Mr. Speaker, judges are controversial for a very important reason. That is because, as de Tocqueville said, `Hardly any question arises in the United States that is not resolved sooner or later in a judicial question.' If that was true in the 19th century, imagine how much more true it is today. Yes, this is a high stakes game. Yes, judges in our system of government have much more power than judges generally have. But yes, we can tolerate it. We know where to stop. We love this system, and the last thing any Member wants to do is to destroy it.
The principle of separation of powers, of an independent judiciary, of limited government, and of constitutional government are more important than Judge Baer's decision in the New York City case, are more important than Judge Duckman's decision in the case of the woman who was murdered. Yes, judges are human and they will make mistakes, and some of them will be profound, and some others of them will be outrageous. But we will not throw away 200 years of a magnificent constitutional system because two judges make a mistake. We will not do this. This Member comes to the floor to announce that she believes she is speaking for Members of the House and Senate and the President of the United States when she says we will not do this.
We will carry on the 1996 campaign with a lot more vigor and raunchiness than I would like, but it is going to happen. It is going to be a nasty, ugly campaign. So be it. That can happen between the two branches, and in a Presidential campaign. I do not like it. There is nothing illegal about it. There is nothing about it that risks our system of government. If we must punch each other out, as we have all during the 104th Congress, so be it. I ask my colleagues only one thing: As we go at one another, just leave the judges and the courts out of it.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone].
Mr. PALLONE. If I could, Mr. Speaker, I will sum up a statement on the arms transfer to Pakistan and the United States response to Chinese nuclear transports. This is with regard to events taking place over the weekend.
I wanted to express my strong concern about these two recent developments that will affect the proliferation of nuclear and conventional arms in the South Asia region. First, after months of negotiations, it was announced last Friday that the United States will not punish the People's Republic of China for its sale to Pakistan of 5,000 ring magnets, devices used for the production of weapons-grade enriched uranium, in direct violation of provisions of the nonproliferation Act.
The official rationale for taking no action against the Chinese was that Beijing had committed itself not to make any such transfers in the future and that the Chinese would help us to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and consult with us on export control policies.
Secretary of State Christopher indicated that the United States had no hard evidence to counter China's denials of any knowledge of the transfers to Pakistan, even though there is strong evidence that the particular Chinese companies that sold the ring magnets have in fact been identified.