protection and as~t~r~nce
program for "political" detainees.
PALESTINIAN RIGHTS UICITS
SEC. 203. Funds appropriated under para-
graph (2} of section 202 of thfs Act may
not be used for payment by the United
States, as its Contribution toward the as
sessed budget of the IInited Nations Por
any year, of any amount which would cause
the tntaI amount paid by the United States
as its assessed confafbntion far that year
to exceed the amount assessed as the United
States contribution for that year less-
(I) 25 percent of the amount budgeted
for that year for the Committee on the
Exercise for the Inalfenahle Rights of the
Palestinian People or any similar successor
entity), and
(2) 25 percent of the amount budgeted for
that pear for the Special Unit on Palestinian
Rights (or any similar successor entity).
Ex GRATIA PAYMENT
SEC. 104. Of the amount appropriated for
the fiscal year 1982 under paragraph (1) of
section 102 of this Act, $82,000 shall be
available for payment ex gratin to the Gov-
ernment of Yugoslavia as an expression of
concern by the United States Government
for the injuries sustained by a Yugoslavia
national as a result of an attack on him
in Neer Fork City.
Sn.ATffiRL SCIENCE Ah~ TECHNOLOGY AG$EE-
naErrrs
SEC. 105. Ia addition to the amounts
authorized to be appropriated Dp section 202
of this Act, there are authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary of State
$3,700.000 for the fiscal gear 1982 and $3,-
700,000 for the fiscal year 1983 for payment
of the IInited States share of expenses of the
science and technology agreements between
the United States and Yugoslavia and be-
tween the United States and PoIaad.
PASSPORT FEES AND DURATION
SEC. iQB. (a) The first sentence of section
1 under the headings ?FEES F08 PASSPORTS AND
vlsAS'? oY the Act of June 4, 1920 (22 U.S.C.
214), Ls amended to read as follows: "There
shall be collected and paid into the Treasury
of the IInited States a fee, prescribed by
the Secretary of State by regulation, for each
S 6481
passport issued and a fee, prescribed by the
Secretary of State by regulation, for execut-
ing each application for a passport.".
(b) (1} Section 2 of the Act entitled "An
Act to regLllate the issue sod validity of pass-
ports, and for other purposes'., approved
July 3, 1926 (22 U.S.C. 217a), is amended to
read as follows:
"SEC. 2. A passport shall be valid for a
period of ten pears from the date of issue, ex-
cept Lhat the Secretary of State may limit
the validity of a passport to a period of Iess
than ten years in an individual case or on a
general basis pursuant to regulation.".
(2) The amendment made by this sub-
section applies with respect topassports is-
sued after the date of enactment o1 this
Act.
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR THE UNIFICA-
TION OF PRIVATE LAW AND THE HAGUE CON-
FERENCE ON PRTVAT& INTERNATIONAL LAW
SEC. 107. Section 2 of the joint resolution
entitled "Joint Resolution to provide for
participation by the Government of the
United States in the Ilague Conference an
Private InCernationat Law and the Interna-
tional (Home) Institute far the Unification
of Private Law: and authorizing appropria-
tions therefor", approved December 30, 1963
(22 II.S.C. 269g-1}, is amended by striking
out ", except that" and alI that follows
through "that pear".
PAN ADSERICAN 1tAILWAY CONGRESS
SEC. 108. Section 2(a} of the joint resolu-
tion entitled "Joint Resolution providing far
participation by the Governlllent of the
United States is the Pan American Railway
Congress, and authorizing pan appropriation
therefor", approved June 28, 1948 (22 U.S.C.
280k) is amended by striking out "Not more
than $15,000 annually" and inserting in lieu -
thereof ?Such sums as may be necessary".
pAN ~Mi?R T!`AN INSTITUTE OF GEOGRAPHY AND
IiZSTOHY
SEG 109. Paragraph (1) of the first sec-
tion of Pablic Resolution 42, Seventy-fourth
Congress, approved August 2, 1935 (22 U.S.C.
273), is amended by striking out ", not to
exceed $200,000 annually,".
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS YN VIENNA
SEC. 110. Amend section 2 of the United
Nations Participation Act of 1945, as
amended (22 U.S.C. 287ej by adding at they
end thereof the following new subsection:
"(hj T'ue President, by and with the ad-k
vice and consent of the Senate shall appoint ,
a representative of the IInited States to tho
Vienna office of the United Nations with ap-
propriate rank and status who shall serve
at the pleasure of the President and sub-
ject to the direction of the Secretary of
State. Such person shall, at the direction
of the Secretary of State, represent the
United States at the Vienna office of the
United Nations, and perform such other
functions there in connection with the par-
ticigation of the United States in interna-
tional organizations as the Secretary of
State from time to time may direct.".
LIVING QIIARTffiS FOH THE STAFF OF THE. UNITE?
STATES HEPRES?NTATTVE OF THE UNITED
NATIONS
SEC. 121. Section 8 of the IInited Nations
Participation Act of I945, as amended (22
U.S.C. 287e), is amended:
(1) bg striking "tile representative of the
United States to the United Nations re-
ferred to in paragraph (a) of Section 2
hereof" and inserting in lieu thereof "the
representatives provided for in Section 2
hereof and of their appropriate staffs?, and
(2) by adding at the end thereof the fol-
lowing: "Any payments made by the IInited
States Government personnel for occupancy
by them of such leased or rented premises
shall be credited to the appropriation, fund,
or account utilized by the Secretary for
Approved For Release 2007105/02 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 Approved For Release 2007i0~5102 : CIA-RDP85-00003800030002001,2,,,-.
.,,,
S 6482
such lease or rental, or the appropriation,
fund, or account currently available for
such purposes."
SELECTIVE NONIMMIGRANT VISA WAIVER
SEC. 112 (a) Section 212 (d) of the Im-
migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1182(d)) is amended by adding at the end
thereof the following new paragraphs:
"(9) (A) The requirement of paragraph
26 (B) of subsection (a) may be waived by
the Attorney General and the Secretary of
State, acting jointly, in the case of an alien
wh0-
"(1) is applying for admission as a non-
immigrant visitor Yor business or pleasure
for a period not. exceeding ninety days;
"(ii) Ls a national of a country which ex-
tends, or is prepared t6 extend, reciprocal
privileges to citizens and nationals of the
United States; and
"(iii) has been, determined not to repre-
sent a threat to the welfare, safety, or
security of the United States.
"(B) (f) For the period beginning on the
effective date of this paragraph and ending
on the last day of the first fiscal year which
begins after the effective date of this para-
graph, acountry shall be considered to be
within the purview of subparagraph (A) (fi)
of this paragraph if, in. the last fiscal year
preceding the effective date of this para-
graph .such country had a nonimmigrant
visa refusal rate, as determined by the Sec-
retary oY State in such manner as he shall by
regulations prescribe, of less than 2 percent.
"(11) For each fiscal year following the pe-
riod specified in subparagraph (B) (i), a-
country considered to be within the purview
of subparagraph (A) (ii) during such period
shall not be considered to remain within the
purview of subparagraph (A) (fi) unless, in
the fiscal year immediately preceding such
fiscal year, it had a rate of exclusion and
withdrawal oY application for admission and
rate of violation of nonimmigrant status, as
determined in both cases~by the Attorney
General in such manner as he shall by regu-
lations prescribe, which did not exceed 1
percent. Determinations required by this
subparagraph shall be made as soon as prac-
ticable after the end of each fiscal year.
"(iii) If, in any fiscal year following the
period specified in subparagraph (B) (i), a
country not previously .considered within
the purview of subparagraph (A) (ii) shall
have a nonimmigrant visa refusal rate, as
determined in the manner provided for in
subparagraph (B) (i), of less than 2 percent,
such country shall be considered to be with-
in the purview of subparagraph (A) (fi) for
the next following fiscal year and shall
thereafter be treated in the manner specified
in subparagraph (B) (ii). ~
"(C) Notwithstanding the provisions of
subparagraph (A) and (B) of this paragraph,
no alien shall be admitted without a visa
pursuant to this paragraph if he has previ-
ously been so admitted and failed to comply
with the conditions of his previous admis-
sion.".
(b) Section 214(a) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(x)) is
amended by changing the period at the end
thereof to' a colon and bq adding thereto the
following: Provided, That no alien admitted
to the United States without a visa pursuant
to section 212(d) (9) shall be authorized to
remain in the United States as a temporary
visitor for buslless or pleasure for a period
exceeding ninety days from the date of hie
admission".
(c) Section 245(c) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255(c)) is amend=
ed to read as follows:
:'(c) The provisions of~ this section shall
not be applicable, to (1) an alien crewman;
(2) an &lien (other than an immediate rela-
live as defined. in section 210(b)) who here-
after continues in or accepts unauthorized
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE June 18, 19 81
employment.. prior.. tp ,Sling an application
for adjustment of status; (3) an. alien ad-
matted in transit without visa under sec-
tion 212(d) (4) (C) ; or (4) an alien admitted
as a temporary visitor for business or pleas-
ure without a visa under section 2:12(d) (9).".
(d) Section 248 of the Immigxation and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1258) is amended
by inserting after the word "e:ICept" the
following: "an alien admitted as a temporary
visitor for business or pleasure under sec-
tion 212(d) (9),,".
HUYINO POWER MAINTENANCE FUND
SEC. 113. (a) Section 24(b) of the State
Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956
(22 U.S.C. 2898(b)), is amended to read as
follows:
"(b) (1) In order to maintain th.e levels of
program activity provided for each fiscal
year by the annual authorizing legislation
for the Department of State, no less than
$20,000,000 of the fund authorized by section
102 may be used to offest adverse fluctua-
tions in foreign currency exchange rates, or
overseas wage and price changes, which
occur after November 30 of the calendar year
preceding the enactment of the authorizing
legislation for such fiscal year.
"(2) In order to eliminate substantial
gains to the approved levels of overseas op-
erations, the Secretary oY State shall trans-
fer to the appropriation account established
under paragraph (1) of this subsection such
amounts in other appropriation accounts
under the heading "Administration of For-
eign Affairs" as the Secretary determines are
excessive to the needs of the approved level
of operations because of fluctuations in for-
eign currency exchange rates or changes in
overseas wages and prices.
"(3) Funds transferred from the appro-
priation account established under para-
graph (1) shall be merged tvitll and be
available for the same purpose, and for the
same time period, as the appropriation ac-
count to which transferred; and funds
transferred to the appropriation account es-
tablished under paragraph (1)- shall be
merged with and available for the purposes
of that appropriation account until ex-
pended. Any restriction contained in an ap-
propriation Act or other provision of law
limiting the amounts available for the De-
partment of State that may be obligated or
expended shall be deemed to be adjusted to
the extent necessary to offset the net effect
of fluctuations in foreign currency exchange
rates or overseas wage and price changes in
order to maintain approved levels: '.
(b) Section 704(c) of the United States
Information and Educational Exchange Act
of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1477b(c)) is amended by
striking out "preceding" and inserting in
lieu thereof "calendar year preceding the
enactment of the authorizing legislation for
such".
(e) Section 8(a)(2) of the Board for In-
ternational Broadcasting Act of 1973 (22
U.S.C. 2287(a) (2)) is amended by striking
out "preceding" in the first sentence and in-
serting in lieu thereof "calendar year preced-
ing the enactment of the amendments to
paragraph (1) which provide the authoriza-
tion for such".
(d) The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on October 1,1981.
ABIA FOUNDATION
SEC. 114. In addition to the amounts au-
thorized by section 102, $4.5 million is au-
thorized to be appropriated in fiscal year
1982 for the Asia Foundation in furtherance
of that organization's purposes as described
in its charter. Such funds are to be made
available to the Foundation by the Depart-
ment of State in accordance with the terms
and conditions of a grant agreement to be_
negotiated between the Department of State
and the Asia Foundation. Filniis appro-
priated under this section are authorized to
remain available until expended.
INTER-AMERICAN FOUNDATION
SEC. lib. (a) Section 401 (s) (2) of the For-
eign Assistance Act of 1989 (22 U.S.C. 290f
(s)) is amended to read as follows:
"(2) There is authorized to be appro-
priated not to exceed $12,000,000 for the
fiscal year 1982 to carry out the purposes of
this section. Amounts appropriated under
this paragraph are authorized to remain
available until expended.". _
(b) Section 401(h) of the Foreign Assist-
ance Act of 1989 (22 U.S.C. 290f(h)) is
amended to read as follows:
"(h) Members oY the Board shall serve
without additional compensation, but shall
be reimbursed for travel expenses, including
per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance
with section 6703 of title 5, United States
Code, while engaged ixi their duties on behalf
of the corporation.".
