How Americans perceive the impact of foreign policy on their lives is influenced by various factors including developments in their home states, according to a bipartisan group of senators and representatives from across the nation. In a recent survey conducted by USIA Staff Writer Dian McDonald, the legislators were asked to assess the importance of foreign policy issues to their constituents and to cite which foreign policy issues are important to them and why. Here is how they responded:

SENATOR PAUL SIMON
(Democrat -- Illinois)

I come from a state where one out of every 11 residents was born in a foreign country, where the great wave of European immigrants in the first half of this century was followed in the past decade by waves of Hispanics and Asians. Among those who left behind relatives and friends to move to America, there is much interest in foreign affairs.

President Clinton recognized that point when we traveled to Chicago recently while his wife was touring Europe. Hillary's itinerary took her to Romania, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Estonia and other countries. The President and first lady had talked on the telephone that day about each other's trips. "She called me and told me all the places she was going to see and she reeled them all off. I said, 'Look, I can make one trip to Chicago and see people from all those places,'" Clinton told a cheering Chicago crowd.

But cheering crowds are not what I usually encounter when U.S. foreign aid programs come up at town meetings throughout Illinois. In at least half the town meetings, someone asks why we don't cut foreign aid. Before I respond, I usually ask the audience what percentage of our budget they believe goes for foreign assistance. The guesses range from 10 to 25 percent. People are startled when I tell them it is less than one percent.

They have no idea that through our aid programs more than three million lives are saved each year through immunization programs; that as we help other countries survive economically, they frequently become our customers and lift our standard of living; that much of what we call foreign aid is spent for food and equipment in this country.

This public attitude can be reversed. Polls that ask if foreign aid should be cut show overwhelming support for such reductions, but the same people respond positively when asked if we should spend more to help hungry people living in other nations. We also should do more to encourage American students to study and travel abroad to improve our understanding of other cultures.

SENATOR FRANK MURKOWSKI
(Republican -- Alaska)

Alaskans, who live at the top of the world, understand better than many Americans just how vital U.S. foreign policy is, not just to their economic well being, but to their liberty and freedom, as well.

Alaskans learned 54 years ago, when the Aleutian Islands were invaded, that foreign policy matters. That lesson, often reinforced during the Cold War, is still fresh in Alaskans' minds. Just recently during debate on the Department of Defense Authorization bill Alaskans were reminded that, in the United States, only Alaska and Hawaii face the threat of missile attack from, for example, North Korea's Taepo Dong 2 missiles, should diplomacy on the Korean Peninsula fail.

Alaskans also know well that their economic well-being in the 21st Century is directly tied to expanding trade and commerce with the Pacific Rim. In 1995, my state exported $1.45 billion ($1,450 million) of its total seafood harvest overseas -- far more than 75 percent. It sold $585.3 million of its timber overseas -- above 90 percent of the state's total timber harvest going to overseas buyers. It also sold $172.9 million of its total mineral production -- one-third -- overseas.

Alaskans, since our financial future is so directly tied to events overseas, know that what happens in Indonesia or Taiwan, Chile or Japan, Russia or China can have an immediate effect on Alaskan exports and thus the incomes of thousands of Alaskan workers and their families. Alaskans know well that Anchorage is closer to Tokyo than it is to New York. While all of America's prosperity is truly dependent on the global economy, the ties are more apparent to Alaskans. Thus members of Congress from Alaska traditionally have a deep interest in foreign affairs.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL RICHARDSON
(Democrat -- New Mexico)

New Mexicans recognize that the end of the Cold War does not mean that the U.S. should withdraw from its vital interests overseas. My constituency sees human rights, international development, and trade as important foreign policy issues facing the United States. New Mexicans have a unique interest in foreign affairs for a multitude of reasons. Our position as a border state puts us in tune with developments south of the border. Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories pioneer research which has global applications. Our three Air Force bases house men and women who often travel abroad to protect our national interest.

A large number of my constituents are deeply concerned, as I am, about human rights. This translates into a solid membership base for groups such as Amnesty International, which has over 2,000 members in my state. Work by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) is crucial to congressional and public knowledge of human rights abuses. New Mexicans who volunteer for these groups should be commended for time well spent on behalf of humanity.

My state's large Spanish-speaking population has a special relationship with other Spanish-speaking countries of the world. My constituents are often concerned about developments in these countries and want the United States to play a role in granting aid and participating in humanitarian missions whenever possible. For example, Results, an international organization which promotes development in third world countries, has one of its most involved groups in New Mexico. New Mexican members were able to successfully lobby Congress to support a children's survival program which allocated $484 million for basic immunization and food costs. Results' support of micro-credit programs which give small sums of money to individuals instead of government bureaucracy is effective and popular with my constituents.

