Congressional Record, Volume 147 Issue 104 (Tuesday, July 24, 2001)

[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 104 (Tuesday, July 24, 2001)]
[House]
[Pages H4481-H4530]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 199 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 2506.

{time} 1708

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 2506) making appropriations for foreign operations,
export financing, and related programs for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, with Mr. Thornberry in the
chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, the
bill was open for amendment from page 6, line 1, through page 10, line
15.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, no further amendment to
the bill may be offered except:
One, pro forma amendments offered by the chairman or ranking minority
member of the Committee on Appropriations or their designees for the
purpose of debate; two, the amendments printed in the Congressional
Record and numbered 4, 7, 30, 33, 38, 44, and 59, debatable for 10
minutes each; three, the amendments printed in the Congressional Record
and numbered 8, 11, 47, 50, 55 and 61, debatable for 20 minutes each;
four, the amendments printed in the Congressional Record and numbered
5, 23, and 34, debatable for 30 minutes each; five, the following
amendments debatable for 40 minutes each: the amendment printed in the
Congressional Record and numbered 32, and the amendment by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) that is at the desk.
Each such amendment may be offered only by the Member designated in
the request, the Member who caused it to be printed, or a designee,
shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified,
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall
not be subject to amendment, except that the chairman and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, or a designee, each
may offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of further debate on
any pending amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for a
division of the question.

Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Brown of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Brown of Ohio:
In title II of the bill in the item relating to ``CHILD
SURVIVAL AND HEALTH PROGRAMS FUND'', after the first dollar
amount, insert the following: ``(increased by $20,000,000)''.
In title II of the bill in the item relating to ``child
survival and health programs fund'', after the fourth dollar
amount in the fourth proviso, insert the following
``(increased by $20,000,000)''.
In title IV of the bill in the item relating to
``contribution to the multilateral investment guarantee
agency'', after the first dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(decreased by $10,000,000)''.
In title IV of the bill in the item relating to
``contribution to the asian development fund'', after the
first dollar amount, insert the following: ``(decreased by
$10,000,000)''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and a Member opposed each will control
15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown.)
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to myself.
Mr. Chairman, in developing countries, tuberculosis kills more than 2
million people a year, 1 person every 15 seconds. In India alone, 1,100
people die from tuberculosis every day.
Tuberculosis is the greatest infectious killer of adults worldwide.
Forty percent of HIV-positive people die due to tuberculosis-related
complications. These statistics are staggering not just because of the
sheer number of people affected, but because most people think we have
eradicated TB. I was a senior in high school when the tuberculosis
sanatorium closed in my community.

[[Page H4482]]

Foreign travel has brought tuberculosis back to the U.S., often in
its most lethal, drug-resistant form. We need to launch a smarter,
better-funded effort to protect ourselves from tuberculosis. We have
the means with medications and vaccines to stop TB. We need the means
to adequately deploy these resources domestically and internationally
to prevent the spread of tuberculosis.
Here in Congress, we have gone from zero to $60 million in 3 short
years in terms of funding. Mr. Chairman, 4 years ago, the institution
had no financial commitment to the battle against worldwide
tuberculosis. Three years ago Congress gave $12 million to anti-
tuberculosis efforts, 2 years $35 million; and last year, we reached a
milestone when Congress appropriated $60 million to combat
international tuberculosis.
Our commitment to international tuberculosis control has stimulated
the involvement of other industrialized nations. Earlier this year,
Canada made an important contribution to the World Health
Organization's new tuberculosis drug facility. This facility will help
provide much-needed drugs to those developing nations implementing
tuberculosis treatment programs.
The statistics on access to TB treatment worldwide are pretty grim.
Fewer than one in five of those with tuberculosis are receiving
directly observed treatment short course. Based on World Bank
estimates, DOTS treatment is one of the most cost-effective
interventions available costing just $20 to $100 to save a life, and
producing cure rates of up to 95 percent even in the poorest country.
Mr. Chairman, we have a small window of opportunity during which
stopping TB can be cost-effective. The failure to effectively treat
tuberculosis, which comes from incorrect or interrupted treatment and
inadequate drug supplies, creates stronger tuberculosis strains that
are resistant to today's drugs.
An epidemic of multi-drug resistant TB could cost billions to control
with no guarantee of success. MDR tuberculosis has been identified
everywhere. It threatens to return tuberculosis control to the pre-
antibiotic era in this country and abroad when no cure for tuberculosis
was available.
In the U.S., treatment normally costing about $2,000 a patient soars
to $250,000 with MDR tuberculosis, and oftentimes, half the time, at
least, those infected with MDR TB do not survive.
To control tuberculosis more effectively, it is necessary to ensure
the effectiveness of tuberculosis-control programs worldwide. That is
why a commitment to a global strategy is necessary. WHO and U.S.
tuberculosis experts have estimated that an additional $1 billion is
needed annually to control tuberculosis.
This amendment, the Brown-Morella-Wilson-Andrews-Green amendment,
will set the pace for other countries to continue the good work that
this Congress has begun. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) and
others have been generous in their support of tuberculosis.
Mr. Chairman, we need to do more to save lives by supporting this
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1715

