Molotov

Senator Arthur Morris, South Dakota wrote:While we appreciate that the administration has thus far neglected to vote in the most senior Progressive Senator as President Pro Tempore of the Senate, and that thus Senate procedure is somewhat haphazard at the moment, I personally find this bill to be most irregular. For one, the bill is entitled Humanitarian Aid to Haiti yet seems to urge the administration to send aid rather than actually send it. Secondly, such a matter would surely have to go through the relevant committee, in this case I would suggest appropriations.

Thirdly, the detail is most definitely lacking on what I can only assume to be an amendment, unless the bill's title has been changed in principle if not in practice. Fourthly and finally, the MSA Humanitarian Volunteer Corps Act of 1981 has the failings of the first proposal in being vague and having not gone through the committee stage, but it is perhaps more serious in that such a major act - about which I have major misgivings - appears to propose something quite unfunded and with no detail whatsoever. Were it to be motioned, one would assume a separate bill would be more appropriate.

Therefore I would request that Senator Donovan withdraw the bill in it's current form and propose drafts which the relevant committees can amend and finalise, thus making it presentable to the Senate. As things stand I do not see how I or any of my colleagues could possibly support it purely from a technical standpoint, quite apart from the practicalities of the proposals themselves.

Vice President Roux-Johnson President of the Senate wrote: The humanitarian aid to Haiti is ready for discussion and voting, with minor adjustments, but the MSA Humanitarian Volunteers Act will be separated to be discussed as a separate issue.

Senator Nathan Hanlon, Majority Leader wrote:As Senator Cullen has pointed out, while I doubt there are any in these chambers who do not support this proposal in spirit, there are a few issues which should be addressed, the foremost being a solution to the danger that any aid workers would be placed in if this bill is passed and put into action. As we are all aware, we are discussing a nation currently experiencing an armed conflict within its borders. While of course, short of a request for military assistance by the Worker's Republic of Haiti, we trust the Haitian military to tend to insurrection in their own nation, we can not and should not rely on their already taxed military and police forces to protect an influx of Mountain States aid workers. As such, I must propose an amendment to the aid bill providing for necessary security to be provided by the Mountain States Navy and/or Marine Corps.

Cliff Thomson wrote:I'm well aware many of those in this chamber got their start in their respective statehouses, so I'm sure that I don't have to remind them of the invaluable resource that the military proves in times of domestic disaster in the form of our National Guard units. This is just as true with our full-time soldiers and even in the best case scenario, where our men and women won't need to act in their capacity as fighters, they will only further improve the impact of our aid workers in reconstruction efforts and the distribution of aid.

Senator Allan Clayton wrote:Is Senator Hanlon seriously suggesting sending the MSN or Marine Corps abroad to potentially intervene in a civil war - and without the invitation of Haiti to begin with?

Senator Nathan Hanlon wrote:I believe my statement should have made it quite clear, friend, but no. That is not at all what I have suggested. I have simply noted that if we are sending American aid workers into a nation experiencing armed conflict, it is irresponsible to send them unprotected. Such a task is both outside the purview and ability of a small embassy security staff. As such, I am suggesting that any aid proposal also provide for the necessary protection of MSA citizens and personnel, and I fail to see any implication that this would lead to an uninvited intervention in Haiti, much less an intervention not approved by Congress. Then again, I trust our soldiers and sailors to do what such a deployment would entail-providing security for our aid workers- and exactly that.

I doubt that the government of Haiti doesn't want aid workers to arrive in a timely manner, though they are perfectly willing to state any objections to such an arrangement. After all, we are all aware that aid workers don't simply show up on a nation's doorstep, hat in hand. I also doubt that the government or people of Haiti would appreciate us sending civilians to their country and expecting their military and police to devote effort to protecting people who are there to help them. The amount of sailors or Marines necessary for such security would hardly be construed as some sort of military intervention.