DEPENDENT TRAVEL
SEC. 118. (a) (1) The first sentence of sec-
tion 5924(41 (B) of title 5, United States
Code, is amended by striking out "American
secondary or" and inserting in lieu thereof
"American secondary education or, in the
case of dependents of an employee other
than an employee of the Department of State
or the International Communication-Agency,
to obtain an American". .
(2) Section 5924 of such title is amended-
(A) by inserting "(a)" immediately before
the first sentence; and
(B) by adding at the end thereof the fol-
lowing
"(b) (1) An employee of the Department of
State or of the International Communication
Agency in a foreign- area is entitled to the
payment of the travel expenses incurred by
the employee in connection with the travel
of a dependent of the employee to or from a
school far the purpose of obtaining an wi-
dergraduate college education.
"(2) Paragraph (1) shall . apply-
"(A) to two round trips each calendar
year, and
"(B) to travel expenses which-
"(i) are extraordinary and necessary ex-
penses incurred in providing adequate edu-
cation for such dependent because of the
employee's service in a foreign area or areas,
and
"(ii) are not otherwise compensated for.".
(b) The amendments made by subsection
(a) shall take effect on October 1, 1981. .
TITLE II-,iNT'ERNATIONAL C0212MUNICA-
TION AGENCY
SHORT TITLE
SEC. 201. This title may be cited as the
"International Communication Agency Au-
thorization Act, Fiscal Years 1982 and 1983".
AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS
SEC. 202. There are authorized to be' appro-
priated for the International Communication
Agency $561,402,000 for the fiscal year 1982
and $482,340,000 for the fiscal year 1983 to
carry out international communication, edu-
cational, cultural, and exchange programs
under the United States Information and
Educational Exchange Act of 1948, the Mu-
tual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act
of 1961, and Reorganization Plan Numbered
2 of 1977, and other purposes autharized_by
law.
CHANGES IN ADMINIBTRATIVE AUTHORrrIES
SEC. 203. (a) (1) Title III of the United
States Information and Educational Ex-
change Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C.. 1451-1453)
is amended-
(A) 1n section 301 by striking out "citi-
zen of the United States" and inserting in
lieu thereof ''person"; and
(B) in sections 302 and 303 by striking
out "citizen of the United States" and in-
serting in lieu thereof "person in the em-
ploy or service of the Government of ~Ghe
United States".
(2) Such title is further amended-
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 droved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
June 18, 1981
(A) in section 301-
CONGRESSIONAE RECORD -SENATE
(d) by striking out "Secretary" the first
place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof
"DlreotoP of International C0211n1u211Cation
Agency,,, and
(id) by stalking out "Secretary" the sec-
ond q~lace it appean4 and insertlllg in Idea
thereof '?Director": anal
(B) in section 303 by striking out ?'Secre-
tary" and inserting in lieu thereof "Director
oY the International Communication
Agency".
(3) Section 302 of such Act is amended-
(A) in the second sentence by striking out
`?section 901(3) of the Foreign Service Act
oY 1948 (80 $tat. 999)?' and inserting in lieu
thereof "section 905 of the Foreign Service
Act of 1980"; and
(B) in the last sentence by striking out
?'section 178b of the Revised Statutes" and
inserting in lieu thereof "section b538 of
title 5, United States Code".
(b) Section 802 of such Act (22 U.S.C.
1472) is amended-
(1) by inserting "(a)" immediately after
"SEC. 802."; and
(2) by adding at the end thereof the fol-
lowing new subsectlona:
"(b) (1) Any contract authorized by sub-
section (a) and described in par(graph (3)
oY this subsection which is funded on the
basis oY annual appropriations may never-
theless be made for periods not in excess of
Sve years when-
"(A) appropriations are available and ade-
quate for payment Yor the first fiscal' year;
and
"(B) the Director of the International
Communication Agency determines that-
"(i) the need oY the Government for the
property or service being acquired over the
period of the contract is reasonably firm
and continuing;
"(11) such a contract will serve the best
interests oY the United States by encourag-
ing effective competition or promoting econ-
omies in performance and operation; and
"(iii) such method of contracting will not
Inhibit small business participation.
"(2) In the event that funds are not made
available for the continuation of such a con-
tract into a subsequent fiscal year, the con-
tract shall be canceled and any cancella-
tion costs incurred shall be paid from ap-
propriations originally available for the per-
formance of the contract, appropriations
currently available Yor the acquisition of
similar property or services and not other-
wise obligated, or appropriations made for
such cancellation payments.
"(3) Thia subsection applies to contracts
for the procurement of property or services,
or both, for the operation, maintenance, and
support of programs, facilities, and installa-
tions for or related to radio transmission and
reception, newswire services, and the distri-
bution of books and other publications in
foreign countries.''.
Actc)(28 U.SCh 1474(18)~iso amendeduby
inserting "and security vehicles" immediately
after "right-hand drive vehicles".
(d) Title VIII of such Act (22 U.S.C. 1471-
Y475b) is amended by adding at the end
thereof the following new section:
"AC1'ENC AS60CIATE DIRECTORS
"SRC. 808, If an Associate Director of the
International Communication Agency dies,
resigns, or is sick or absent, the Associate Di-
rector's principal assistant shall perform the
duties of the office until a successor 1s ap-
pointed or the absence or sickness stops.".
(e) Paragraphs (18) and (19) of section
804 of such Act (22 U.S.C. 1478 (fl8) and (19) )
are amended-
(1) by striking out "and" at the end of
paragraph (18) ; and
(2) by striking out the period at the end of
paragraph (19) and inserting the following:
"; and
"(20) purchase motion picture, radio and
television producers' liability insurance to
cover errors and omissions or similar insur-
ance coverage for the protection oY interests
in intellectual property.??.
(f) Section 1011 of the United States In-
formation and Educational Exchange Act of
1948, sa amended, is amended by adding at
the end thereof the following new subsection:
"(i) Foreign currencies which were derived
from conversions made pursuant to the obli-
gation of Informational media guaranties and
which have been determined to be unavail-
able for, or in excess of, the requirements of
the IInited States and transferred to the Sec-
retary of the Treasury, shall be held untII
disposed of, and any dollar proceeds realized
from such disposition shall be deposited is
miscellaneous receipts. As such currencies be-
come available for such purposes of mutual
interest as may be agreed to by the govern-
ments of the United State3 and the country
from which the currencies derive, they may
be sold for dollars to agencies of the United
States Govrnment ".
(g) Title VIII of the United States Iffior-
mation and Educational Exchange' Act of
1948, as amended, is revised by the addition
of the following section:
"SEC. 809. Cultural exchanges, international
fairs and expositions, and other exhibits or
demonstrations oY United States economic
accomplishments and cultural attainments
provided for under tills Act or the Mutual
Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of
1981 shall not be considered "public work" as
that term 1s defined in section 1 of the De-
fense Base Act, as amended (section 16~51(b)
of title 42 of the United States Code) : '.
LIQVIDATION OF THE INFORMATIONAL MEDIA
GVARANTY FIIND
SEC. 204. Section 1011(h) of such Act (22
U.S.C. 1442 (h)) is amended by adding at
the end thereof the following new paragraph:
"(4) Section 701(x) of this Act shall not
apply with respect to any amounts appro-
priated under this section for the purpose of
liquidating the notes (and any accrued in-
terest thereon) which were assumed in the
operation of the informational media guar-
anty program under this section and which
were outstanding on the date oY enactment
of this paragraph.".
INTERNATIONAL ERCHANGE9 AND NATIONAL
SECURITY
SEC. 205. (a) Congress finds that-
(1) United States Government sponsorship
of international exchange-of-persons activi-
ties has, during the postwar era, contributed
significantly to United States national secu-
rity interests;
(2) during the 1970's, while United States
programs declined dramatically, Soviet ex-
change-of-persons activities increased stead-
ily in pace witri the Soviet military buildup;
(3) as a consequence of these two trends,
Soviet exchange-of-persons programs now far
exceed those sponsored ny the United States
Government and thereby provide the Soviet
Union an important means of extending its
worldwide influence;
(4) the importance of competing effectively
in this area is reflected in the efforts of
major IInited States allies, whose programs
also represent far greater emphasis on ex-
change-of-persons activities than is demon-
strated by the current United States effort;
and
(b) with the availability of increased re-
sources, the United States exchange-of-ger-
sons program could be greatly strengthened,
both qualitatively and quantitatively.
(b) It is therefore the sense oY Congress
that-
(1) United States exchange-of-persona ac-
tYvities should be strengthened;
(2) the allocation of resources necessary
to accomplish this improvement would
constitute a highly cost-effective means of
S 6483
enhancing United States national security;
and
(3) because of the integral and continuing
national security role of exchange-of-per-
sons programs, such activities should be ac-
corded a dependable source of long-term
funding.
(c) Beginning in Sscal year 1982, ex-
change-of-persons programs administered by
the International Communication Agency
shall, over a lour-year period, be expanded to
a level, in real terms, three times that in ef-
fect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
TITLE III-BOARD FOR INTERNATIONAL
BROADCASTING
sHOaT TITLE
SEC. 301. This title may be Cited as the
"Board for International Broadcasting Au-
thorization Act, Fiscal Years 1982 and fl983".
AVTHORIZATIONfi OF APPROPRLITEONB
SEC. 302. There are authorized to be appro-
priated for the Board for International
Broadcasting 898,317,000 for fiscal year 1982
and 898.317,000 for fiscal year 1983.
SEC. SOS. Notwithstanding the provisions of
section 8b of Public Law 93-129, not to ea-
ceed 88,19b,000 of the gain reaflized during
fiscal year 1981 through upward fluctuations
in foreign currency exchange rates shall be
made available to compensate for losses in-
curred as a result of the bomb explosion at
RFE/RL, Inc., Munich headquarters oa Feb-
ruary 21, 1981, and for additional RFE/RL,
Inc., operating expenses as might be deemed
appropriate.
MEAGER OF THE BI8 AND THE RFE/RL HOARD
SEC. 304. Section 4 of the Board for Inter-
national Broadcasting Act of 1973 is amended
as follows:
"(c) Beginning January fl, 1982, no grant
may be made under this Act unless the certi-
flcate of incorporation oY RFE/RL, Inc., has
been amended to provide that-
(1) the Board of Directors oY RF'E/RL,
Inc., shall consist of the members of the
Board for International Broadcasting and of
no other members; and
(2) such Board of Directors shall make all
major policy determinations governing the
operation of RFE/RL, Inc.; and shall appoint
and fix the compensation. oY such managerial
officers and employees of RFE/RL, Inc., as it
deems necessary to carry out the purposes of
this Act.".
TITLE IV-ARMS CONTROL AND
DISARMAMENT AGENCS
SHORT TITLE
3EC. 401. This title may be cited as the
"Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Act,
Fiscal Years 1982 and 1983".
AIITHORIZATIONB 08 APPROPRLITIONB
SRC. 402. Section 49(a) oY the Arms Control
and Disarmament Act (22 U.S.C. 2b89(a)) is
amended to read as follows:
SRC. 49. (a) To carry out the purposes of
this Act, there are authorized to be appro-
priated-
"(1) for the fiscal year 1982, 818,288,000
and such additional amounts as may be nec-
essary for Increases in salary, pay, retire-
ment, other employee benefits authorized by
law, and other nondiscretionary costs, and to
offset adverse fluctuations in foreign cur-
rency exchange rates, and
"(2) for the 8sca1 gear 1983, such sums as
may be necessary to carry out the purposes
of this Act.
Amounts appropriated under this subsection
are authorized to remain available until
expended:'.
SRCVRrrY CLEABANCEB
SEC. 403. Section 46(a) of the Arms Con-
trol and Disarmament Act (22 U.S.C. 2b85
(a)) is amended by inserting th0 following
new sentence after the second sentence
thereof: "In the case oY persona detailed
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012,
S 6484 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE
from other Government agencies, the Direc-
tor may accept the results of fullfield back-
ground security and loyalty investigations
conducted by the Defense Investigative Serv-
ice or the Department of State as the basis
for the determination required under this
subsection that the person is not a security
risk or of doubtful loyalty.".
ANTISATELLrrE ACTIVITIES
SEC. 404. Section 3Y(b) of the Arms Con-
trol and Disarmament Act (22 U.S.C. 2571)
is amended by striking the "," and inserting
the following phrase: 'and of all aspects of
anti-satellite activities;".