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for 15
minutes.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to say I think the gentleman's heart is
definitely in the right place, and I appreciate what he is doing here.
But let me say my opposition is based largely on the choice of the
offsets here: cutting $10 million which is the entire appropriation for
the World Bank's Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency, known as
MIGA, and $10 million from the Asian Development Fund. I know it is not
exactly popular on this floor to rise and talk about multilateral
development banks and what they do, but I feel the need here today to
speak out for a moment about it.
I find the proposed transfer from the Asian Development Fund to
increase funding levels for bilateral tuberculosis activities very
strange and puzzling indeed. The Asian Development Fund is an
organization that provides highly concessional financing for the
poorest people in Asia. In 2002, Asian Development Fund activities will
include child nutrition, immunization activities, education
interventions and other basic needs. Also, the Asian Development Fund
is a strong supporter of tuberculosis reduction projects and considers
DOTS a highly effective program. This is actively supported throughout
the Asian Development Bank's health activities. Therefore, I think the
amendment robs multilateral tuberculosis activities to pay for
bilateral ones.
I want to point out to those that might support the gentleman's
amendment that a reduction in the U.S. contribution here will trigger a
clause in the Asian Development Fund agreement that encourages other
donors to default if the U.S. does not pay its agreed-upon
contribution. So the overall impact of this on the poorest of the poor
people of Asia is going to be exponentially much, much greater than the
gentleman from Ohio realizes or I think thought of at the time he
proposed this amendment.
Let me speak for a moment about the proposed reduction to the World's
Bank's Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency, or MIGA as it is
known. As many of my colleagues realize, private investment flows to
developing countries now drown out, they completely cut off all the
official development assistance from the U.S. and the rest of the donor
community. If we can help the poorest nations, who are often the very
riskiest of the investments that we have, gain access to private
capital, then they have a better opportunity to raise their own
standard of living.
MIGA, through its provision of political risk insurance and coverage
of foreign exchange risks, is one of the tools that facilitate private
sector activity in the world where it would otherwise not occur, in the
poorest of nations with the least access to capital.
It is for these reasons, Mr. Chairman, that I urge my colleagues to
oppose the Brown amendment and at the same time commend him for what he
is attempting to do and for the cause that he works for.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson).
Mrs. WILSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for
yielding me this time and commend him for his leadership on this issue
because I think it is one that is very important to the public health
future of this country and this region of the world.
When New Mexico became a State in 1912, the city of Albuquerque where
I live had one-third of its population as active, active TB cases. A
third of the population was sick with a disease which at that time had
no cure. Antibiotics changed that. But now major health institutions in
this country have identified tuberculosis as one of the reemerging
infectious diseases that poses a threat to U.S. health. It is not just
regular tuberculosis, though. It is multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.
In Mexico, 6 percent of the tuberculosis cases are multidrug-
resistant. What that means is the regular antibiotics do not work and
you have to have very expensive, high-end antibiotics to have any
chance of curing the disease. We have had outbreaks in this country of
multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. The only answer is the eradication of
the disease. That will take a worldwide public health effort.
The good news is that it is cost effective to eradicate it when it is
not cost effective to treat multidrug-resistant TB. The worldwide
commitment will be about $1 billion a year. The U.S. contribution
should grow towards about $200 million a year over many years.
We have made tremendous progress since the late 1990s, going from
really no commitment at all to a significant commitment. I want to
commend the chairman for his efforts. We need a continued national
commitment to the eradication of TB worldwide. That is why I stand in
support of the gentleman's amendment, to continue that focus and effort
on eradication of this disease before it becomes too big for us to
eradicate.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).

[[Page H4483]]

Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time, but I also thank him for his leadership in sponsorship of
this amendment and I am pleased to add my name to it along with the
gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson), the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Green) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
This amendment is going to provide $20 million in much-needed added
resources for the fight against tuberculosis globally. We have all
heard tuberculosis is one of the world's deadliest diseases, killing
over 2 million people worldwide each year. It is the leading cause of
death among people with AIDS. Sub-Saharan Africa has the world's
highest TB incidence. In many sub-Saharan countries, the number of
people with TB has quadrupled since 1990, mainly because of AIDS.
I want to point out a particular group of people that are
disproportionately affected by this, and that is women. TB is the
greatest killer of young women in the world. In fact, TB kills more
women than all causes of maternal mortality and more women than AIDS.
In the developing world, tuberculosis destroys girls' and women's
futures. TB tends to attack its victims in their most productive years,
often killing or sickening the primary breadwinner of a family. In
order to pay for the medical costs and generate income, families
frequently take their young girls out of school and put them to work.
It also means the loss of educational opportunity for girls in poor
families.
Besides the direct health effects, there is often a stigma that
attaches to a woman with TB. This leads to increased isolation,
abandonment and divorce. According to the World Health Organization,
recent studies on India found that 100,000 women are rejected by their
families because of TB every year. The litany goes on. I could cite a
lot more cases.
I want to point out that the emergence of drug-resistant TB is a
threat to all of us here in the United States. An outbreak of drug-
resistant TB in New York City in the 1990s cost almost a billion
dollars to bring under control, and several hundred victims died.
TB control is cost effective. A full course of drugs costs as little
as $10 per person in the developing world. The treatment method
approved by the World Health Organization is 95 percent effective.
Unfortunately, only one in four of those affected with TB have access
to treatment, despite the fact that it is extremely cost effective and
simple to administer. The global community must do more to adequately
address this disease by investing in quality tuberculosis control
programs, especially in countries with a high incidence of TB. The
United States should lead the way with this seed money.
I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on this amendment.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment that I
am privileged to cosponsor. I want to speak for a moment about the
appropriateness of the offsets that have been chosen in this amendment.
The first is the elimination of funding for MIGA. We have heard some
persuasive arguments from the chairman of the subcommittee about the
good work that MIGA does in the more desperately poor parts of the
world. I agree they do some work, but I think that it is overstated to
say they do much.
The top five countries to receive assistance from MIGA in fiscal year
2000 were Brazil, Argentina, Peru, Russia and Turkey. None of these
five countries is eligible for funds under the International
Development Agency program that provides for loans to the poorest
countries in the world. MIGA is not providing economic development in
the poorest sections of the world. There are other programs that do so.
I think that this offset is appropriate.
Second, with respect to the Asian Development Fund, it is my
understanding that the increase in this bill is $30 million. This
amendment reduces the increase by one-third. There is still a $20
million increase in that fund as a result of this amendment.
There are many problems brought to this floor that we cannot do very
much about. This is one where there is a solution within our reach.
Tuberculosis has a cure. Three out of four people in the poorest parts
of the world do not have access to that cure. We can do something about
that by adding $20 million to the fund under this bill. We have a smart
way to do it. It is a compassionate thing to do. I would urge my
colleagues from both sides of the aisle to support this amendment.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
I would again ask the House support of this amendment. The House has
moved in the right direction in tuberculosis funding over the last 4
years. The House of Representatives and the Senate and the President by
signing the legislation in the past have not just pushed the ball
forward but have been the catalyst for other nations around the world,
especially Canada, the Netherlands and philanthropists around the world
to fully fund more antituberculosis efforts. It has made a difference
and saved hundreds of thousands of lives around the world. We have the
opportunity to do even more.
I ask the House support for the Brown-Wilson-Morella-Andrews-Green
amendment.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I would just very briefly in closing note, as the gentleman from Ohio
said, we are moving in the right direction. In fact, I think we are
moving very much in the right direction. Two years ago this program,
the tuberculosis program, had $15 million allocated for it. This last
year it was $60 million. This year it is $70 million. The supplemental
appropriation bill that we have adds even more to it than that. In the
regular appropriations, that is almost a fivefold increase in 2 years'
time for this one single program.
Is it needed? Yes, it clearly is needed. We are certainly moving in
the right direction. The gentleman's amendment, while I sympathize with
it, I think is just wrong in where it takes the money from. I think to
take it out of these particular programs that will mean no lending to
the very poorest of the poor in that account I think is wrong.
I would urge my colleagues for that reason to oppose this amendment.
Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the
Brown-Morella-Green-Andrews amendment to increase funding to fight the
international threat of tuberculosis.
Most Americans believe that the battle against tuberculosis is over.
Treatment and prevention measures have resulted in a decline in
tuberculosis cases in the United States. In fact, U.S. TB cases
declined seven percent in 2000, reaching an all-time low.
Despite our success in the U.S., tuberculosis continues to be one of
the most devastating infections killers in the world, accounting for
more than 2 million deaths each year.
The statistics are startling: More than one-third of the world's
population is infected with tuberculosis; It is the leading killer of
women, surpassing any cause of maternal mortality; It creates more
orphaned children than any other infectious disease; Tuberculosis is
the leading cause of death among HIV-positive individuals, causing over
30 percent of AIDS deaths; and As the number of tuberculosis cases has
increased, a multi-drug resistant strain has emerged that poses a major
public health threat in the US and around the world.
With the increase in global travel and migration, we cannot be
content to control tuberculosis in the United States. We must step up
our efforts to eliminate the global threat of tuberculosis.
That is what this amendment does. By providing additional funding for
tuberculosis control, we can bolster our worldwide prevention and
control efforts.
The World Bank has determined that modern TB treatments are among the
most cost-effective health interventions available today.
For every dollar we spend on TB prevention and control, we can save
an estimated $3 to $4.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment makes a wise investment to address a
very serious problem.
I urge my colleagues to support the Brown amendment, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

[[Page H4484]]

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) will be
postponed.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word for the
purpose of yielding to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for a
colloquy.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I thank the gentlewoman for her courtesy in yielding
to me.
Mr. Chairman, I rise for the purpose of entering into a colloquy, if
I could, with the distinguished gentleman from Arizona, the
subcommittee chair. I have enjoyed working with him over the years on a
number of areas that deal with international affairs, trade and
development.
I rise today because of deep concern with the work that we have with
the Agency for International Development's Environment and Urban
Programs.
Mr. Chairman, we are told by the experts that we are going to see 2.5
billion people added to the world's urban population in the next 25
years. The overwhelming majority, over 90 percent of them, are going to
be in the least developed countries of the world. Already, some 30
percent of these communities do not have adequate drinking water, 50
percent do not have basic sanitation, and we are facing the one program
in the Agency for International Development that deals with the urban
programs that has a crying need for budget assistance.