Free and fair trade is important to my constituency because export-driven companies provide jobs in my district. Last year, New Mexico exported half-a-billion dollars worth of goods to the rest of the world. I led the fight to pass the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) because I feel that in the long run, free trade means better and higher paying jobs for New Mexico and the country. The United States' ability to export more to emerging markets than Japan and Europe combined is a testament to the success of our long-standing free trade policy.

SENATOR OLYMPIA J. SNOWE
(Republican -- Maine)

American foreign policy directly affects the lives, livelihood, and security of the people of Maine, just as it affects the interests of all Americans. Maine seafood is prized in Japan for its quality and freshness, and retailers like L.L. Bean are finding new and important niches with storefronts in downtown Tokyo. A subsidiary of Central Maine Power, a major electric power utility, is today working to help modernize the infrastructure in nations once part of the Soviet bloc. For the 8,000 workers at Bath Iron Works in Maine, foreign and defense policy is the basis of a proud shipbuilding tradition, just as it is part of the fabric of life for workers at Kittery-Portsmouth Naval Shipyard or Brunswick Naval Air Station.

When I ran for the U.S. Senate I promised the people of Maine that while I would always work to assure Maine's place in America, I would also work to assure America's place in the world. American interests are shared by people throughout the world, whether in protecting security and stability, insisting on equal treatment in trade relations, supporting the rule of law or encouraging the growth of political freedom, democracy and human rights.

In my years of foreign policy work -- as a member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and previously, as a member of the then-Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives -- I have been active in each of these areas. From assuring the security of our new embassy in Moscow during the Cold War, to participating in the first official U.S. delegation to Cambodia immediately after the overthrow of the genocidal Khmer Rouge, I have tried to assume an appropriate congressional role of oversight and encouragement. My congressional responsibilities took me to Bosnia and Croatia last fall as part of a special Senate delegation that landed amidst shelling in Sarajevo; previously, I served as an official observer in landmark elections in Central America; and investigated the activities of the notorious Abu Nidal terrorist group in Eastern Europe before the dissolution of the Soviet Union. And over the past several years, I have worked consistently to strengthen the principle of a nation's right to self-defense in America's policy toward Bosnia.

America's importance abroad is unquestioned, not only to the people of the world who share our values and interests, but also to all Americans.

REPRESENTATIVE ELIOT L. ENGEL
(Democrat -- New York)

Most of my work in Congress is directed toward improving the socio-economic realities confronting people in the 17th Congressional District and throughout the New York City metro area. I have fought long and hard to improve health care, promote job training, expand educational opportunities, and ensure that senior citizens can feel secure when they reach their 60's, 70's, and 80's.

Nevertheless, I have served for many years on the International Relations Committee and have responsibilities to do what I can to promote U.S. interests beyond our borders. I am co-Chair of the Congressional Albanian Issues Caucus and the Congressional Peace Accord Monitoring Group which monitors the Middle East Peace process. And I am a member of the Ad Hoc Caucus on Irish Affairs, the African Trade and Development Caucus, and the Caucus on India.

I firmly believe that American leadership is critical to the maintenance of order within the international system and represents the preeminent factor in support of human rights and democracy. Given our leadership role, I feel that the U.S. should not cut its foreign assistance to developing nations or our closest friends and allies. With proper planning and oversight, small amounts of assistance can go a very long way and help a large number of people. Indeed, in many ways, foreign aid is our first line of defense against hostile powers around the world. For a program representing only one percent of our total budget, the benefits of foreign aid far outweigh its drawbacks.

The Bronx and Westchester, within my congressional district, are among the most ethnically diverse areas of the United States. Having large African-American, Hispanic, Jewish, Irish, Italian, Albanian, and other communities within the 17th district, the interests of my constituents range well beyond the borders of the United States. As such, I have been proud to represent their concerns to the U.S. State Department and other agencies which deal with foreign affairs and in the future will work with them to see that U.S. foreign policy-makers take their opinions firmly into account.

SENATOR DON NICKLES
(Republican -- Oklahoma)

Landlocked Oklahoma is located in the center of the United States, but Oklahomans have a strong sense of the importance of what happens in the rest of the world having fought in four foreign wars to defend or reestablish freedom in Europe, Asia and the Middle East.