TITLE V-MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
REPEALS; TECHNYCAL AMENDMENT3
SEC. 501. (a) The following provisions of
law are repealed:
(1) Section 408 of the- Act entitled "An
Act to authorize appropriations for fiscal
years 1980 and 1981 far the Department oP
State, the International Communication
Agency, and the Board for International
Broadcasting", approved August 15, 1979 (22
U.S.C. 287e note).
(2) (A) Section 121(b) (22 U.S.C. 1175
note) ,
(B)
section 122(b) (22 U.S.C. 2280 note),
(C)
section 203 {22 U.S.C. 1481-i note), .
(D)
section 504 (e) (22 U.S.C. 2658d(e)),
(E)
section 801(b) (92 Stat. 985),
(F)
section 803(c) (22 U.S.C. 2658 Hate),
(G) section 8o8(c) (22 U.S.C. 2858d note).
(H) section 609(c) (92 Stat. 989),
(i) section 810(c) (22 U.S.C. 2151 Hate),
(J) section 611(b) (22 U.S.C. 1731 note),
(K) section 813(b) (22 U.S.C. 2370 note),
(L) section 705(a) (22 U.S.C. 2151 note),
(M) section 709 (22 U.S.C. 2151 note), and
(N) section 711 (22 U.S.C..2220a note), of
the Foreign Relations Authorization Act,
Fiscal Year 1979.
{3) {A) Section 10?(,b) (91 Stat. 848),
(B) section 109 (s) (7) (22 U.S.C. 2384
note).
(C) section 414(b) (22 U.S.C. 1041 note),
(D) section 501 (91 Stat. 857),
(E) section 503(b) (91 Stat. 858),
and) section 505 (22 U.S.C. 21bi Hate),
(G) section 513 {19 Stet. 882), of the For-
eign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal
Year 1978.
(4) Section 403 of the Foreign Relations
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President,
I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum caII be .rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
AMENDMENT NO. 72
Under the previous order, the Senate
will now resume consideration of the
amendment by the Senat~ar from Minne-
SOta (Mr. DURENBERGER) .
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President,
as I indicated last evening, I have no
further argument to make in favor of the
amendment. I am not aware of anyone
on this side of the aisle wYio does. At
this time, I yield to the Senator from
Vermont for whatever remarks he cares
to make in addition to those he made
last night.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I thank
the Senator.
The PRESIDING OFFICEFG. The Sen-
ator may proceed.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the discus-
sions yesterday, which revolved primar-
ily around procedural matters on this
resolution, may have obscured same of
the issues that we have before us. There
is a great deal of concern and it is, I be-
lieve, bipartisan concern, as i:o the pos-
ture presented by the United States in
its vote on the infant formula matter.
The United States has an enviable rec-
ord worldwide in efforts that it has made
in combating hunger, in helping in ref-
ugee programs, and providing both medi-
cine and food, not only within its awn
borders but without its borders, to Third
World nations, emerging nations, war-
torn nations, ravaged by natural disas-
ter. These are items in the history of the
United States which all of us, as Amer-
icans, can be extremely proud of.
.June 18, 1981
in its effort to, restore U.S. credibility and
influence with the developing world.^
Chicago Sun-Times-May 12. 1981:
But now the U.S. delegation will withdraw
support for the plan (code)-in effect, put-
tingformula makers' profits before the health
of Third World babies. It's a shameful switch.
Baltimore Sun-May 14, 1981:
That the administration instead is oppos-
ing. the code makes !t appear to be callous
toward the welfare of infants in the Third
World.... When they oppose the WiiO code,
the U.S. companies and the U.S. government
appear to oppose a public health revolution
which could yield immense benefits for the
world's poor.
~ashingtoxi Post-May 15, 1981:
The fact is that none ai the administra-
tion's ob)ections has anything to do with the
health of babies. That Ss the sorry flaw in its
handling of this Sssue.
Long Beach (Cal.) Press-Telegram-
May 18, 1981: .
But the "no" vote on the infant formula
issue is a mistalte. If the United States is
alone In its "no" vote, or at best among the
very few that vote "no" on this emotional
issue, it will be marked as a cation that puts
the interests of its own companies above con-
cern for the nutritional needs and develop-
ment of infants.
Le~ciston (Idaho) Morning Tribune-
May 19, 1981:
It is easy to understand why the groposed
Code would attract so much support. It is a
recognition by a community of civilized nar
bons that much harm has been done by ag-
gressive baby food conglomerates who for
years have been taking advantage oY the huge
third world market. It is harm that is meas-
ured not in dollars, but in human lives-
babies' lives.
It is ironic, Mr. President, that at a
time when this country and this Gov-
ernment have stated a great concern
for the unborn of its Nation, when
we have on tye floor of the house
and Senate legislation pending that does
everything from trying to make a con-
gressional determination of the ultimate
theological question of when life begins,
straight through, en an issue which could
be considered as pro#~e.^tive of human life
as any in the vrorld, the United States
ends up in the u1?!~nviabie position of ap-
pearing to be in favor of billions of dol-
lars of profits for some of the multina-
tional baby fooe manufacturers and not
on the side of babies who will be using
that formula.
It should not be forgotten, Mr. Presi-
dent, what we hwve here. We have a sit-
uation where the image of the Western
World, the image of progress, the image
of democracy, the image of civilization, .
is a baby bottle and baby formula. I do
not think that it puts too fine a point on
it, Mr. President, to say that in many
areas of the world, the steps taken by
some of these baby formula manufactu-
rers are very much akin to drug peddlers
and dope peddlers in this country-the ~-
free samples, the below-cost items.
Is it any. more sinister to get somebody
hooked on a narcotic habit in this co~n-
try, that they cannot afford and cannot "-
sustain but cannot live without, than to
convince mothers in a country where
there is a lack of pure water, lack of nor-
mal sanitation methods, to stop the tra-
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 droved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
Juryie 18, 1981
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE ' ~ 6485
through our whole evolutionary -process,
a safe hygienic method of feeding their
children? Instead, to be telling them that
they must stop and it is an irreversible
stop-biology is biology. Once stopped,
you do not start up again.
The formula companies say, "Take this
free sample of baby formula. Start with
that." What happens within a month or
2 months when the free samples run out?
Many times, in many of these coun-
tries, it is necessary to spend as much
money for formula as a family normally
would spend on food for the whole fam-
ily.
We have come to a time when the sym-
bol of Western development is the baby
bottle. It makes no difference, then, what
is put into the bottle, whether it is water
that is contaminated, filthy and dirty,
swimming with germs; whether it is an
improperly diluted formula; whether it
is a formula that has been exposed to
every kind of unsanitary situation. That
is what goes into it, because, by God, it is
Western development. "We are coming
into the free world by using this bottle."
I referred yesterday to the testiirlony
of one of the missionary nuns who
worked with those in Yt Third World
country. She talks about the baby bottle
costing nearly a month's salary or a
month's income of a family. The bottle
' was fetid, putrid, blaclr, dirty, crawling
with bugs. Yt is that western baby bottle.
The mother's children are being fed
~- with that bottle because, after all, the
glossy, colorful .ads showed that this is
the modern way and this is the way to
have healthy children. Yet, family after
family would wonder why child after
child would die.
We are talking about baby formulas
going into countries where children are
not even recorded-their births are not
recorded, many times, for months and
months, because so many bf them die.
Again, I would refer to the many ed-
itorials on this issue-from all over the
country.
The New York Times of May 19, 1981,
said:
There thus appears no reason to cast the
United States as the enemy of mothers and
babies. It is unwise to contend that every
society should observe American styles of
commerce. And if there are wrong-headed
provisions or precedents in such a code, they
will be much better dealt with country by
country, by an American Government that
shows itself ,sympathetic to the most ele-
mentary concerns of others.
Washington Star, May 18, 1981:
The U.S. is isolating itself from a con-
sensus that it is merely silly to blame on a
malicious anti-capitalist cabal, and also ex-
posing itself to a charge of bad faith.
Baltimore News American, May 19,
1981:
Let us hope the Reagan administration
realizes the damage it proposes to do,
-z changes its mind and decides to vote with an
eye toward the well-being of hundreds of
thousands of infants, and not in keeping
with the wishes of a powerful industry.
_ St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 20, 1981:
The no vote by the U.S. is a sorry com-
mentary on the country's concern for the
health of infants everywhere.
Milwaukee Journal, May 20, 1981:
The Reagan administration should take'
its anti-regulation bias off the backs of
babies in Third World countries.
Columbia (Ga.) Ledger, May 20, 1981:
. Maybe the Reagan administration next
will announce that the U.S. Justice Depart-
ment has no right to interfere with the
marketing and sale of heroin because it in-
terferes with the free enterprise system. That
would surprise us, but not much.
Raleigh News & Observer, May 20,
1981:
The Reagan administration will send a
callous message to poor countries if :t votes
against a proposed international advisory
code of ethics for the marketing of infant
formula.
Miami News, May 20, 1981:
The risk of course involves far more than
how the world views the United States. The
lives of children are at stake-and the
Reagan administration would be both wise
and humane iP it changed its mind. And
instead of accepting the resignations of Babb
and Joseph it should give them large raises.
Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette, May 20,
1981:
But whether it stems from tortured rea-
soning or behind-the-scenes lobbying, the
administration's opposition to the proposed
WHO code could mean death for Third
World infants whose mothers are encouraged
to feed them easily contaminated formula
rather than breast-feeding them.
Vancouver (Wash.) Columbian, May
20, 1981:
The ethics of a public policy that puts
corporate profits before infant starvation
are questionable, indeed.
Oskaloose (Iowa) herald, May 21,
1981:
We say human beings and the preserva-
tion of health and life are more important
goals.
Hartford Courant, May 21, 1981:
The code, which the Reagan adminis-
tration opposes for ideological reasons, is
only a partial but necessary step toward pro-
tecting the health and welfare of mothers
and children.
Conway (Ark.) Log Cabin Democrat,
May 21, 1981:
America, the world's leader in sharing its
medical knowledge, equipment and person-
nel with other nations, got a black eye with
this vote.
Minneapolis Tribune, May 21, 1981:
But potential health benefits from appli-
cation of the code outweigh its bureaucratic
drawbacks.
San Francisco Examiner, May 22,
1s81:
It's saddening that the government has
given, for no good reason, adversaries of this
country an emotional club with which to
beat us over the head. Even if it happened to
cost us something (which it wouldn't), we
need to show a gad deal more concern on
this question, and reverse our national posi-
tion.
Marshall (Minn.) Independent, May
22, 1981:
Surely the Reagan administration is op-
erating out of ignorance. Surely our presi-
den~ and other top governorent officials do
not want to cast our country in the role of
a child killer and, worse, one who does so
for profit.
The Catholic Review, May 22, 1981:
Despite overwhelming evidence that such
marketing practices by multi-national cor-
porations like Nestle and Bristol-Myers are
detrimental to the health of young chil-
dren, the U.S. took the risk of destroying its
own credibility on world health sad trade
circles.
South Bend Tribune, May 23, 1981:
No amount of explanation will erase the
stigma of our vote. We are gluing up world
leadership for business reasons.
Fayetteville (N.C.) Observer, May 25,
1981:
Is the Reagan administration allowing .the
interests of big business to prevail over
those of mothers and children? That is the
smell of it.
Kansas City Times,. May 25, 1981:
In failing to support a humanitarian World
Health Assembly resolution favoring moth-
er's breast milk as infant food at the ex-
pense of commercial substitutes, the United
States shamed itself. Not only did it decline
to stand beside 117 other nations of the world
declaring concern for the dangers to chil-
dren in underdeveloped countries posed by
infant formulas, this administration served
unqualified notice that it is not interested
in being a symbolic moral leader.
Buffalo Evening News, May 26, 1981:
It is unfortunate that the Reagan admin-
istration found it necessary to cast a vote
that unduly stressed legalistic issues to the
exclusion of the health concerns involved
in the infant formula debate. The decision
contributed nothing to the image of
either the present administration or the
nation. ,
Valley Advocate (Northampton,
Mass.) ,May 27, 1981:
Shame seems often to be the underbelly
of bravado. Yet, in the government's latest
swagger before the world community there is '
a schism that is becoming familiar. Those
who committed the indiscretion remain smug
while the outcry of high-ranking, respected
officials and our consciences reveal a depth
of humiliation.
Bucks County (Penn.) Times, May
1981:
It is painfully obvious that decisions like
this one will not endear the administration
to the leaders of the world's underdeveloped
nations. In some cases, our legitimate in-
terests make it impossible to accommodate
them. But the controversy over infant for-
mula appears to be a case of the adminis-
tration going out of its way to be insensitive
to their concerns.