{time} 1730

Its budget has been $4 million last year. This is down from $8
million in 1993. It has been going down and holding steady.
I guess I would like to engage the gentleman in a colloquy to inquire
if it is possible to work with the committee and with USAID to find
ways to see that this program receives its proper emphasis and to
encourage AID to build on its pass successes by increasing this
program's funding levels.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LOWEY. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that I appreciate the
gentleman from Oregon's comments, and I agree that the AID's Office of
Environment and Urban Programs is a cost-effective investment.
In addition, I concur with his belief that a report of the nature he
has described would be, I think, useful to us. I am happy to work with
the gentleman from Oregon in extending the message to AID that we would
like to see a greater investment in the Office of Program Funding,
while at the same time maintaining or increasing the operating funds
for the office.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman will yield further,
I appreciate the gentleman's words. I look forward to working with the
gentleman and with the ranking member, the gentlewoman from New York
(Mrs. Lowey).
I include for the Record some additional information about this
matter.
Congress plays a key role in the use of the development assistance
budget in addressing issues of cities in the developing world. Cities
around the world must accommodate 2.5 billion additional people in the
next 25 years and 95 percent of these people will be in cities of the
developing world.
In the large urban areas of developing countries, 30 percent do not
have access to safe drinking water and 50 percent do not have adequate
sanitation. A crisis is in the making and if left unattended, problems
due to rapidly expanding cities will have serious repercussions for
these nations as well as for us here at home in the U.S.
When cities work, the economic growth and potential for trade exists.
When things go wrong in cities, it affects the entire nation. We need
to support foreign assistance programs that help make cities in the
developing world work. We need to help build the capacity to plan for
and provide the basic services, promote economic growth, reduce
environmental degradation, and improve health services--at the city
level.
That is why in its Outlook 2015, the Central Intelligence Agency
ranks rapid urbanization among its top seven security concerns. The
CIA's report states, ``The explosive growth of cities in the developing
countries will test the capacity of governments to stimulate the
investment required to generate jobs, and provide the services,
infrastructure, and social supports necessary to sustain livable and
stable environments. Cities will be sources of crime and instability as
ethnic and religious differences exacerbate the competition for ever
scarcer jobs and resources.''
The U.S. Agency for the International Development's Office of
Environment and Urban Programs provides support for enabling cities to
provide environmental services and infrastructure. This Office assists
USAID missions and carries out regional activities worldwide through
staff based in Regional Urban Development Offices overseas. This RUDO
network strengthens urban-rural linkages and emphasizes the key role
played by market towns and secondary cities. I urge support for it.
I also wish to insert the following document which was provided to me
by the Coalition for Sustainable Cities. PADCO, Inc. (Planning and
Development Collaborative International) in Washington, DC is the
contact for this Coalition.

Urban Programs at USAID

Rapid urban growth is having a profound impact on
sustainable development, and USAID can do more to address the
urban challenge.
Very soon half of the world's population will be urban, and
almost all the world's 2.5 billion increase in population
over the next 25 years will take place in the cities of the
developing world.
Poverty, malnutrition, and chronic disease are shifting
their concentration from rural to urban areas. Slum
conditions adversely affect natural resources, health,
security, and economic progress.
Cities are also the engines of economic growth in
developing countries, and urban focused programs can increase
efficiency in addressing the causes and symptoms of poverty.

The Need for Urban Programs: The Growing Consensus

There is a growing awareness that mega-cities, with
populations of 10 to 20 million, in the developing world are
increasingly becoming of great concern, as demonstrated by
articles in the June 11th article in the Washington Post and
in the April 2001 edition of the ``Global Outlook'' Journal.

concerns at usaid

USAID knows how to work with the private sector to address
urban challenges and capitalize on urban opportunities, but
results are diminishing because both central funding for
urban programs and the number of USAID urban technical staff
have been declining rapidly, and are not being replaced.
Although the new reorganization of USAID makes tremendous
strides in several key areas, it does not mention the small,
but critical international urban programs that focus on
making cities work.
The Regional Urban Development Offices (RUDO) Network,
which enables urban experts to function regionally and are so
critical to international urban programs, are in danger of
being eliminated, even though Mission directors
overwhelmingly support the RUDO Networks.
The valuable Housing Guaranty/Urban Environmental Credit
program was terminated last year and may need to be created
again. It represents the only opportunity to move capital
resources into critical areas Congress has traditionally
viewed as necessary. Through private sector loans with a
USAID/USG guaranty substantial amounts of resources have been
leveraged into priority areas at minimal cost and risk.

