Thank you for subscribing to e-mail updates from Freedom Works, home page for the Office of the House Majority Leader, Dick Armey, http://www.freedom.gov
Here's what's new this week:
- Congress Sends Missile Defense Bill to President Should the president sign the missile defense bill passed today, he would agree through his signature with the bill's clear intent -- that the U.S. will deploy a missile defense system as soon as technologically feasible. http://freedom.gov/library/defense/missilespeech.asp
---
House Sends Missile Defense Bill to President May 20, 1999
Only days after congressional action on this legislation, the State Department sent an internal cable to our embassies abroad instructing them to explain away the President's support for this bill.
That cable, which I have in my possession, told them to say, in effect:
"Even though Congress has passed, and the President has endorsed, legislation committing America to deploy national missile defense-don't worry, because the President intends to use loopholes to deny that commitment."
In this way, the Clinton State Department sought to comfort foreign governments who feared we might render their offensive missile programs harmless and obsolete.
And just what are the alleged loopholes the President has seized on?
Because the bill says that funds for missile defense are subject to annual appropriations and authorization, the President thinks he can sign it without really committing to protect our citizens from missile attack.
This, of course, is ludicrous. The entire Defense Department is subject to annual appropriations. Much of the federal government is. Those words merely restate the obvious. They do not add or detract any significant meaning to the bill. When John F. Kennedy committed America to land a man on the moon before his decade was out -- that commitment was no less real because the money for the space program had to be appropriated each year. Neither is this commitment.
The president is seizing on this language to conceal that he and his party have been forced to flip flop on missile defense. After over a decade spent opposing missile defense, they have been mugged by reality. The reality ofŠ
* North Korean ICBM tests
* the Southwest Asia arms race
* the Ayotollahs' missile program
* the theft of our nuclear secrets by Communist China
Once the cable to Moscow and Beijing and elsewhere came to light, we considered trying to rewrite the bill. But then we realized, What would be the point? If the President's aides can so absurdly misconstrue even the most innocuous language, then there are no words that might have fixed meanings for this Administration.
All we can do here is make our intentions and meanings crystal clear.
Let me do so: This bill makes it the policy of the United States to deploy an effective national missile defense system as soon as technologically possible.
If the president disagrees with this position -- if he truly believes that we should leave our citizens vulnerable to missile attack -- he should show the character of a true leader and say so, without dissembling, without equivocation, without seizing on nonexistent loopholes. He should veto this bill.
But if, on the other hand, he signs the bill, we can by rights conclude that he agrees with the plain English meaning of the words in it: That we will deploy a national missile defense as soon as technologically possible.
I'll close with this. The president's endorsement of this language, whatever his private feelings on it, is a tribute to the vast public support that now exists for national missile defense. It shows that the debate that Ronald Reagan started in 1983 has now been decisively won by those who believe that America needs a defense that defends.
I am very proud that today we are taking this important step to defend the American people from missile attack.