Philadelphia Inquirer, May 1981:
The controversy is literally a motherriood
issue, and the White House has put the
United States on the wrong side of it.
1 will now refer to the testimony oP
Dr. Alan Jackson, who heads the Tropi-
aal Metabolism Research Unit at the
University of the West Indies, in Kings-
ton, Jamaica. Dr. Jackson states:
Studies that have been carried out [in Ja-
maica] over the last 12 years show that there
is a consistent pattern of infant feeding.
About 70 percent of the mothers start off by
breast feeding their children. But from a
very early age, they introduce their children
to bottle feeding, complementary feeding,
usually with a milk formulation.
Initially, widespread advertising, free sam-
ples, and the use of milk nurses encouraged
this type of feeding practice. The government
has kfi'en fairly active in Jamaica, and they
have attempted to limit the extent of the
advertising and the accessibility of milk
nurses to government institutions. But this
has had little effect on the established pat-
tern. i
Furthermore, the influence of the adver-
tising and the milk nurses has been found
to outlast the period of their physical pres-
ence, so that unless definitively and strongly
advised otherwise, the mothers persist in d
pattern of bottle feeding in subsequent preg-
nancies. Aad this is something that is asso-
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-R,pP85-000038000300020012
r
~S 6486 CONGRESSIONAL RECORI) -SENATE
ciated, in fact, with the ambivalence itself suffer, deprived of the protective qualities of
of health professionals who themselves, have their mother's milk. In one hosp11;a1 I visited
been courted by milk companies, and help to !n the Philippines, infant formula com-
promote an undesirable practice of feeding. ponies' western dressed sales personnel were
Now, the average family income in Jamaica so common with their samples, gifts and
for a family of, say, five or six people is of posters, that upon entering, I was asked what
the order of $16 to $20 a week. Now, to prop- milk company I represented!
erly feed afour-month-old baby [with for- The companies involved were, of course,
mule]-it is difficult to get an accurate fig- American and Swiss. But also English, Dutch,
ure, because they are having rising costs of Japanese and even Indian. I couldn't have
living-but it is a minimum of $7 a week imagined the intensity of competition until
out of total family income of, say, $20 a I saw huge billboards advertising milk prod-
week. Obviously, that is prohibitive. ucts near the slums of Bangladesh, by so
was sent to me-by MissyLinda Kelseyl lri 1 know that the advocates of breast feed-
ing and the marketing code are being ac-
connection with this matter. Miss Kelsey cused of being political. It's true, of course,
1S probably best known t0 A111er1CariS for and my trip has oonvinced me of this neces-
her brilliance aS an actress. Many see sity. A powerful institution-much less the
her on television each week on the Lau combined forces of over thirty large milk
Grant program, but i believe that those companies-cannot be changed w-[thout po-
Of us who have worked the most in this litical intervention. But this is nut an issue
that splits on traditdonal conservative/
area know her for the unstinting effort liberal lines. Those who do so have not seen
she has given to this whole issue. In her the babies, or the advertising in the most
letter, she speaks Of a trip She made into appalling circumstances-or are motivated
India, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Purely by self-interest. we must act now to
and the Philippines. She says: conserve our most valuable res,~urce: the
went should support the World Health It is not a question of banning the use of
Organization/UNICEF efforts to stop the infant formula, but of insuring it;s safe use.
unethical promotion of breast milk substi- it is a case of developing guldedinE~s that will
Lutes. I have just returned from seeing babies make corporations responsible fox controli-
affifcted with "bottle baby disease" in five ing the advertising, marketing and promo-
Asian countries where I talked with their tion activities which in and of themselves,
suffering mothers, and learned from local create a market in spite of public health
health workers of the difficulties they have considerations. The World Health Organiza-
stopping the trend away from breast feeding, tion (consisting of 155 member nations) will
undertake this responsibility this month at
What I experienced has made me very angry its Assembly in Geneva, through cansidera-
because it is ail so preventable. But to do so tion of its code of marketing for breast milk
requires the voice of the powerful, such as substitutes.
yourself, defending the silent voices of the I believe your efforts with Senate Resalu-
children. ~ tion No. 111 are essential to prote,;t millions
I was asked to visit India, Bangladesh, of innocent children, i have written to your
Malaysia, Hong Kong, and the Philippines by colleagues to urge them to support your ef-
the International Organization of Con- forts. On behalf of those I spolce with, I
sumers' Unions; my visit was coordinated by thank you for caring enough to commit yaur-
the consumer societies of each nation. They selves to help at this time.
asked me in the hopes that my public linage I am convinced that the U.S. will suffer
as a reporter" on the Lou Grant Show" great political damage if we are the only na-
would help Stimulate support for an issue tion in the world-as we might well be~to
only casually treated in the press. vp~e against the Code. After my visits, I know
James Grant, Director of UNICEF, has that it wii be interpreted by people around
termed this the "silent catastrophe," because the world that we ase more concerned with
the babies suffer and die with no political the health of our industry than the health of
voice. It is estimated that four million in- children. This would be an insult to Ameri-
fants will die each year-11,000 per day-as can ideals-and the very real feelings of
the result of inappropriate bottle feeding. American citizens who support this effort.
(In the five days since I've returned to the Sincerely,
time I've written this letter, the number of LINDA KELBEY.
babies Who have died has surpassed the p,S.-I'm enclosing a xerox of an article
deaths of all Americans in the Vietnam war.) that appeared in Asia Week while I was there.
Having seen one baby in Bangladesh suffer- I think it shows the extent of interest and
ing so unnecessarily, multiplying these depth of feeling I found wherever I went.
figures to global proportions staggers me.
i visited health clinics and hospitals, Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
talked with front line health workers, with Serif to have printed iri the RECORD the
women's groups, consumer organizations, article to which Miss Kelsey referred.
and government officials. They were shocked
when I told them that the new Administra- There being no objection, the article
lion was contemplating a vote against the was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
WHO/UNICEF code of marketing for breast- as follows:
milk substitutes, t0 be debated at this SABOTAGE. BREAST VS. BOTTLE: ANEW
months' World Health Assembly. I W&s Very BATTLEFRONT
moved by their sense of abandonment, of the MELY, i9, feels sluggish and untidy as her
sense of helplessness that an underfunded visitor clucks greetings from the foot of the
health worker feels when faced with the hospital bed. The "nurse" is matronly but
powerful interests of large commercial firms. trim, her uniform spotlessly white, her hair
They expressed the need for the code to pulled smoothly back by an economic com-
help right the imbalance, and help them bination of tortoiseshell clasp and prim little
attain the political force needed to protect bonnet. She slips the neat blue shoulder-bag
their children from the unnecessary and over the bed rail and begins to fuss around
dangerous use of breast milk substitutes. Mely. Isn't Mely lucky to have an adorable
They showed me the promotion stickers, new baby daughter?' Is Mely sure she has
free samples, and advertisements of the baby enough breast-milk to keep the little one
milk companies. I saw stacks and displays of contented? Mely looks tired-babies can be
baby milks in tiny stores-the most visible so demanding. Has Mely heard about this
and prestigious products of a poor shop- amazing new milk developed by doctors in
next to open sewage and slum conditions America and Europe where all babies are so
which insured that the babies would only healthy and strong?
June 18, 1981
YUE-LING, 27, worries that her 3-day-old
son isn't getting enough milk from her swol-
len, aching breasts. The baby seems fretful
and cries a lot; each feeding is becoming a
trial for both mother and child. Yue-ling
feels like weeping with relief when the firm
but friendly young woman in the starched
trouser-suit and sensible shoes explains how
infant formula is scientifically designed by
babycare. experts for modern mothers.
RAJ, 36, listen thoughtfully as the im-
peccably groomed "nutritionist" goodhum-
ouredly scolds him. His wife, trying to hush
their 4-year-old son and suckle the new in-
fant at the same time, calls irritably from
the door of their two-room hut: breast-
feeding may be a labour she snaps, but at
least it is free. Raj sees her anger, her des-
peration, $er rumpled and prematurely
stooped figure. He hears the "nutritionist"
chide him with happiness, convenience and
science . .
All over Asia, those scenes are being re-
peated thousands of times every day, with
countless variations. Always, the aim is the
same: to convince mothers that "infant for-
mulas"--milk-substitute preparations made
and aggressively marketed by multinational
corporations-are better than mother's milk.
Unfortunately, their claims are not true. In
some instances, the claims and activities of
infant formula manufacturers constitute
crimes against Asia and against the develop-
ing world as a whole. Now, just when the
international community has finally begun a
concerted effort to combat the menace, the
big companies are gearing for a counter-
attack.
At the World Health Assembly. in Geneva,
Switzerland, next month, representatives of
more than 150 countries will debate a code
of ethics for the sale of infant-formulas and
other baby foods. The code was drafted by
the World Health Organization (WHO) and
the United Nations Children's Fund
{UNICEF) following a joint meeting of these
two agencies in Geneva in October 1979.
Many infant-formula companies participated
in the discussions that led to the drafting
of the marketing code; they did so out of a
sense of moral obligation, having studied the
evidence that misuse of their products en-
dangers the health and even the lives of
millions of children around the world. Yet
as the Geneoa conference draws closer, some
of those same companies are preparing to
sabotage the code or dilute it so heavily
that it will be virtually meaningless.
The reason for that scandalous about-face
has nothing to do with health, science or
modernity. It is pegged directly to politics
or, more accurately, to the shift In American
and West European politics. With the advent
of the Reagan Administration, some of the
manufacturers who previously cooperated
with the U.N. agencies have begun to "sense
an advantage;' as one angry UNICEF top-
sider puts it. They have made it clear they
intend to fight in Geneva next month by
characterising the code as a "restraint on
free trade." They intend to portray the
code's provisions against misleading or am-
biguous advertising as a violation of the U.S.
Constitutfon~s First Amendment, which pro-
tects freedom of speech and freedom of the
press.
By such means, the companies plan to ob-
scure the real purpose of the code, which
seeks not to ban infant formula but to pre-
vent or minimise its abuse through aggres-
sive marketing. Those marketing efforts go
far beyond simple advertising: most glaring-
ly, they include the use of "milk nurses'
salespeople employed by the companies to
push their products in hospitals, towns and
villages. Because they appear to function in
an official or semi-official capacity, and be-
cause they are often abetted by corrupt or
ignorant hospital staffers, the hucksters have
little difficulty winning over Mely and fue-
ling or fathers like Raj who want to make
life easier for their wives.
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 ? ~, ?~;;~roved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-00003R0003a0020012-6
June 18, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE
At the core of the current debate is the
incontrovertible and mounting evidence of
much higher sickness and death rates among
botttE-fed babies than among breast-fed
youngsters. The evidence is most startlingly
clear in terms of diarrhoeal diseases: bad
water, dirty bottles and unsterilised teats
cause diarrhoea. And since infant formula
makes a big dent in family income, pa_*ents
habitually dllute the product to make it last
longer. Result: progressive malnutrition.
James P. Grant, UNICEF's executive direc-
tor, believes worldwide adoption of the mar-
keting code "could saver a million children a
year now dying of diarrhoea and [the effects
of] malnutrition." The infant-food industry,
adds WHO Director-General Haifdan Mahler,
is "morally obliged to change its prac-
tices."
Many women, for one reason. or another,
are not able to breast-feed; for them, infant
formula.-pmperiy used-is a godsend. WHO
and IINICEF don't dispute this. What they
do dispute is marketing aimed at convincing
mothers that infant formula is "almost as
good,' "as good" or "even better" than
mother's milk. They also want to put, a stop
to marketing that suggests substitute milk
products are "more convenient" and "more
modern," a tactic favoured in developing and
industrialised societies alike.
"Want to be a real hero?" asks an ad
published by Mead Johnson & Co. of Evans-
ville, Indiana. "Buy Mom a two-week supply
of Enfamil Nursette infant formula. .
She'll appreciate your gift (because] Nursette
is easy to use-it means less work, more
rest. ...Isn't your wife's happiness worth
it?" Yet the American Academy of Paediatrics
is unequivocal in asserting that "breast milk
is the best food for every newborn infant."
Mead Johnson is a wholly-owned subsidi-
':ary of Bristol-Myers Co. (annual sales: US
$2.5 billion). Ross Laboratories, which makes
Similar, is owned bgAbbott Laboratories (an-
nual sales: $1 blllion). These two companies
are said to hold. about 90 percent of the in-
fant formula market in the U.B. Along with
a third, American Home Products Corp., they
have begun intensive lobbying in Washington
to persuade American politicians to oppose
the marketing code.
