HOUSE TARGETS COLOMBIA DRUG CROP

WASHINGTON - Backing President Clinton, House Republicans on a
powerful committee gave their prescription yesterday for the war on
drugs: yes for $2 billion to fight drugs at their source in Colombia;
no for $1.3 billion to treat addicts at home.

Brushing aside amendments by leading Democrats to delete funds for the
Colombian military and pour money instead into treatment, the votes by
the House Appropriations Committee boosted the White House's ambitious
plan to battle drug cultivation in Colombia. The panel voted 33-13
last night to approve the entire $9 billion emergency supplemental
request. The measure now goes to the full House.

''They want a military solution. We want a humanitarian solution to
the war on drugs,'' said Representative Nancy Pelosi, the California
Democrat who introduced the $1.3 billion treatment amendment. ''The
discussion is not over.''

The amendments by Pelosi, the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee on
foreign operations, and Wisconsin Democrat David R. Obey underscored
the deep unease among Democrats and some Republicans about the
Colombia initiative. The administration estimates it would last a
minimum of five years.

The $2 billion funding, which the Republicans increased by $428
million over Clinton's proposal, was for two years, but administration
officials say the final cost could easily include a few billion
dollars more.

The partisan debate yesterday at times grew heated, with Republicans
finding themselves oddly in the same corner with the Democratic
president. Some GOP members, who had pushed for intervention in
Colombia for years, chided Democrats for not standing with Clinton.

''I think you must have confidence in your president,'' said
Representative Sonny Callahan, an Alabama Republican, speaking to
Obey. ''Your lack of confidence in your president is stunning to me.''

Obey replied: ''I elect my president every four years to be my leader,
but I do not elect my president to do my thinking for me.''

Obey urged the committee to at least temporarily remove $552 million
from funds for the Colombian military, which has been linked to the
notorious paramilitary forces in three recent reports by human rights
organizations. He said more time was needed to study the military's
role in the counter-narcotics fight.

But Chairman C.W. Bill Young, a Florida Republican, said there was no
time to lose.

''It is essential to eliminate the product where it is grown,'' Young
said.''Every day we delay eliminating these drugs, another hundred or
a thousand kids could be addicted. ... We're not satisfied this is the
best program, but are we ever?''

The committee defeated Obey's amendment 36-20.

Later, Pelosi cited a Rand Corporation study in 1994 that found money
spent on treatment was 23 times more cost-effective than eradication
of crops and 11 times more cost-effective than interdiction. She noted
that only 37 percent of America's 5.7 million hard-core addicts
received treatment in 1997.

''How can we neglect the obvious need in our country when sending all
that money to Colombia that is 23 times less effective?'' she asked.

Representative John Edward Porter, an Illinois Republican, answered
that the Clinton administration didn't view treatment of drug addicts
as an emergency priority and didn't include it in the package.

Pelosi's amendment lost 30-23 in a mostly party-line
vote.