A major international concern of Oklahomans today, and the foreign policy issue I believe is of paramount importance, is the surprising fact that this country has no defense against ballistic missile attack. Despite the fact that the Russians have already put into place a system for defending Moscow, and despite the fact that we are working with the Israelis to create a system to defend their country from missile attack, we have no such defense ourselves.

That is why I am an original cosponsor of the Defend America Act, a bill which declares it to be the policy of the United States to deploy a national missile defense system by the end of 2003. The Defend America Act says this entire country should be defended against limited, unauthorized or accidental ballistic missile attack in recognition of both existing threats and those which almost certainly will develop in the future.

Political instability and uncertainty in Russia and China highlight the need to guard against a possible unauthorized or accidental missile launch. Recent saber rattling by the Chinese during the Taiwan Straits crisis should have provided a wakeup call for us all. The other threat comes from at least two dozen other countries that currently possess or are seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction -- nuclear, chemical and/or biological weapons -- and the means to deliver them. Many countries that already have short range missiles are now seeking to acquire more sophisticated, long range missiles.

REPRESENTATIVE E (KIKA) DE LA GARZA
(Democrat -- Texas)

The area of Texas I represent (South Texas) is quite diverse both ethnically and culturally. We are the southernmost tip of the United States bordering Mexico. What that means is that on a daily basis we see the world in more of an international way. We always have.

Everyone today talks about how new technology is making the world smaller, how we are becoming more of a global community and how we are more interactive than ever before in the past. For us this is not a new concept. We have always been interactive with our neighbors to the south and they with us. We have long since learned to see the world in a broad scope.

Every day those of us who live in South Texas deal with foreign policy issues. There are the obvious issues such as NAFTA, immigration, trade, etc. Then there is the larger world picture involving issues such as foreign aid, U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts, terrorism, or currently Most Favored Nation status for China. All of these and more are concerns about which I hear.

My constituents are very informed, just as I am certain most Americans are today. I hear, as I'm certain most other members do, about whatever issues are most topical. In today's information age, what most individuals view as pressing is what is brought into their homes by the media on the evening news or in their morning papers. Because foreign policy issues, in general, are not perceived as having any direct effect, I think it's fairly accurate to say that most people do not consider them to be all that important.

The recent tragedy in Saudi Arabia, however, would be an exception. It is an example of the type incident that draws us as a people together. We as nation are always concerned about the safety of our forces abroad and when something affects them, it affects us. That is because it is no longer an abstract -- it's the father, the son, the cousin, the friend, or the neighbor we know. The Persian Gulf War, the deployment of U.S. troops to Bosnia -- these are other examples where people are quite concerned about foreign policy. In general, though, people do not give quite the same attention to most other foreign policy matters.

SENATOR JOE LIEBERMAN
(Democrat -- Connecticut)

Our government's first mission, as stated in the U.S. Constitution, is to "provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." Foreign policy is central to protecting national security and economic growth. If we fail to address foreign policy concerns, all that we do domestically will be for naught.

The American people benefit from the prevention of war and the cultivation of good relations with the nations of the world. Economic growth is spurred on by expanding trade. The Connecticut economy, for example, benefits enormously from trade with other nations. Our state's exports grew by nearly 100 percent between 1987 and 1992. The export market can remain a major engine for economic expansion and job creation in Connecticut and throughout the United States in the 21st century.

And the effective pursuit of foreign policy goals can lead to the expansion of democratic, peace-loving states and a reduction in cycles of totalitarian conflict. We won the Cold War thanks to a combination of a strong defense and a realistic, dynamic foreign policy. In this uncertain time of transition, we must maintain such strength and vision if we are to build a new generation of peace among nations.

Three foreign policy concerns loom especially large in 1996. The first is terrorism, brought home so tragically by the recent bombing in Saudi Arabia. We must work harder to protect American troops, especially when they are defending our interests in parts of the world where they are most vulnerable to attack. And we must work closely with our allies to fight back against terrorists -- especially through the aggressive use of intelligence resources and infiltration of terrorist groups.

A second foreign policy issue of great concern is Bosnia. I believe the capture of those who have been indicted for crimes against humanity in the former Yugoslavia should be made a priority for those nations involved in restoring peace in this region.

A third issue is NATO. I support the enlargement of NATO, encouraging new states to join the security alliance if they can contribute significantly and have democratized sufficiently. Expanding NATO and restoring peace in Bosnia each, in their own way, reinforce the prospect of continued peace in Europe.

By focusing on improved relations and increased trade among all nations, especially those committed to democracy, we will enhance chances for peace and prosperity throughout the world.