Those companies had previously supported
the draft code; now, conscious that a Re-
publican government is much more inclined
to leave big business alone, they are reneging.
The draft, they claim, is a "serious distor-
tion of the original intent"-a charge that
leaves WHO and UNICEF officials blinking in
amazement. "They helped write it!" ex-
ctaims one.
From the outset, some other manufactur-
ers actively opposed the international agen-
cies efforts to draw up a code. One of them
was the giant Swiss-based food corporation
Nestle, whose products are familiar in many
Asian countries. Nestle tried to skirt the is-
sue, say UNICEF sources, by "insisting that it
had never said breast milk wasn't best, by
claiming that its products have improvec><
baby .nutrition in developing countries, by
saying it doesn't anvertise infant formula in
poorer countries, and so on." Unfortunately
for Nestle, those lofty claims are easily
brought down to earth:
Claim: "Nestle actually encourages breast-
feeding." Fact: While the company's prod-
ucts do carry the advice. that "Breast-feeding
is Best," Nestle's promotional and market-
--,mg techniques effectively spread the opposite
message. Through doctors, midwives and the
mothers themselves, Nestle clearly encour-
ages the use of infant formula-hardly sur-
prising, since it makes the stuff. The Inter-
faith Centre on Corporate Responsibility
(ICCR), an activist wing of the National
Council of Churches in the U.S., quotes a
letter firm s Nestle "medical representative"
who said her main responsibility "is to pro-
mote the Nestle infant formula products" by
visiting "people in the medical profession
who are directly in contact with infants.'
In return for infant-formula samples, she
wrote, "the recipients would of course recom-
mend, in one way or another, Nestle for-
mulas."
Claim: Nestle does no consumer advertis-
ing of infant-formula products in developing
countries." Fact: While Nestle supposedly
ordered a halt to all such advertising in
July 1978, it promoted formula to mothers
at a baby show in Malaysia in October 1978.
Formula promotion calendars were distribu-
ted by Nestle in Indonesia in 1979:
Last month, a well known European ex-
pert on child nutrition announced that he
was quitting his post as consultant to a
Nestle subsidiary because of Nestle's activ-
ities in developing countries. In a letter to
the British medical journal The Lancet, Dr.
Stig Sjolin of Sweden's Uppsala University
Hospital declared: "Despite sharp and weIl-
founded criticism from a number of orga-
nisations and individuals over the years,
Nestle has shown. little interest in changing
its attitudes and marketing policies:' He
added: "Nestle, in its obstinacy, has even
joined forces with other large manufacturers
of breast-mllk substitute-not, as is now
clear, to establish rules of conduct that
would protect child health, but to defend the
manufacturers' activities and to protect their
own economic interests."
The 1979 WHO/UNICEF meeting was at-
tended by government representatives from
eighteen countries including India, Japan,
Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua, New Guinea,
the Philippines, the II.S. and Britain. Also
among the participants were experts from
U.N. and other agendes such as the Food
& Agriculture Organisation (FAO), the
World Bank's Rural Development Depart-
ment, the International Labour Organisation
(ILO), the U.N. Conference on Trade 8: De-
velopment (UNCTAD), the II.N. Fund for
Population Activities (UNFPA), the World
Food Programme and the U.N. Industrial De-
velopment Organisation (IINIDO). Among
the participants from the infant-formula
industry itself were executives from Bristol-
Myers, Mead Johnson, Abbott, Wyeth and
Gerber (U.S.), Friesland and Nutricia (Hol-
land), Dumex (Denmark), Meiji Milk Prod-
ucts and Snow Brand (Japan) and Nestle
(Switzerland). At that meeting, by consen-
sus, it was agreed that "there should be an
international code of marketing of infant
formula and other products used as breast-
milk substitutes. This should be supported
by both exporting and importing countries
and observed by all manufacturers." The
code was duly drawn up in consultation with
industry officials and approved two months
ago by the executive board oP the World
Health Organisation; now it must be ap-
proved by the WHO Assembly next month.
The motion before the Assembly will take
the form of a "recommendation" to member
governments, rather than a "regulation"-
s concession to the industry and a reflection
of the industry's lobbying over the past year.
The hope is that governments, once the rec-
ommendation is accepted, will quickly give
the code the full force of law is their own
countries.
If the code is weakened further or scuttled
altogether by the manufacturers' new coun-
terattack, Asian governments will have only
two options: to legislate against fmproper
marketing practices, or watch more of their
youngest citizens suffer and perhaps die
through misuse oP infant formula. Plainly,
there is nothing wrong with established
breast-milk substitutes, used correctly and
under the supervision of trained medical per-
sonnel. But there is a lot wrong with the
manner in which leading companies exploit
social pressures, ignorance or poverty in sell-
ing their products to mothers who may not
need it and probably can't afford it. To
Geneva in mid-May, the thoughts of all car-
ing Asians must turn.
S 6487
Mr. LEAKY. One of the articles in the
Washington Post spoke of the use of baby
formulas in Brazil and it presented a
scientific study showing a large percent-
age of bottlefed babies in Brazil's larg-
est city are undernourished.
In fact, as a result, the conservative
military government of Brazil launched
a campaign to encourage mothers to
breastfeed their children, according to
Jim Brooke of the Washington Post.
The report that they found that 32
percent of the bottlefed babies suffered
from malnourishment, 32 percent com-
pared to only 9 percent of the breastfed
babies. Twenty-three percent of the bot-
tlefed babies had to be hospitalized.
Mr. President, I shall read a few para-
graphs from the Washington Post article
of April 21, speaking of a survey done in
Brazil:
The survey findings were echoed in ran-
dom interviews with mothers in Rocinha,
one of Rio's largest-and worst-favelas or
shantytowns.
"I started giving [formula] to my baby
boy at 11/2 months, but he got a stomach in-
fection that almost killed the child," one
woman, known only as Nicinha, said as she
sat in her two-roam house, partially roofed
with flattened soy oil cans.
Nicinha said her baby was consuming four
cans of formula a week. To save money she
diluted the mix with flour, corn meal and
cream of rice cereal At $2.50 a can, a month's
supply of Nestogeno costs $40, while most
wage earners of Rocinha earn Brazil's mini-
mum salary-$80 a month. The Sao Paulo
study found that formula feeding a baby for
one year would require 43 percent of the
income of a Boor family of four, compared to
the cost of breast-feeding, approximately 4
percent.
"The water here also doesn't help," Nicinha
said, waving to a green-gray open sewer
gurgling three feet from her doorstep. Favela
residents get their water from nearby wells,
but they say this water is polluted, frustrat-
ing efforts to sterilize baby bottles.
Across the sewer and down a narrow, slip-
pery, alley Maria da Conceicao sat in her
darkened room, nursing her 1-year-oid'son,
Vito.
"They are much stronger," she said of
breast-fed babies. "They don't get sick with
diseases:'
Dr. Amandio Ferreira de Souza, head pedi-
atrician at Rio's Poor Mother Hospital agreed
with Maria da Gbnceicao's comments.
"Almost all the diarrhea cases I see are
bottle-fed babies;' he commented.
Without hesitation, Dr. Amandio said his
fellow pediatricians in Rio are "100 percent"
in favor of breast-feeding, but for many
years his profession was the target of a mul-
tifaceted promotional campaign by Nestle.
Until recently, Nestle gave a free, one pear's
supply of powdered milk to Brazilian pedia-
tricians, nutritionists and maternity nurses
when they or their wives had children. The
Sao Paulo report found that Nestle adver-
tising helps support professional journals,
and Dr. Amandio said the company fre-
quently sponsors meetings of pediatricians.
Mr. President, as I said before our
country is a good country. It is a gener-
ous country. It is an honest country. But
we have problems of malnourishment,
malnutrition, and hunger in our coun-
try, and we are only now beginning to
accept that and take steps to get rid of
it.
We have expressed concern and we
have demonstrated our concern in other
parts of the world.
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 ~S 6488
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-00003R00030002001~',~~ ,_
CONGRESSIONAL RECORID -SENATE June Y 8, Y 981
But what worries me is that we can
wipe out that whole concern overnight
by looking as if we are just jumping fn
bed with some of the multinationals and
helping them make billions of dollars at
the cost of the lives of thousands and
perhaps millions of babies.
Yt is interesting when we have to pause
for a moment and look at some of the
issues. The Foreign Relations Committee
is meeting now on a matter which I think
is.an extremely important one, the Is-
raeli attack on the Iraqi nuclear facil-
ity, the questions that it raises on stabil-
ity in the Middle East, the possibility and
portentions that it makes for possible
nuclear war in that area. These are sig-
nificant issues.
They should not overshadow this issue
because, believe me, from the mail I have
received, the people I hear from, the peo-
ple Ihave talked with in other parts of
the world, this is a major item. When the
United States wants to demonstrate its
good faith to the rest of the world, when
the United States seeks allies around the
world, we do not necessarily get those
allies by simply building bigger and bet-
ter battleships or taking obsolete battle-
ships out of mothballs to do it and sail
them around the world as though we
were Teddy Roosevelt and the great
white fleet. We do it by our example. We
do it by our respect of human rights. We
do it by the constancy of our diplomacy.
We do it as much in many areas by moral
persuasion as anything else.
The United States must make sure
that it does not give itself the image of
babykillers because we are not. We are
not. And the vote that we saw a few
weeks ago unfortunately can be inter-
preted that way in so much of the world
and our enemies will very quickly move
to interpret it that way.
It is unfortunate, when so many good
American of all political persuasions
have made every effort possible to dem-
onstrate the good will of America around
the world and have spent billions of dol-
lars of our tax dollars to help other coun-
tries. That in the almost ,frivolous ac-
tion we can wipe out much of that good
will because of a lack of realization of the?
steps-that we have taken and without
realizing the complexity of these issues
and trying to' go through on a wing and
a prayer. And I think that that is what
has happened here.
This is the way we wipe out years of
efforts oP trying to develop good faith
around the world.
This reflects a catering to commercial
interests without considering the overall
best interests not only of the United
States but also of our allies.
I hope that as a result of the resolu-
tion before the Senate and the resolu-
tion passed by the other body by a
3-to-1 margin that it will not happen
again.
Mr. President, i have been pleased,
during the discussions of this issue, with
the great concern shown by my col-
league from New Ehgland> the distin-
guished Senator from Maine (Mr.
MITCHELL) . Senator MITCHELL has dis-
cussed it with me in great detail, and
has attended hearings on this issue. I
know when I had the opportunity to
serve with the distinguished Senator
from gansas on the Presidential Com-
mission on World Hunger that I wished
the distinguished Senator from Maine
had already been in the Senate at that
time because I think he might have been
a welcome addition to those who testified
and appeared before the Commission:
He brings a sense of urgency to this
vital issue.
i am reminded of another member of
that Commission, one who did more
really to -get the Commission to start
than anybody else, folksinger Harry
Chapin. Mr. Chapin would come down
like a man with a mission, strolled the
halls of the House and the Senate to get
that Commission started.
I think the sight of Harry Chapin and
his guitar, various Senators and Con-
gressmen striding very quickly down the
halls with him, became a very familiar
one until the Commission on World
Hunger was founded.
As a member of the Commission, he
urged, so eloquently, the issues we have
before us.
So I have to think that on behalf of
him, and so many others, that; it is good
to see new Members take up this issue.
It is with a sense of respect that I yield
to the distinguished Senator from Maine
(Mr. MITCHELL).
Mr. MITCHELL. Y thank the Senator.
Mr. President, the decision of the U.S.
Government to cast the world's only
negative vote against the adoption of
the infant formula marketing code was
regrettable.
The code is an advisory code; it does
not have the legal force of a treaty or
other international obligation. It does
not require the United States to impose
any limits on marketing practices for
infant formula domestically, nor does it
mandate any restrictions on such prac-
tices by U.S. companies operating
abroad.
it would require the United. States to
report back to the World Health Orga-
nization as to what steps it has taken to
prevent misleading and overly-aggressive
selling of infant formula in circum-
stances where its use is not appropriate.
One hundred eighteen natiioxis voted in
Geneva to uphold .that code. They are
nations that range from industrialized
countries like Britain, Canada, Switzer-
land bo the very poorest countries whose
babies are mast at risk from inappropri-
ate infant feeding practices.
Only the United States of America
voted no.