USAID Can be Part of the Solution

Urban Programs must play a part in the new thinking at
USAID.
The agenda is to create more: public/private partnerships
for urban service delivery; market based financing for basic
urban infrastructure including schools and primary health
clinics; private credit and micro-finance for housing and
enterprise development; and community participation in
planning and management down to the neighborhood level.
USAID Development Assistance, especially as related to
Urban programs, has a significant afterlife. It is truly a
beneficial investment for both here and abroad.
The Regional Urban Development Offices network should be
mandated.
Additional resources should be provided to USAID to enable
it to address the growing urban challenge. The role of USAID
and the RUDOs should be used as a catalyst to efforts by
private organizations.

Amendment No. 47 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 47 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
In title II of the bill in the item relating to ``child
survival and health programs fund'', after the first dollar
amount, insert the following: ``(increased by
$100,000,000)''.
In title II of the bill in the item relating to ``child
survival and health programs fund'', after the first dollar
amount in the fourth proviso, insert the following:
``(increased by $60,000,000)''.
In title II of the bill in the item relating to ``child
survival and health programs fund'', after the fourth dollar
amount in the fourth proviso, insert the following:
``(increased by $40,000,000)''.

[[Page H4485]]

In title II of the bill in the item relating to ``andean
counterdrug initiative'', after the first dollar amount,
insert the following: ``(decreased by $100,000,000)''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member opposed each will
control 10 minutes.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) will control the
time in opposition.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for
5 minutes.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I believe that the Members have engaged in this debate
for an extensive amount of time. My amendment follows the McGovern,
Hoekstra, Pelosi, Morella, Jackson-Lee amendment, but it breaks the
funding down differently. It provides $60 million additional funding
for child and maternal health programs and $40 million additional
funding for the USAID valuable infectious disease program.
What I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, is simply read into the Record
the emphasis and the issue dealing with maternal health, and hopefully
we can find an opportunity to work through these issues as we move
toward conference.
Let me cite for you a particular emphasis or citation as relates to
the World Health Organization.
They have indicated that maternal health is the largest disparity
between the developed and developing countries. While infant mortality,
deaths to infants less than 1 year, for example, is almost seven times
higher in the developing world than in the developed, maternal
mortality is, on average, 18 times higher. Beyond the consequences for
women, the health of their children is also put at risk. Children are
more likely to die within 2 years of a maternal death. The chances of
death are 10 times greater for the new born and three times greater for
children 1 to 5.
We had a vigorous discussion on the floor of the House, with many
Members citing developing nations. My funds, likewise, take dollars
from the Andean Counterdrug Initiative. I only refer the chairman to
the point that we want these dollars to come out of military. I also
refer the chairman to the point that we have seen the tragedy of a
broken drug enforcement system with the loss of the missionary in the
Peruvian drug war.
However, I am more interested in a solution, and I would like to
address the ranking member on this issue and to express my interest,
both I hope in the earshot of the chairman, of making these additional
funds available for this maternal health program in a way of working
through this process and through conference.
I would like to yield to the gentlewoman from New York on this issue,
if I might. I have discussed the basis of my amendment. I have
indicated that we have discussed this fully in the previous amendment.
I believe that the ultimate goal of all of us is to get more dollars to
dying mothers and dying children around the world and more help for
them as it relates to infectious diseases.
I would hope as we see this legislation going through, that we might
find a way to work with the other body and work with the chairman and
work with the gentlewoman to look for opportunities to find funding for
these very desperate needs.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend from Texas for
bringing these issues to our attention once again, and I know of the
commitment of the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) and the
gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young) to these issues, and I can
assure the gentlewoman as the bill moves through the process, we will
continue to work together to provide as much resources as we can direct
to this very important issue.
Again, I thank my colleague from Texas for her important discussion
of these priorities.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for
her commitment, and I thank the chairman of the full committee and the
chairman of the subcommittee for the work that I know that they have
done.
In order not to generate a negative vote on such an important issue
and to make sure that language follows suit and we get some response on
this issue of maternal health and child nutrition, let me at this time
work with these Members and the committee and withdraw the amendment
that I have just proposed, looking forward to a solution as we move
toward conference.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to this bill that
will permit the United States Agency for International Development to
provide valuable support for global child and maternal health programs
and to combat global infectious diseases.
This amendment will provide $60 million additional funding for Child
and Maternal Health programs and $40 million additional funding for the
USAID's valuable infectious disease program. I am not asking for new
funding, but merely funds from the State Department's Andean
Counterdrug initiative. I introduce this amendment on the heels of the
McGovern-Hoekstra-Pelosi-Morella-Jackson amendment to emphasize the
importance of funding these programs and to shift a bit more funding
into Child Health and Maternal Health programs, because, as chair of
the Congressional Children's Caucus, I place a special emphasis on this
program.
We know firsthand that the health and survival of a child is directly
linked to the health of his or her mother. Infectious diseases continue
to take a toll on the developing world. Ten million children will die
before their fifth birthday this year due to preventable diseases, such
as diarrhea, pneumonia and measles. In addition, infectious diseases,
such as tuberculosis and malaria, take the lives of millions of people
living with HIV/AIDS. All of these deaths are preventable and by
strengthening the basic health and nutrition services in developing
countries, we can make a difference.
We must recognize that the U.S. federal budget allocation to foreign
aid has hit a record low, and is now less as a proportion of our
national income than in any other industrialized nation. Foreign aid is
now only one percent of our federal budget.
In September, we will mark the ten-year anniversary of the 1990 World
Summit for Children. At that summit, the U.S. joined with over 70 other
nations in committing to the reduction of child and maternal deaths.
Substantial progress has been made since 1990, but many goals have not
yet been met. We need to redouble our efforts to expand programs that
can sharply reduce the millions of preventable deaths.
Despite the good work of many organizations and individuals
worldwide, each year more than ten million children die before reaching
their fifth birthday due to preventable infectious diseases, such as
pneumonia, measles, and diarrhea. This is equivalent to every child
living in the eastern half of the United States. While diarrhea remains
one of the leading causes of death in the developing world, at present
one million childhood deaths are averted every year due to diarrhea
prevention and appropriate treatment programs.
Clean water and sanitation prevent infectious, and oral rehydration
therapy (a simple salt sugar mixture taken by mouth, which costs only
pennies and was developed through U.S. research efforts overseas) has
been proven to be among the most effective public health interventions
ever developed.
Global immunization coverage has soared from less than 10 percent of
the world's children in the 1970s to almost 75 percent today. Annually,
immunizations avert two million childhood deaths from measles, neonatal
tetanus, and whooping cough. The success of these programs in the
world's poorest regions is even more striking when one considers that
the vaccination rate in the United States only reached 78 percent in
1998.
Unfortunately, immunization rates are not improving everywhere.
Coverage in sub-Saharan Africa has decreased. 30 percent of children
still do not receive their routine vaccinations--30 million infants.
Measles immunization rates have improved in the past ten years but
there are still 30 million cases of measles every year.
If a child is not killed by measles, it may cause blindness,
malnutrition, deafness or pneumonia. It is possible to save millions of
children per year just by increasing immunization rates from 75 percent
to 90 percent, and by assuring access of essential nutrients such as
Vitamin A, which increases resistance to disease and infection. Vitamin
A supplementation is protective and will protect a child from the most
serious consequences of measles, such as blindness and death, and costs
only four cents per year per child. Deficiencies of both iron and
iodine are among the most harmful types of malnutrition with regard to
cognition. Iodine deficiency disorder is the

