mr. chairman , i yield myself such time as i may consume . 
mr. chairman , i would like to announce that i am terribly flattered by the extravagant things that have been said , but i must confess i did not name this bill after myself . 
while i deeply appreciate the honor , i am a trifle embarrassed , not thoroughly embarrassed , but a trifle . 
mr. chairman , most informed people agree that the u.n . 
is in desperate need of reform . 
corruption is rampant , as evidenced by the ever-expanding oil-for-food scandal . 
u.n . 
peacekeepers have sexually abused children in bosnia , the congo , sierra leone and other places ; and the culture of concealment makes rudimentary oversight virtually impossible . 
a casual attitude towards conflict-of-interest rules undermines trust in the u.n. 's basic governance . 
i could spend many hours reciting a litany of waste , fraud , and abuse that has become intolerable . 
so what do we do about it ? 
what leverage do we have to bring about change in how this institution operates ? 
first of all , we pay 22 percent of the budget . 
that is $ 440 million . 
we pay 27 percent of the peacekeeping budget . 
do not ask me what that is . 
you can not find out . 
that is a secret . 
china pays 2.1 percent , or $ 36.5 million . 
russia pays 1.1 percent , or $ 19 million . 
over the years , as we listened to the counsels for patience , the u.n. 's failings have grown worse , not lessened . 
our many warnings , plans and urgings have largely come and gone , with few lasting accomplishments to mark their presence . 
trust in gradual change has been interpreted as indifference , a very expensive indifference . 
so the time has finally come when we must in good conscience say `` enough. '' `` enough '' to allowing odious regimes such as cuba , sudan and zimbabwe to masquerade as arbiters of human rights . 
`` enough '' to peacekeepers exploiting and abusing the people they were sent to protect . 
`` enough '' to unkept promises and squandering the dreams of generations . 
very few are opposed to the u.n. 's role in facilitating diplomacy , mediating disputes , monitoring the peace , and feeding the hungry . 
but we are opposed to the legendary bureaucratization , to political grandstanding , to billions of dollars spent on multitudes of programs with meager results , to the outright misappropriation of funds represented by the oil-for-food program . 
and we rightly bristle at the gratuitous anti-americanism that has become ingrained over decades , even as our checks continue to be regularly cashed . 
no observer , be he a passionate supporter of this legislation or dismissive critic , can pretend that the current structure and operations of the u.n . 
represent an acceptable standard . 
even the u.n . 
itself has acknowledged the need for extensive measures and , to its credit , has put forward a number of useful proposals for consideration . 
in the united states , the recognition of need for change is widely shared and bipartisan . 
republican and democratic administrations alike have long called for a more focused and accountable budget , one that reflects what should be the true priorities of the organization , shorn of duplicative , ineffective , and outdated programs . 
members on both sides of the aisle in congress agree that the time has come for far-reaching reform . 
i have heard no arguments in favor of maintaining the status quo . 
even the opponents of this legislation concede the need for deep change . 
the key difference , the all-important difference , between their proposals and the one we have put forward lies in the methods to be used to accomplish that universally desired goal . 
we are already experiencing strenuous resistance to change from many sources , both within the u.n . 
and without . 
but admonishment will not transform sinners into saints ; resolutions of disapproval will not be read ; flexible deadlines and gentle proddings will be ignored . 
instead , more persuasive measures are called for . 
this legislation brings to bear instruments of leverage sufficient to the task , the most important being tying the u.s. financial contribution to a series of readily understandable benchmarks . 
in an effort to derail this legislation , it has been proposed that we hand to the secretary of state the power to selectively withhold funds from the u.n . 
as a means of inspiring a cooperative attitude in the organization . 
i certainly mean no disrespect for the current secretary , whom i hold in the highest esteem , but the power of the purse belongs to congress and is not delegable , no matter who holds that high office . 
we can not escape this burden . 
the task we face is an extensive one , and i have no illusions regarding the difficulties and the challenges we face . 
but the choice is simple : we can either seek to accomplish concrete improvements , which will require an enforcement mechanism more credible and more decisive than mere wishes , or we can pretend to do so . 
for there can be no doubt that any proposal resting upon discretionary decisions concedes in advance that any reform will be fragmentary at best , if there is any at all . 
we are in a peculiar situation . 
opponents of change cloak themselves in the robes of defenders of the u.n. , when it is in fact they who would condemn it to irrelevance . 
those of us who believe the u.n . 
can yet reclaim its mission and assume the role foreseen by the vision of its founders have no choice but to take up this task of u.n . 
reform . 
yes , this is radical surgery . 
sometimes it is the only way to save the patient . 
mr. chairman , i reserve the balance of my time . 