This is not an action in which I, as a
citizen of this land, or indeed in which
any citizen should take any pride.
By a negative vote, we did not pro-
tect the right to free enterprise. Our own
laws prohibit misleading advertising. We
did not protect the first amendment. The
first amendment does not condone un-
fair business practices.
In 1978, our Congress enacted legisla-
tion to protect the quality of infant
forlyula sold here in the United States.
That action did not infringe on the
rights of any company to conduct its
business within the law.
Yet, our Government voted against this
international, advisory code because of
claims that the restrictions it recom-
mends against certain marketing prac-
tices represent an intrusion on Consti-
tuti~onally guaranteed rights. That is
simply not so.
The purpose of this advisory code is
simple, not difficult to understand. It is
intended to support the governments of
poorer nations in their efforts to protect
their people against the blandishments
of advertising that implies infant for-
mula is as good as breastfeeding, prefer-
able to breastfeeding, or superior to
breastfeeding.
It is designed to help limit the prac-
tice of companies dressing their sales-
women in uniforms that look like nurses?
uniforms, and sending them to mater-
nity clinics and villages to make the
sales pitch to illiterate women that in-
fant formula will make their babies as
strong and healthy as European babies,
or American babies.
It is designed to prevent these "nurses"
giving free samples of formula to post-
parturient women for a few days, a prac-
tice which lets the mother's milk dry up
and makes a return to breastfeeding
impracticable.
The manufacturers have claimed that
they do not engage in these and similar
misleading practices any more under a
voluntary code of self-restraint. ?But a
report by health professionals, Peace y
Corps workers and others in the field last _
year found at least 700 individual in-
stances of abuse.
The manufacturers claim that mar- :.
keting does not encourage women who
can breastfeed to switch to formula.
They claim their only goal is to reach
those women who cannot breastfeed. If
these marketing practices do not, in fact,
encourage sales, it is hard to understand
why the companies are so adamant
against any restrictions.
And it is even more difficult to under-
stand in light of the fact that this code
is purely advisory. It mandates nothing.
This question involves much more
than ideological arguments over whether
we should oppose the anticorporate at-
titude oP some governments. It directly
affects the health of new-barn babies in
Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
Infant formula is meant to be pre-
pared under careful sanitary conditions.
It is designed for mothers who under-
stand the nutritional needs of their
babies. When it is mixed from a con-
taminated water supply, when none of
the utensils can be sterilized, when il-
literacy or misunderstanding combines
with poverty to stretch the precious for-
mula by watering it down, when it can-
not be refrigerated in a tropical climate,
then the use of infant formula is surely
inappropriate. When the disposable bot-
tles American mothers use do not exist,
and formula is given to a baby from a
Coke bottle with a rag tied across the ~-
neck then, surely, infant formula is don-
gerous to infants. .
So I am deeply concerned about the
implications of our negative vote. In-
stead of sending the message that we
support free economic activity-which
we do-that corporate operations play
an important constructive role in devel-
oiling countries, are we instead sending
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 ? ~,~~proved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
June 18, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE
the message that the economic health
of private interests far outweighs any
other consideration in the world
community?
That is why I am concerned about the
administration's overruling the decision
reached by the Department of State and
Health and Human Resources to ab-
stain on the vote as a mark of U.S. con-
cern about overly broad restrictions on
commercial activity. An abstention sends
that precise message. A negative vote
sends much more.
The drafting of the code had already
been substantially modified at U.S. in-
sistence. References to nonmilk-sub-
stitute baby foods were eliminated at our
insistence. The code was made advisory,
rather than being issued as a regulatory
code, at our insistence. The language of
the code was ton~i down at our
insistence.
All this was done to maintain the
unanimity of world concern about the
nutrition and health .of the most help-.
less among us, newborn infants.
But, apparently as the results of in-
dustry lobbying, the administration has
vetoed this advisory recommendation.
A recognition of the sanctity of human
life and support for the right of life itself
sureiv goes beyond the mast elementary
goal of seeking to permit birth. It surely
-entails obligations to preserve newly-
.born life and to protect the health of the
newborn, as well.
I deeply regret this wrong decision by
=the U.S. Government to vote against this
code.
I thank the Chair, and I thanklny col-
league, Senator LEessY, for the oppor-
tunity to say a few .words on this subject.
Mr. LEAHY. I thank the Senator, the
distinguished Senator from Maine.
I appreciate the comments of the dis-
tinguished Senator from Maine who has
expressed a great deal of concern about
this issue in the past. I could not empha-
size enough what the distinguished Sen-
ator from Maine refers to and that is a
concern, a concern for life that all of
us share. I hope that none of us feel or
that no one in this country feels that it
is only those who may use a rubric or a
slogan, whether it be right to life or any
other type of slogan that only they are
concerned about lives. I cannot imagine
any Member in this body. Republican or
Democrat, who is ,not concerned with
human life.
But it has to go beyond merely the
rhetoric of being concerned with human
a life. One has to make sure that reality
catches up with that rhetoric and, con-
versely, that the rhetoric does not over-
shadow the reality. It is not enough sim-
ply to give speeches that say we value and
we cherish human life, which we do, it is
not enough to say that we will make the
world free and safe for all people, unless
we take the steps to make sure that those
~eopie, especially the most defenseless of
them, can live in such a world.
It is not enough to use the rhetoric on
the one hand, but then to substitute the
~7eality of a really Faustiaal alliance with
corporations that obviously care little for
life and care little for the weIl being of
their customers but care only that there
be customers. And so many of these
multinational corporations could care
less about the lives oP the people in the
third world of the emerging nations.
They could care less about a right to life
no matter how defined.
i think that instead of taking action
which seems tm appear to condone what
they have done, that we should take ac-
tion that condemns what they do-not
just what they have done but what they
do-because their activity condemns to
death tens of thousands, hundreds of
thousands, even millions of infants, born.
and yet to be born, in Third World
countries.
I doubt very much if, for even a mo-
ment, these death sentences are discussed
in the corporate headquarters of some of
these multinationals, but rather, the bil-
lions of dollars of proEts that are gained
bu them putting into commerce, putting
into commerce, items that-because of
the countries they are used in-are as
dangerous and deadly as any drug ped-
dler on the streets of any city in the
United States or anywhere else in the
world.
Is it any more deadly, I ask my col-
leagues, for a pusher in the dties or
back alleys of this country to peddle
heroin to an addict, an adult addict who
can make a conscious determination of
whether they will take that heroin or
not? IS it any different, or is it fn fact
more deadly, than giving polluted, dan-
gerous. unsanitary formula in a bottle
ridden with germs, unsterilized, to a Z-
month old infant who has no choice at
a]I but respond with a biological urge to
eat and in thousands and thousands of
instances takes 'in a more deadly sub-
stance than that heroin addict in the
back alley of our cities?
And yet every one of us, in or out of
the Government, wilt rise on this floor
and condemn the activities of those
heroin. pushers. But they do not sit in
nice, gleaming corporate headquarters.
But you know there is one area I found
in our hearings where there is one very
near connection. None of those heroin
pushers are willing to talk about the
profits they make. They~do not give out
a balance sheet detailing these Profits.
I know from the hearings conducted by
the dieting-shed Senator from Massa-
chusetts (Mr. Ksxb-anse) and others, that
we found that a lot of these multina-
tionals are not too eager to tell about
their profit figures either.
I kna~r in the work that we did with
the Hunger Corr:mi~ion we found that a
lot of them said it was just a minor mat-
ter. Aminor mattes'? The best informa-
tion we are able to develop is that we are
talking about a multibillion dollar
market.
And is it not interesting, when the
figures get up into the tens oP mfliions.
the hundreds of millions and eventually
into the billions of dollars, that any
question .of morality goes right out the
window in those plush corporate head-
quarters?
Mr. President, let us snake sure that
when we vote on this resolution it is so
overwhelming that we send two mes-
sages, not only in this sand but across the
world: First, a message to our own Gov-
ernment that we will never vote this way
S 6489
again; and, second, to the world that the
policy of the United States is not to con-
done but the policy of the United States
is to condemn the activity of these multi-
nationals, an activity that determines
the death and guarantees the death of
helpless infants through the world.
Mr. President, i realize that there are
those who feel that we have taken a
great deal of time on this issue on the
Senate floor. Mr. President, I have seen
far more time taken on housekeeping
matters for the Senate. I have seen far
more time taken on mischievous amend-
ments to appropriations bills. Mr. Presi-
dent, Icon think of few issues that are as
important, not only to the people of this
country but to the image of our country
abroad and, more than image, to the sub-
stance of life abroad.
Mr. President, I note on the floor the
presence of the distinguished Senator
from Massachusetts (Mr. KsxxssnY) . I
know that he wants to speak. He is the
Senator who has had the public hearings
on this matter and I yield to the Senator
from Massachusetts.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I wish
to express my very deep sense of ap-
preciation. to the Senator from Vermont,
my friend, Senator LEaxY, and also to
Senator DIISENBERGl3$ for their initiative
in developing the amendment which is
before us today. If I had my "druthers,"
I would have drafted a resolution which
would have deplored the action of the
United States in what I consider to be a
shameful vote in the World Health Or-
ganization on the infant formula code.
It seems to me, Mr. President, that the
vote that was cast by the administration
in behalf of the IInited States clearly
did not reflect the medical opinion of
those who have studied this issue close-
ly over a period of years, whether it has
been in the U.S. Senate or within the
World Health Organization. I refer to
very extensive hearings that our sub-
committee in the Labor and Human Re-
sources Cammittee, the Health and
Scientific Research Subcommittee, held
in 1978. The vote that we cast at the
World Health Organization was not con-
sistent with the medical testimony that
was submitted to our subcommittee, a
subcommittee that was acting in a bipar-
tisan way with our present Secretary of
HHS> Senator Schweiker, who was then
the ranking minority member and an
extremely active member on this issue,
a man who spoke with both knowledge
and understanding of the dangers of the
dilution of infant formula in the Third
World countries. _
The vote that was cast in the World
Health Organization was also not con-
sistent with the studies that have been
done within the World Health Orga-
nization, which has a wealth of infor-
mation on the less developed countries
of the world where this infant formula
is used and abused.
So the action that was taken by the
United States in that international
forum is completely inconsistent with
what I consider to be the overwhelming
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-00003800030002001
~-
S 6490
medical testimony that has been gath-
ered not only in the U.S. Senate but in
the World Health Organization.
There should be no confusion, Mr.
President, by the Senate on this fact.
Second, Mr. President, it is important
that the American people, when they
read this debate, recognize that there
are those of us who are cosponsors of
this resolution who believe, and believe
very deeply, that if the vote was to be
cast in the World Health Organization
by the American people, the vote by the
United States would have been over-
whelmingly in the affirmative on what
the World Health Organization had de-
veloped-because the American people
understand the issue well because we are
a compassionate and humane nation
and citizenry.
The mothers of this country would
have demanded that the United States
and its representatives cast an affirma-
tive vote, mothers who, I think, under-
stand the needs of other mothers in the
Third World countries, who see their in-
fants die because of the failure of hav-
ing adequate resources to buy and use in-
fant formula, mothers who understand
the agony and the pain of an infant who
is on the verge of death because of mal-
nutrition. Maybe mothers in our own
society have not looked into the eyes of
their own infants and seen them die of
malnutrition, but they understand full
weA what that horror can mean to a
parent, to a loved one, to a mother, and
to the members of a family. That is what
we are talking about here this morning.
International agencies have estimated
there will. be close to 1 million children
who will die in this world of ours because
of the misuse of infant formula. There
are 15,800>000 children who die every
year in this world. Fifteen million two
hundred thousand of them die in the
Third World from preventable diseases-
diseases that could be prevented with im-
munization and with technology which
are already available.
To do this would amount to maybe $200
to $300 million-a lot of money, granted,
but which pales .in comparison to the
billions and billions of dollars that we
spend in the budget of the United States,
money we spend 1x1 terms of our own
national security.
Sometimes we hear voices which say,
"Well, we cannot really.immunize those
children in Third World countries be-
cause we cannot get out into the bush or
into rural areas:'
Listen to Dr. Davida Coady, who testi-
fied before our committee on the prob-
lems of nutritional deficiency, whether
it be Biafra, Southeast Asia, or Africa.
She talked about her visits to some of
the most rural and distant parts of the
world. And she says in those small vil-
lages the one item you can find is infant
formula.
It is amazing how they are able to de-
velop and deliver cans of infant formula
into the mast r~.u'al and remote places
in the world and still we are unable to
get medicines there or de?~elop an im-
munization program to try and sustain.
life in many of those same countries.
