It makes no sense. more importantly. to disregard President Bushs foreign policy visavis the Government of Hungary. In his speech at Karl Marx University in Hungary. President Bush held out the promise to Hungary of permanent MFN status if they would liberalize their most restrictive emigration policies. I agree with the debate that has taken place here in substantial measure. Hungary is liberalizing its regime. Reform elements within the Communist Party itself are liberalizing the regime in Hungary. but the recent mass confiscation of passports by returnees from the West suggests that the precise change that President Bush is seeking to obtain in Hungary is not taking place and. of course. the annual extensions of MFN status to Hungary have not yet been successful in bringing about the change in emigration policies that we would like to see. The most important question before us. particularly given the amendments by the Committee on Ways and Means. is who is going to conduct American foreign policy. President Bush has gone to Hungary and cut a deal. The deal. in fact. is one that Hungary seems willing to accept. Hungary has said: As early as September of 1989. we may liberalize our emigration policies. We may bring about the changes in law that you seek. The Presidents carrot that he is holding out is a permanent grant of MFN status. and what we are going to do with a 2year regime or a 3year regime or a 5year regime is take away the Presidents opportunity to grant permanent MFN status without first coming hat in hand to this Congress and asking permission.
Keywords matched
emigration