[[Page H4486]]

leading preventable cause of mental retardation in children and it
renders children listless, inattentive and uninterested in learning.
We must reduce hunger and malnutrition, which contribute to over one-
half of childhood deaths around the world. We can do so through these
Child and Maternal Health programs. An estimated 150 million children
are malnourished, which puts them at even greater risk for infections.
Protecting children from disease and malnutrition increases their
ability to learn and thrive. The issue of hunger and nutrition was so
important to my predecessor, Mickey Leland, that along with Congressmen
Tony Hall and Ben Gilman, he founded the House Select Committee on
Hunger in 1983. The bi-partisan non-profit Congressional Hunger Center
grew out of this effort in 1993 and fights national and global hunger.
It is important that we in Congress continue these efforts.
According to the United Nations, approximately 838 million people are
chronically undernourished in the world today. Approximately 300
million are children. UNICEF reports that 32 percent of the worlds'
children under five years of age, about 193 million, have stunted
growth, which is the key indicator for undernutrition.
Weak health and poor nutrition among school age children diminish
their cognitive development either through physiological changes or by
reducing their ability to participate in the learning experience, or
both. The extra demand on school age children to perform chores, for
example, or walk long distances to school, creates a need for energy
that is much greater than that of younger children. Available data
indicate high levels of protein energy malnutrition and short-term
hunger among school age children, and deficiencies of critical
nutrients are pervasive.
Poor nutrition and health among school children contribute to the
inefficiency of the educational system. Children with diminished
cognitive abilities and sensory impairments perform less well and are
more likely to repeated grades or drop out of school. The irregular
school attendance of malnourished and unhealthy children is one of the
key factors in poor performance. Even temporary hunger, common in
children who are not being fed before going to school, can have an
adverse effect on learning.
For those of you who worry that their home districts will not support
such additional aid, I offer that polls consistently show that
Americans support putting a high priority on addressing world hunger
and poverty. In a recent survey by the Program on International Policy
Attitudes at the University of Maryland, 87% polled support foreign
food and medical assistance. Only 20% surveyed supports cuts in efforts
to reduce hunger. 62% said that combating world hunger should be a very
important goal for the United States. 76% positively rated giving child
survival programs more money. Only about one fourth positively viewed
giving military aid to countries friendly to the United States.
U.S. food aid alleviates poverty and promotes economic growth in
recipient countries. As incomes in developing countries, rise,
consumption patterns change, and food and other imports of US goods and
services can increase. Hence, supporting child nutrition programs is an
effort that we can and must all support.
This amendment will benefit families in many other important ways.
Nearly 500,000 women die of pregnancy-related causes each year. Every
minute, around the world, 380 women become pregnant, 110 women
experience pregnancy-related complications, 1 woman dies. Each year, an
additional 15 million women suffer pregnancy-related health problems
that can be permanently debilitating, and over 4 million newborns die
from poorly managed pregnancies and deliveries.
Ninety-five percent of maternal deaths occur in the developing world.
In some sub-Saharan African countries, the risk jumps still further:
one in every 14 girls entering adolescence will die from maternal
causes before completing her child-bearing years--compared to 1 in
1,800 girls in developing countries.
According to the World Health Organization, maternal health is the
largest disparity between the developed and developing countries. While
infant mortality (death to infants less than one year), for example, is
almost 7 times higher in the developing world than in the developed,
maternal mortality is on average 18 times higher. Beyond the
consequences for women, the health of their children is also put at
risk. Children are much more likely to die within two years of a
maternal death. The chances of death are 10 times greater for the
newborn and 3 times greater for children 1 to 5 years.
Reducing maternal deaths is an effective investment in healthy
families--and therefore in sustainable development--around the world.
These deaths can be averted through services that include skilled
attendants at birth with necessary equipment and supplies, community
education on safe motherhood, improvement of rural and urban health
care facilities. Most of these interventions are low-tech and low cost.
Maternal deaths affect women in their most productive years, and as a
result the impact reverberates through their families, their