Mr. President, I remember. traveling to
the World health Organization in 1977
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE June 18, ~ 198I
and speaking about the abuses of the in-
fant formula. At that time I visited with
Dr. Mahler, the head of the World Health
Organization, urging his personal inter-
vention in the development of a code.
Also, I remember his inquiring of me
whether there would be support by the
United States for the fashioning, shap-
ing, and development of an infant for-
mula code.
i could not possibly conceive of the
possibility that the United States would
not be out front in trying to lead the
world in an area which is of such ,great
importance and significance for millions
and millions of people throughout the
.world in the fashioning and the shaping
of an infant formula code.
I recall returning from that World
Health Organization and working with
the then Senator Schweiker ~in the de-
velopment of this very extensive set of
hearings on the medical implications of
failing to develop an infant formula
code, and returning to the World Health
Organization in 1979 and speaking with
the delegates at that assembly about the
progress that had been made in the de-
velopment of an infant formula code.
Then I heard the first rumblings in
the early part of this year that the"
United 45tates was thinking of voting
negative-not in the affirmative or ab-
staining with objections, ath.er possible
votes that the United States could take.
Now we were considering casting our
vote in the negative, being the only na-
tion in the world to cast our vote in the
negative on an issue that will not even
affect the United States but will only af-
fect the other countries of .the world
if they take the appropriate remedial ac-
tion which will protect their people. _
It is a voluntary code, to be accepted
or rejected by the individual nations, but
the U.S. position was, in effect, saying,
"We are not even going to urge that
Third World countries even consider this
particular code: '
How shameful our vote, Mr. President,
and how shameful our action.
It seems to me, Mr. President, that
this resolution does, in some measure,
give an opportunity for the elected rep-
resentatives of the American. people to
indicate what I stated earlier-that, if
this issue had been decided by the Ameri=
can people rather than by this adminis-
tration, there would have been a very
clear, powerful voice that would have
spoken and voted in the affirmative and
placed the United States where the
United States should be placed. That is in
a leadership role for its concern for hu-.
manity and its concern for children, its
concern for suffering, anguish, and pain,
and its concern for our follow human
beings who share this planet with us.
On the issue of whether it is the sur-
vival of infants or the profit margins of
major international drug companies, who
profit so dramatically from itrfant for-
mulas, there would have been no equivo-
cation, there would have been no hesita-
tion. The voice of the United States and
the vote of the United States would have
been aye.
Mr. President, this resolution gives us
some opportunity to speak on this issue
and to indicate by our support for it that
we reject the position of the administra-
tion on this question and that, on this
resolution, we express the position of the
American people and vote aye.
Again, Mr. President, I commend the
Senator from Vermont and the Senator
from Minnesota for their leadership in
this issue.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed in the RECORD a let-
ter which I selit to Secretary Schweiker
in April of this year on this issue, in
which I was joined by Senator FELL and
Senator HATFIELD.
There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
U.$. SENATE, COMMTTTEE ON LAHOR
AND HUMAN RESOURCES,
Washington, D.C., April 10, 1981.
AOri. RICHARD $. $CHWEIKER,
Secretary of Health and Human Services,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SECRETARY: We are Writing to
express our hope that you will give your sup-
port to a consensus which has been developed
by -the World Health Organization on a vol-
untary code oY marketing of breastmilk sub-
stitutes (infant formula). As you will re-
member, it was the work of the Senate Health
Subcommittee in 1978 which highlighted the
serious health consequences 113 the develop-
ing world associated with the use of infant
formula. In May, 1980 the lull Senate Com-
mittee on Foreign Relations in its report on
the foreign aid legislation, endorsed the rec-
ommendations of the WHO/UNICEF special
meeting, of October 1979, on Infant and
Young Child Feeding. The Committee's re-
port stated "The Committee wishes to go on
record in support of WHO and UNICEF's ef-
forts to formulate an internationally ob-
served Code for the appropriate marketing
and distribution of breastmllk substitutes."
In our view, the WHO Code deals with this
issue in a sensible manner. Its voluntary
nature also argues for our support. The WHO
has been able to e8ect a compromise solution
which apparently has the support of the de-
veloping world countries, virtually the entire
health community,"our European allies and
at least the acquiescence of the European
manufacturers involved who now constitute
some 90 percent of the actual production of
the infant formula.
We believe that it is in the American inter-
est to }oin this consensus. If necessary, res-
ervations could be made on those points in
the Code that cause serious problems for the
industry. We believe that a negative vote
would be directly counter to our own inter-
est and would place us in a position of op-
posing a ma}or step toward reducing sickness
and death among Third World infants. We
have Written to Secretary Haig on this mat-
ter as well.
We hope that you will take these views
into consideration as you consider the U.B.
position at the upcoming World Health As-
sembly.
Sincerely,
EDWARD M. $ENNEDY.
- CLAIBORNE FELL.
MARS O: HATFIELD.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr: President,. I thank the _
Senator from Massachusetts for his '-
statement, and I find myself ixr "total
agreement. I could not help but think
during the hearings held by the Senator ,~
from Massachusetts that, the case was
made so persuasively by people. who. had
no political ax to grind at all. They were
people who were just involved in world
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 ? _? --~..~roved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
June 18, 1981 CONGRESSI?NA]L l[8~C?It~ - Sl3NATE
Mr. KENNEDY. Will the Senator yield
on that point?
Mr. LEAHY. Yes.
Mr. KENNEDY. Y should like also to
have printed, Mr. President, the witness
list of individuals who appeared ixl a
public fforum that a number of Senators
held on thLs issue last month. This just
reinforces the point made by the Sena-
tor from Vermont. For we had on this
panel Bishop Francis Murphy, who 15 the
chairman of the Archdiocesan panel of
Justice and Peace Commission of Bal~i-
more, but also representing the Catholic
bishops. We had Rabbi David Sapper-
stein, who is the director of the Religious
Action Center of the Union of American
Hebrew Congregations and the Central
Conferenc? of Rabbis and Mr. Louis
Knowles, who is associate professor of
public heaflth of the University of Cali-
fornia at Los Angeles.
Quite frankly, these were three repre-
sentatives of the thl'ee different denom-
inations of religion in the United States.
But we could Have had a panel, that
would have contiliued to be testifying
even today, of those who are concerned
about the moral impflications of the vote
of the United States and our responsi-
bilities in terms ?f the hungriest and
neediest people of the world. There was
no equivocation, no hesitation from that
group.
On the third panel, there was Dr. Dav-
icla Coady, who has been appearing be-
fore our committee since the early 1970'x.
fi?ormerly Davida Taylor, she is an out-
standing nutritionist, who first worked
in Biafra. She now works at UCLA as a
nutritionist, teaches there for 6 months
of the year and takes 6 months of the
year to work in an underdeveloped canlll-
try. Her final words to the Members of
the Senate at the fforum were that she
does not mind the deprivation and she
does not mind being separated Prom leer
loved ones and the members of her own
family for 6 months at a time, doing that
year otter year; that while she was
troubled by the extent of poverty that
she saw in the Third World and the suf-
fering that she saw, the one thing she
pleaded for Bras for the United States
not to be undermining what she acid
others had dedica4a~d their lives to; that
is, trying to provide at least some sem-
blance of a nutritious diet for infants in
the Third World.
She Pelt that if the Congress of the
United States could do anything in this
area, maybe we are not in a position to
do all the positive things that we would
like to do, but for God's sake, do not
permit the kinds of abuses that we have
seen with infant formula. Mr. President,
this is a person who leas years of profes-
sional experience fn this area.
There was also Dr. Pr~ichael Latham,
professor of international nutrition,
Cornell University, who was on a study
mission I sent to Africa. Also Douglas
Johnson, who has been national chair-
person of the Infant Formula Action
Coalition. Then there were the extremely
courageous Dr. Stephen Joseph, who was
the Deputy Assistant Administrator of
Human Resources Development, and
Eugene Babb; Deputy Assistant Admin-
istrator for Food and Nutrition, AID.
I think it is probabfly appropriate at
this point t0 note that these two individ-
uals, men of conscience, prefferred to re-
sign their official positions rather than
be a part of a decisionmaking process
that ran so completely contrary to their
consciences. They lead careers o8 dedica-
tion to the interests of the United States
in the service of them country and the
foreign service of our Nation, but they
finally came to a point where they said,
on this issue, "Enough is enough," and
they stood with tine American people. I
think at a time of a flot of cynicism and
skepticism about bureaucrats and people
who run Government agencies, these
two individuals stand out as stars, indi-
viduals who wanted to come down on
the side of the American people on this
issue rather than with the administra-
tion's decision, which ran so completely
contrary to their conscience. Y think in
this whole dialog and deveflopment of a
Senate record, they ought tm understand
that their actions speak powerfully and
their service to their country is respected
and understood by many.
(Mrs. HAWKINS assumed the chair.)
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, if the
Senator will yield, II am remarkably
proud of both those men. Tine irony of it
is that they had to resign their positions
because they had tried to defend the
United States from tal~alg an action
that was sure to briing about worldwide
condemnation-and it did.
The further irony o8 it is that what
they were doing was takialg ~ position
that I am confident redacts the feeling
and the will of people of both political
parties, of all ideologies throughout the
country. Had the United States taken
their position, we could have .increased
our credibility within the Third World,
we could have shown our dedication to
humanity, and we could have shown our
dedication to basic rights of life.
Yet, because they were not listened to,
they had to resign; and the United
States went into a position that brought
about condemnation frohl around the
world, raised serious questions about our
responsiveness to the Third World, and
was a position that was an enormous
propaganda gift to those countries that
are opposed to the United States.
Here, all the things that the United
States does not want to do, the United
States ended up doing, ~'he two courage-
ous people who tried to keep the United
States from making a terrible mistake
arere forced to resign their positions. We
cannot say enough good about them, and
I am pleased by the recognition they
have received fdl the other body for their
activity.
Mr. KENNEDY. I thank the Senator
for his comments.
Madam President, I ask unanimous
consent to have the witness list printed
in the RECORD.
There being lio objection, the witness
list was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, aS fOIlOWB:
WrrNESS L8S?1'
PANEL II Y
Ma. Linda Kelsey, Actress, I,os Angeles,
Calif.
Rev. Daniel Driscoll, Msryknon Order,
Ossining, N.Y.
S 6491
Sister Margaret Moran, Medical Mission
Order, Philadelphta, Pa.
PANEL II
Bishop P. Francis Murphy, Ausilliary
Bishop of Baltimore, Chairman of Arch-
diocesan, Justice and Peace Commission of
Baltimore.
Rabbi David Sapperstein, Director of
Religious Action Center of Union of Ameri-
can Hebrew Congregation and the Central
Conference of American Rabbis.
Mr. Louts Knowles, Coordinator for Hunger
Concerns, National Council of Churches in
the UB., New York, N.Y.
PANEL IIr
Davida Coady, M.D., Associate Professor
of Public Health, University of California at
Los Angeles.
Dr. Michael Latham, Professor of Interna-
tional Nutrition, Cornell University, Ithaca,
N.Y.
Mr. Douglas Johnson,
person, Infant Formula Action Coalition,
Minneapolis, Minnesota.
PANEL Ev
Dr. Stephen Joseph, Deputy Assistant Ad-
ministrator, Human Resources Development.
Mr. Eugene Babb, Deputy Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Food and Nutrition, Agency
for International Development.
Mr. I,EAHY. Madam President, the
witness list that has just been placed in
the RECORD by the distinguished Senator
from Massachusetts is interesting be-
cause, as he has said, the hearings could
have gone?on, with a continuing witness
list, until now, and it could have con-
tinued beyond. We would have heard
more and more of the same, more and
more documentation. In fact, of the var-
ious hearings or meetings I have at-
tended, Ihave been to very few where
the documentation on a subject was so
thorough, so complete, and so persuasive.
It is interesting to look at what might
be said on the other side. About the
strongest support Y have heard given for
the activity of the multinational sale of
baby formula and the way they have
done it was, "well, it really doesn't
amount to very much business, and it
really doesn't amount to very much ac-
tivity on our part and, therefore, why
the fuss?"
The obvious question we ask then is,
"How much business does it amount to?"
"Well, we have differing kinds of ac-
counting methods, et cetera, so we don't
give the answer."
Madam President, as nearly as we can
tell, the business amounts into the bil-
lions of dollars. That is why, as I said
before, money wins out over morality in
this question. That is why those ixl the
corporate headquarters-well-fed, weA-
cared-for-can close their eyes to the
suffering and the deaths of infants
throughout the third world. It is a case
in which one would think that any per-
son with a spark of human conscience
would condemn, not condone, the activ-
ity we are seeing.
