Mr. Speaker, I am presenting this survey to my colleagues because it draws attention to the state of political rights, civil rights, and freedom in Panama. In fact, the seven, six, and not free (NF) ratings for the above-mentioned categories place Panama on the same level as the Soviet Union and Cuba. The question of human rights violations has been a leading plank in President Carter's foreign policy platform. It should not be abandoned as we examine the issue of Panama and the Canal Zone. RANKING OF NATIONS BY POLITICAL RIGHTS [NOTE: Ranked on scale of 1 (most free) to 7 (least free).] PANAMA STAR AND HERALD NOTES: ENVIRONMENT ISSUE RAISED BY SNYDER (By Hon. Gene Snyder of Kentucky) Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, I was pleased that a news item about my August 9 exposure of the failure of the State Department regarding the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, was published on the front page of the Panama Star and Herald for August 10. The news story was as follows: ENVIRONMENT ISSUE RAISED BY SNYDER WASHINGTON.-Mentioning the possible spread of foot-and-mouth disease among other things, Rep. Gene Snyder said Tuesday he has asked the State Department to issue a statement on the environmental impact among the possible consequences of a new Panama Canal treaty. Snyder said such a statement is required by law but he is sure that no serious effort was made to put it into effect until he wrote to the State Department on June 9. He said he received a reply dated July 22 saying the Department had not defined whether a statement is needed, but it was preparing an analysis of the environmental implications of a treaty. Snyder said Panama wants to extend the City of Panama into the Canal Zone and he asked if that could result in the erosion of the banks of the canal. He said the Madden forest reserves, vegetable and animal life and especially many species of birds in the area are matters of environmental concern. Snyder also said the possibility of a sea level canal suggests possible grave dangers could occur as a result of the mixing of the biological systems, now separated by the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean. 99-592-78- -30 [From the Congressional Record, Sept. 23, 1977-E5815] PANAMA AUDUBON SOCIETY CONCERNED ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF NEW TREATIES (By Hon. Gene Snyder of Kentucky) Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, the following letter that Ms. Carolyn Lowe, vice president of the Panama Audubon Society, wrote to me August 15, speaks for itself. I hope my colleagues take careful note of the concern she expresses as they consider the proposed new treaties with Panama. The letter follows: Hon. GENE SNYDER, U.S. House of Representatives, BALBOA, CANAL ZONE, August 15, 1977. DEAR CONGRESSMAN SNYDER: It was very encouraging to read your statements, which appeared recently in the local press, regarding the environmental impact of a new Panama Canal treaty. This is a mattera which has caused a great concern on the part of many of us here in the Canal Zone as we have watched the treaty negotiations move toward conclusion. And our concern has been augmented by the fact that neither the U.S. nor the Panamanian negotiators have appeared to give any consideration to the environmental implications of the proposed treaty. As you are well aware, the ecological resources of the Canal Zone are of tremendous importance. The Canal Zone's extensive tropical rain forests harbor one of the world's most valuable treasures of tropical bird, animal and plant species. The accessibility of these forested areas makes them a great outdoor laboratory for the scientists who come from all over the world to do research in every aspect of tropical biology. Their loss would be a loss to mankind. We hope you will continue to put pressure on the State Department to prepare a complete and accurate Environmental Impact Statement on the effects of a new treaty on the Canal Zone's natural resources, and also insist that strong provisions for environmental protection be included in such a treaty. Otherwise, the Canal Zone faces an ecological disaster. This would have grave consequences not only for the wildlife and biological resources, but for the viability of the Canal itself, the operation of which would be seriously undermined by the destruction of the forests protecting the watersheds. Considering the widespread destruction of forests throughout the Republic of Panama, the threat to Canal Zone forests is a real one. Thank you for your concern and for your positive action on this vital matter. Sincerely, CAROLYN LOWE, WHY WE MUST KEEP AMERICA'S CANAL IN AMERICAN HANDS (By Hon. Steven D. Symms of Idaho) Mr. SYMMS. Mr. Speaker, Gov. Meldrim Thomson of New Hampshire, a prominent leader of the conservative movement in America, addressed a council dinner of the John Birch Society in New York City on September 10, 1977. Governer Thomson discussed the Panama Canal Treaty recently signed by President Carter and explained why it is imperative that the Senate reject the treaty. I would like to point out, Mr. Speaker, that Governor Thomson has remained steadfast in his principles of limited government. New Hampshire is the only State that has neither an income tax nor a sales tax. Consequently, it has strong economy, a healthy business climate and very low unemployment rates. It should serve as a model to the rest of the States in this regard. I would like at this time to submit Governor Thomson's remarks to my colleagues in Congress: WHY WE MUST KEEP AMERICA'S CANAL IN AMERICAN HANDS (By Meldrim Thomson, Jr.) If our giveaway boys in the Department of State and the Carter Administration have their way, the American Canal in Panama might well become America's waterway to destruction. The result of the Roman Circus staged by the Administration in Washington this week to sign a Panama Canal Treaty might best be described by paraphrasing Rudyard Kipling's Recessional: "The tumult and the signing dies,/The leaders and the aides depart ;/Still stands America's sacrifice,/A great Canal; our Flag a part!" I find it abhorrent, in the twilight of a great Bicentennial celebration, to witness an American President rushing to surrender the sovereign territory of the United States; in this case to the Communist-trained Panamanian dictator Omar Torrijos! It is certainly a shameful way to begin the third century of our onceglorious national history. PREVENTING NATIONAL SUICIDE Patriots wonder what has happened in this land of the brave and the home of the free. For almost two centuries, whenever American troops went forth to battle it was to win as quickly and decisively as possible. That zest for victory was captured in the inspiring words attributed to Colonel William Barret Travis at the battle for the Alamo in 1836-words written on the wall of the fortress either by candle or in blood, and found after Travis and his 187 men had all been killed in battle or massacred by the enemy. "I am beseiged by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna," Travis said. "The enemy have demanded a surrender at discretion: otherwise the garrison is to be put to the sword if the place is taken. I have answered the summons with a cannon shot, and our flag still waves proudly from the walls." Then Colonel Travis added: "I shall never surrender or retreat!" How different was the cowardly appeasement of those politicians and diplomats who committed more than 100,000 young Americans to death unnecessarily in the no-win wars of Korea and Vietnam! And now the Carter Administration, by its proposed giveaway treaty, would commit America to an even lower level of disgrace by surrendering without a whimper a territory and facility essential to the very existence of our nation. What is even worse is that for the first time in our history American taxpayers will be asked to pay millions in indemnity to make our surrender acceptable to Panama. Oh, that we might have 34 courageous U.S. Senators who, in the fateful hour of ratification of this noxious giveaway treaty, will say with Colonel Travis in strong clear voices: "We shall never vote to surrender or retreat!" How wonderful it would be if those same 34 or more Senators would give answer to the President in the great words of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, who in 1797 told a French Minister: "Millions for defense, but not a damned penny for tribute." One must wonder whether in the haste to give away our American Canal, to make accommodation with Red Cuba, to harass and desert such loyal allies as the Republic of China and Israel ... whether Carter is bent on national suicide. Take heed, my fellow Americans, to the sage warning of young Abe Lincoln to a lyceum audience at Springfield, Illinois, in January 1838: "All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide." I tell you, friends, this giveaway treaty smells to high heaven of national suicide! |