communities, and the societies in which they live. The diminished
potential productivity of the women who die is $7.5 billion annually
and $8 billion for the newborns who do not survive.
Ninety-nine percent of maternal deaths can be prevented with improved
pregnancy care, nutrition, immediate postnatal care as well as
appropriate treatment for the complications of incomplete abortions.
The WHO Mother-Baby program has identified a package of health
interventions that, for a cost of $1-3 per mother, can save the lives
of countless women and will begin to do so immediately upon
implementation.
U.S. funding for maternal health programs has remained level at $50
million for the past 3 years. While other global health and development
programs have received increased attention, women continue to die
needlessly of preventable causes.
Through this amendment, we also seek additional funding to prevent
infectious diseases. Almost 2 million people die each year from
tuberculosis (TB). It is estimated that one-third of the world's
population is infected with tuberculosis, although it lies dormant in
most people. Deadlier and more resistant forms of TB have emerged and
have spread to Europe and the U.S., re-introducing the possibility of
TB becoming a global killer. Moreover, since HIV/AIDS reduces one's
resistance to infectious diseases, TB is easily transmitted to an
infected individual. It is regarded as the most common HIV-related
opportunistic infection in developing countries.
Many advances have been made to reduce the prevalence of these
diseases by the USAID, in collaboration with other international
agencies. For example, the World Health Organization's Roll Back
Malaria campaign had decreased the death rate from malaria by 97% in
some countries. WHO has also started a ``directly observed treatment
strategy,'' or DOTS, to fight tuberculosis. Under this strategy,
patients are given second-line drugs when they become resistant to
first-line drugs.
Similarly, tuberculosis (TB) has re-emerged on the world stage in
deadlier and more resistant forms. With the appearance of multi-drug
resistant TB, and its spread to Europe and the U.S., we face the
possibility that this could again become a leading killer of the rich
as well as the poor.
Infectious diseases account for 8% of all deaths in the richest 20
percent of the world and 56% in the poorest 20 percent. This poorest
fifth of the world's population is seven times more likely to die as a
result of infectious diseases, accounting for 56% of deaths within this
population segment. Children are particularly susceptible to infectious
diseases, which tend to be exacerbated by malnutrition, an all-too
common condition in developing countries.
Finally, this amendment does not seek to cut any economic assistance
for the Andean region, assistance for Peru or Bolivia, or funding for
the Colombian National Police. It only seeks to cut some military aid
to Colombia, aid that does not help the Colombian people, as will these
valuable health programs.
The human rights situation in Colombia has deteriorated since
Congress approved last year's aid package. The Colombian military
continues to collaborate with right-wing paramilitaries that commit
over 70% of human rights abuses, such as the paramilitary massacres of
civilians that have nearly doubled in 2001 compared to last year.
The U.S. is engaged in a costly military endeavor with no clear exit
strategy. The high level of military aid threatens to draw the U.S.
further into Colombia's civil war. The amendment leaves intact $152
million in police aid, an estimated $80 million in the Defense
Appropriations bill, $30 million in expected drawdowns and IMET and
$158 million in military aid in the pipeline from FY 2001. Security
assistance accounts for 71% of expected U.S. aid to Colombia this year.
Military aid escalates the conflict and weakens the fragile peace
process by emboldening those who hope to solve the conflict on the
battlefield and undermining government and civilian leaders seeking a
peaceful resolution to the conflict.
President Bush himself said this Tuesday that ``A world where some
live in comfort and plenty, while half of the human race lives on less
than $2 a day, is neither just, nor stable.''
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

[[Page H4487]]

development assistance

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
sections 103, 105, 106, and 131, and chapter 10 of part I of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $1,098,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2003: Provided, That none of
the funds appropriated under this heading may be made
available for any activity which is in contravention to the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Flora and Fauna (CITES): Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading that are made available for
assistance programs for displaced and orphaned children and
victims of war, not to exceed $25,000, in addition to funds
otherwise available for such purposes, may be used to monitor
and provide oversight of such programs: Provided further,
That $135,000,000 should be allocated for children's basic
education.

