Congress Passes Foreign Aid Supplemental Bill

The U.S. House of Representatives finally passed an "emergency" supplemental foreign aid bill on March 24, 1999, nearly four months after President Clinton indicated that he would seek such funding.

After initially requesting a major foreign aid increase through a supplemental bill, the President was eventually forced to back away from his initial request after it became apparent that Clinton was seeking to reverse a battle he lost with Republicans over foreign aid spending cuts in last years Budget agreement.

Initially, Clinton wanted more money for foreign aid, more money for Israel and Egypt, more money for the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and more money for hurricane victims in Central and South America. Congress balked. The House and Senate leadership argued that Clinton was seeking a backdoor foreign aid increase.

Eventually, Congress would develop a new foreign aid supplemental bill that includes funding for the hurricane victims and for Jordan to implement the Wye River agreement. But, that is not the newest in a long line of sticking points for the Administration.

The Clinton Administration used a smart tactic in first promoting the supplemental idea. They argued that offsetting spending cuts is necessary to come up with the funds to pay for the supplemental bill. Congress would have to make that decision and decide where the cuts come from.

This politically astute tactic seems to have backfired. Taking the Administration up on its challenge, Congress has decided to pay for the trimmed down legislation by cutting funding for the World Bank and the IMF, as well as international food aid programs and other forms of unpopular for aid programs.

Thus, instead of getting what the Administration originally wanted (a backdoor foreign aid increase), they actually are getting a backdoor foreign aid cut.

Now that the House and Senate have each passed versions of the supplemental bill, the next phase is to go to a conference committee where House and Senate members will iron our the differences between the two bills. Once this is done, a version may be ready to go to the White House for a signature.

However, the Administration has threatened to veto the bill because it objects to the offsetting funding cuts. Now, an issue that Clinton had originally tried to use as a political weapon to beat up on the Republicans (by making them chose the offsetting spending cuts) may turn into a headache for the Administration. Does Clinton really want to veto humanitarian aid to Latin American hurricane victims?

Go To Page: 1 2