Madam President, I know there have
been times when some other justification
has been tried to be given for this. The
Baltimore Sun published an article last
year on this matter in which Edwin T.
Frantz, the vice president oP Stouffer's
tried to defend the activity of Nestles in
this regard. I wiA read a response by Dr.
Cori E.. Taylor, who is professor and
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
 ~S 6492
Approved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012 ~.__ ,
s.?---_
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE June 18, 1981
chairman of the Department. of interna-
tional Health at Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity. His response appeared in the $alti-
more Sun of September 13, 198Q. Dr.
Taylor said:
Editor: The Saturday, August 2~, edition
of The Sun. carried an article by Edwin T.
Franta, vice-president of Stouffer's, a Nestle
affiliate, that is full of eels-serving distor-
tions and inaccuraeiea In setting the record
straight it is impartsnt to realise that the
current counter-oSensive against the "Nestle
Boycott" by representatives aF af4Iiated sub-
sidiaries such as the Rusty Scupper indicates
that the boycott fs being remarkedly
effective.
(1) It is the worst kind of distortion by
association to imply that because use o?
Nestle's infant formulas has increased isi de-
veloping Gauntries they can take credit for
the decline in infant mortality which has oc-
curred in spite of Nestle's activities,
It is outright ?aliacious to say, "Nestle has
been the strongest supporter of breast-feed-
ing of infants." The well documented truth,
whicka I have seen myself i:n many Gauntries
where we have research projects, is that. in-
font formula representatives use unscrupu-
lous sales tactics.
For instance, wainen dressed like nurses
have handed out free samples to lactating
mothers,. then when, the breast milk dried up
the poor mother had to buy formula-a
process analogous to a drug pusher. Because
of cost, the mother dilutes the formula so
much that it only colors the watex and is
totally inadequate nutritionaIlg.
(2J The argument downplaying the role of
bottles f32 transmitting infections fs aIso
spurfous_ Even though infected water would
be used with a spoon and cup, the dosage of
infectious sgents would be much less.
An inadequately sterilized bottle with milk
residue is one of the bacterial world's most
delicious culture media. It is almost impos-
sible to clean a battle and nipple except with
sophisticated equipment, whereas a cup and
spoon can be readily eIeaned and sun dried.
Use of bottles is actually and symho?iaally
associated with farmttla feedang while gruels
arc. iri most doeo:1, cultures, automatically
eaten with local utensils.
E3) It is scientifically untrue that supple-
menting breast-feeding with gxuels of ceresls
and lentils leads to "serious infant nutrition
problems." Breast-feeding, even by an under-
nourished mother; provides the protein
needed so that even cassava or arrowraat
supplements provide the added caFeries suf-
8cient tq sustain excellent growth,
(4~ It is not. true that formula use is Ifm-
ited to the urban middle class. I have a pic-
ture of a typical shop in a remote valley two
weeks trek into Nepal with the shopkeeper
breast-feeding her own infant while the
shelves behind her are loaded with infant
formula,
(sj Dlestte and the other infant formula
companies are not leadim.g the current world-
wide move to promote breast-feeding as is
clasmed but are being dragged along kicking
and screaming to cooperate with the new
"Dods" for ethical behavior oY infant formuFs
sales which is being drafted under the aus-
pices of the World Health Qrganizattan and
UNICEF. .
This was written, as I I've said, on
September 13 of last year. 'I'lls Bode he
spoke of is the code that the Illiited
States, ail by itself throughout the world,
voted against.
I quote Dr. Taylor again:.
The saddest indictment against their at-
titude is that when this code came ap for
vote at the last World Health Assembly, the
United States. stood almost alone in voting
against it. The U.S. position was taken over
the vehement objections of U.S. health pro-
fessionals because of pressure on the State
Department from the- Department of Com-
merce.
Much of the international credibility gen-
erated by U.S. church groups and others
who have led the boycott vvas neutralized
by that one vote and a slow :retrieval of our
position is now going to be neeessrry. ?b-
viously the boycott. of all Nestle aTliates
including, the Rusty Scupper; is still needed
to show that we care.-Carl E, Taylor, P.g.D,
Madam Presid~.,nt, I da not stand here
suggesting baycAtts. I stand here sug-
gesting the United States stand for
world heaItl~, that the 17nited States
stand for decent nutrition, and that
the United States stand for the war
~a.~ainst malnausishment and ~*unger,.
Madam President, I have said orer
and aver again,. and I will. sa?y it once
more, that we have na diilic?l1t;T in khis
country of condemning drug peddlers
and drug pushers. I fain in that con-
demnation. Ijoin in' condeling the
criminal activity that they carry out but
especially ~e human misery tlsat is
caused by thasA rnddicted to diem.
But you know it fs ~sy for us to con-
demn the drug pusher s.nd the drug
peddler. The drub pushers >rd drug ped-
dlers are not among our friends and our
associates. They are outside the pale.
They are outside decent ~~s>rep2ny and
decent people. So we can condemn them.
But what happens. when those who are
as bad as any drug pedaler or any drug
pusher, when the corporate executive
determines that we will adcLict the me+~h-
ers and infants o? the Thiu`d ~Forld ixlto
unsafe, unsanitary bo#tle feedt~Ig, we
will subject them to disc to mat-
nourishment, to hunger, often to death?
Do they not deserve the cor~demnlation of
us, of our people, of our Government, o?
our country_as nluch as an int~rriational
drug peddler and drug pusher? And
could it be that that condemnation does
not occur because they lire jl~~st nice
people, because they have nice Names,
because they work in nice buildings and
they go to nice clubs and they have nice
political affiliations, and they have nice
adherence to the tenets of the free en-
terprise system?
In xny former career as a prosecutor
I could paint to a lot of heroin peddlers
who belangect to riice clubs and had nice
affiliations, political and otherwise, and
it might apperr as if they were nice peo-
ple, who would stand up and say they
were all in favor of the f~~ enterprise
system. Iri fact, one of tFl,e regulations
they would Tike to get rid of is the law
against heroin peddling and let the free
market seek its own level.
That is what we are doing here. In the
guise of free enterprise we end up con-
demning to death thousands, perhaps
millions of infants.
Even there we blew- it. Even o2t the
strictly commercial sense vze blew it, be-
cause as the Journal of Commerce stated.
"If the United States abstains or votes no
on the infant formula code we believe it
will gain little' ar possibly lose much in its
effort to restore U.S. credibility and jn-
fluence with the developing world."
I refer, Madam President, back to the
Vancouver,.. Wash., Colombian. which said,
"The ethics of a public policy that puts
corporate profits before infant starvation
are questionable, indeed."
I expect the RECORD will carry a num-
bet of pages pro and con on this issue,
speeches delivered an the float and
speeches not delivered on the floor.
I wonder if any of those speeches say it
better than that.
Tile Qskaloasa, Iowa, Herald:
We say }3u*ny~*,IZ befogs and the preservation
of health and life are mare imps-taut goats.
The Hartford Courant, May 21, 1981:
The code, which the Reagan administration
opposed for ideolagfcal reasoizs, is only a pa?-
tiai but necessary step toward protecting the
health, and welfare of mothers and children..
This is frcln the Conway, Ark_, Lag
Cabi~a D?anocr~.t,May 21,198t:
A.raerica, th? worl?i;s Iea.~er in sh.g its
med*_4 P knowledge, equipment,. $rrd person-
nel with other nations, got a black eye with
this vote.
The M;nlleapuilis Tribune, May 21,
1981:
But giotentlal health honeats frpm app~ica-
tian of t128 ~:Pd9 otitwsigFa its btuaaucratlc
d*awl?5~.
The San F'rancisca ~camilaer, May 22,
198L:
It is sadde?xlr~g tlxat the Qavexnment has
given, for no goad reason; t~se adversaries of
this cxtuntry an emati?naI club with which
to beat ua ocer the head. Even it it liappaned
to ocst us something (w?=ich it wouldu'tk,
we need to shry,r a good deal more- concern
on this question and reverse our nationRi
position.
The Marshall, Minn., Indd,pendent,
ryas 22, 1881:
Surely the Reagan administration is opery
&.~ing sat o~ igno,rance. S'1,-ziy o::zx I'rea?dent
and. other top Cxa4ernmer.,~ at:^,Sa':s do not
watt to Cast our country fn th? r;Tle of a
childkiller and, worse, one: whca doss so for
profit,
The Catholic i-levie~.v, lt~lay Z'2, 198.1:
Despite overwhelming evidence that such
m;.sketing prs-roved For Release 2007/05102 :CIA-RDP85-000038000300020012-6
June 18, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE
States is unconcerned about the health
of the world's poorest children.
Ir~ant mortality throughout the
Third World has reached epidemic pro-
portions. Today 21 young children die
every minute throughout the developing
countries from. hunger related causes,
primarily diarrhea and other infectious
diseases. This amendment merely states
what is the preponderant view of the
medical profession and the scientific
community-that breastfeeding is a
nutritional source of uncontaminated
food which also provides necessary p~c-
tection against potentially deadly, dis-
eases faced by young children in develc ~-
ing countries. By doing so, this amend-
ment will hopefully clear up any misin-
terpretation that might lead to the con-
clusion that breastfeeding is, in any way>
an inferior food source.
There is also an undeniable danger
that reliance upon infant formula in
areas where safe and' sterile formula
preparation is not possible, can result in
widespread infant diarrhea,-the largest
single cause of infant deaths in the poor-
est regions of the Third World. Under
such circumstances, it is only prudent
that governments consider ways to con-.
trol excessive promotional practices. It
is here as well that this amendment is de-
signed to correct any misimpression by
stating the intent of the Congress not to
discourage other countries from adopt-
ing standards to protect the health of
their citizens.
Finally, this amendment urges greater
efforts to improve sanitation and water
quality thereby bringing about healthier
infant feeding practices where mothers
can not or choose not to breast feed.
This country cares deeply about the
world's poor and their children. I urge
my colleagues to support this amend-
ment which will send the message clearly
and unambiguously that we are con-
cerned.
? Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I have
for years been concerned, frustrated and
frightened about the misuse of infant
formula throughout the world. I care-
fully followed the infant formula hear-
ings Senator KENNEDY held several years
ago, and I am proud to be an original
cosponsor of the Infant Formula Act of
1980 which this body adopted last year.
Personally, I was amazed and ashamed
by the vote this country cast at the
World Health Assembly of the World
Health Organization on the Interna-
tional Code of Marketing of Breastmiik
Substitutes.
The_ fact is, Mr. President, that the
brilliant, sophisticated, and extremely
successful marketing techniques of the
world's multinational corporations and
our own American corporations are in
a large way contributing to the poison-
ing and death of thousands of infants
throughout the world.
Successful marketing is not neces-
sarily good marketing. Brilliant, sophis-
ticated, and extremely successful mar-
keting is not enough. Marketing must
also be responsible. That's what the
WHO voluntary code on infant formula
was all about, responsible marketing.
No one should dispute that there is
a need for breast milk substitutes. There
is a place for infant formula when breast
feeding is impossible and the under-
standing and resources for correct prep-
aration are available.
There should be no place for breast
milk substitutes in conditions of ,poverty,
illiteracy, and disease, where babies are
in desperate need of the unique anti-
bodies foz`nd only in breast milk, when
the mother is capable of breast feeding.
Infant formula manufacturers are in
business to make money. They make
money by selling baby formula. They see
an ever-expanding market in develop-
ing countries whose population booms at
unbelievahle rates. They have fabulous
rark~ting techniques. Poor, illiterate
mothers are easy targets. Aggressive
marketing stimulates increased con-
sumption under hazardous conditions
and consequently, thousands of babies
fall ill and die. This has all been care-
fully documented.
One last point. Mr. President. I am not
quite sure what the link is, but I find. it
worth noting that the nation with one
of the highest rates of infant mortality
in the industrialized world cast the only
vote against the voluntary code on the
marketing of infant formula.
Children everywhere deserve protec-
tion from malnutrition and disease.
Passage of this amendment is a very
small symbol of our commitment to this
protection. I urge passage of this amend-
ment.?
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President,
I have no further comments on this is-
sue. Iyield back the remainder of my
time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques-
tion is on agreeing to the amendment of
the Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, have the
yeas and nays been ordered?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas
and nays have been ordered and the
clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called
the roll.
Mr. STEVENS. I announce that the
Senator from California