Senator Philip Donovan wrote: Senator Harlon is quite correct, and I would also address Senator Clayton's question with a question of my own: is the Right-Wing seriously suggesting not only sending aid workers unprotected into a dangerous area, but that the wanton murderous raiding by a band of Fascist bloodthirsty killers amounts to a Civil War? Is the Republican Party granting the status of a legitimate belligerent party to the Tonton Macoutes?
This is a vicious paramilitary gang that the government of Haiti has found itself currently unable to stop. We should aid said government in any way we can. Right now the best way to help is to send immediate disaster relief aid, and to not go at it as helpless sitting ducks.

Trust me, Senator, the Right-Wing won't crumble if Europe loses its terrorist grip on Haiti.

Senator Allan Clayton wrote:I thank Senator Hanlon for his reply. The original bill implied that disaster relief experts, instead of a mass aid worker effort, would be sent. Our... esteemed Vice-President was perhaps premature in pushing this through, as the proposed legislation remains unclear.

Sadly the communist ideologues of the Socialist party - Senator Donovan foremost among them of our present company - are more at home writing Trot drivel than a bill clearly worded and thought-through. Your ranting, Senator Donovan, may earn you a free drink across the border, but it neither impresses nor answers me nor the American people. We are in the Senate of these Mountain States of America, sir, not the local meeting of the communist party, much as I'm sure it pains you.

Elijah Kennedy wrote:I second Senator Hanlon's position that the bill must be amended to provide security for any and all aid workers being sent to Haiti, but I also share the concerns of my colleague from Louisiana in...ironing out some of the aspects of this bill. In particular, I'm rather confused as to why the Department of the Interior, as opposed to say, the State Department, would hold responsibility for this bill?

Christopher Aronson wrote:Details, of course, that we can iron out when our friends to the left and right remember that they're in a Senate hearing, not a high school debate class. There's such a thing as parliamentary procedure, gentleman.

Senator Philip Donovan wrote: What a typical Republican reply, Senator Clayton: falsely accuse the Socialist Party of communism, attempt to demerit our arguments by attacking their merit without refuting our point and round it all up with a nice hint of xenophobia and gratuitous animosity towards our regional allies to the South.

The fact of the matter is that the discussion at hand centers around the way in which we would provide security, if any, to the people we send to do disaster relief work in Haiti, a country ravaged by roaming bands of Fascists, something that the Senator from Wyoming objected to on the grounds of interfering in what he's deemed fit to call a "Civil War", expressing the Right-Wing's concern at hurting the sensibilities of a marauding horde of cutthroats. That the Tonton Macoutes are as I've described them is not a point of contention, nor is it in any way an ideological position of the Socialist Party that would be up for debate, as Senator Clayton would imagine.

Senator Paula Brewer, OK wrote: While we agree that it would be best for the Haitian government to be the one that provides security, the reality in the ground is that they are currently sorely unable to do so. We see the merit in asking for permission first, though, especially considering the dark history of imperialist intervention in Haiti by the former US. The Socialists would support such an ammendment.

To answer Senator Kennedy's concerns, the Department of the Interior would only oversee the direction of the MSA Humanitarian Volunteer Corps, a discussion which has been moved to another place. The current session only concerns Humanitarian Aid to Haiti, which would, naturally, concern the Department of State.

Senator Allan Clayton wrote:Perhaps Senator Donovan requires it more easily explained to him. The bill as it stands remains unamended, unclear, and fails to answer the questions raised on both sides of the house - something I find not unrelated to the fact the Vice-President decided to rush bad legislation before the Senate. It is clear to everyone, I should hope, that this bill is very much not developed enough for the voting stage.

I would apologise to Senator Aronson if my words earlier were found unusual for the Senate floor, but frankly I tire of the stuttering nature of this poorly drafted bill and the preference of it's sponsor to throw insults and insinuate the "Right-Wing"'s support for a band of fascist terrorists than answer legitimate questions.