Amendment No. 33 Offered by Mr. Roemer

Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 33 offered by Mr. Roemer:
Page 10, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(increased by $12,000,000)''.
Page 13, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(reduced by $1,100,000)''.
Page 37, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(reduced by $3,900,000)''.
Page 38, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(reduced by $7,000,000)''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) for 5
minutes.
(Mr. ROEMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, in government we do some things extremely well, and
occasionally we make some mistakes. In the Microenterprise Loans for
the Poor Program, this is an exemplary program that is innovative, that
works off a revolving loan basis, that regenerates money, and helps the
poorest of the poor people help themselves out of poverty. It is
directed primarily at growing small businesses in the smallest and
poorest countries, and it helps primarily women and their children.
What more could you ask for than an effective aid program for the
United States to run and assist other people in other countries around
the world?
This program works so well, Mr. Chairman, that it helps people like
Sarah Doe, from Liberia, who fled the Ivory Coast and lost her husband
tragically in war. She has four children. This Microenterprise Loans
for the Poor Program loaned her $16. Now, to us, $16, people spend that
at lunch; $16 is what she might see in a year. This helped her grow a
small business selling donuts. She continued to grow it and get some
more loans. She now has a savings account, a successful business, and
she is putting her four children through school.
This is a great program. It is an innovative program. We are talking
about new things to use in the Microenterprise Loans for the Poor
Program like the poverty assessment tools, trying to make sure that we
continue to target loans at the poorest children.
Twelve million dollars is what this amendment would increase the $155
million in this appropriations bill by; $12 million to literally help
millions of people, women, small businesses and their children.
I think this $155 million in the bill, it is not a ceiling on what we
can spend, so I am hopeful that the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe),
who has been an advocate and proponent of this program, and certainly
the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Lowey), who champions this program
left and right, can hopefully fight for more money, more innovation,
and more revolving loans that help the poorest of the poor around the
world.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am not really in opposition to what the gentleman is
certainly attempting to do. Let me just say that the gentleman has very
eloquently laid out the case I think for microlending programs. I have
had an opportunity, as I know the gentleman has, to see a number of
these programs very recently, and before that found some very
heartwarming stories in Uganda when I was there a few years ago of some
of our micro-credit programs we have in that country.
I think one of the arguments that is frequently lost in our debate
about health issues, is how important economic growth is to addressing
some of the health issues that we have been talking about here at great
length today.
A country cannot have a health system, infrastructure, hospitals,
nurses, midwives, or clean water if it does not have economic growth.
Micro-credit is a jump-start. It is what we can use to get economic
growth going. I think it is a very, very important part of our
assistance program; and I am very, very much in support of that
program.
I also think it is worth noting when we talk about health that micro-
credit can be very important in communities that have been ravaged by
HIV and AIDS, because in those communities frequently the only thing
that is available, not large investments, not large amounts of capital,
the only thing available for those people to survive and sustain
themselves are small projects, craft projects very often, and those can
only be done with this kind of micro-credit.
So I think the gentleman from Indiana is absolutely correct. I think
that what the gentleman is attempting to do here is the right thing to
do, and I have continued to urge and will continue to urge USAID to put
as much emphasis as possible on this program, because I am very
supportive of it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate my colleague for again speaking
out so forcefully for microenterprise. We have been working on this
issue a very long time, and I do applaud the gentleman's efforts in
this area.
We know that microenterprise is not charity; it is an outstanding
investment. It helps the poorest of the poor break the cycle of poverty
and achieve self-sufficiency. With barely more money than any of us
would spend on a new suit or a weekend away, a woman receiving a
microenterprise loan can literally change the course of her life. The
loan may enable her to open a small restaurant, start a small business,
buy some chickens, sell their eggs, make bread to sell to her
neighbors.
The small amount of income and the small amount of savings that this
loan makes possible will pay for a small uniform for her daughter, who
may not have otherwise gone to school. It will pay for doctor visits
for her family, for nourishing food to keep everyone healthy and
active.
This small amount of money, which is paid back in full and on time
more than 95 percent of the time, often less than $300 and many times
less than $100, will give an entire family new hope for the future.
Mr. Chairman, microenterprise works. We should increase our
investment in these important programs. I want to applaud my colleague
again for his focus on microenterprise, and I want to assure the
gentleman that I intend to work with our Chair, who is a very, very
active supporter of microenterprise as well, that we will do all we can
to get additional funds in this program.
Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi), the ranking member of the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence, who has worked with us on this very critical
issue.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding me
time, and I commend her and our distinguished chairman and the maker of
this motion, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer), for their
interest in this micro-lending.
The gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and I have visited these
micro-lending sites throughout the world. We visited in India,
Guatemala, and just all over; and we have seen how these small
businesses have changed

[[Page H4488]]

not only the families, but the communities. So it is money well spent.
It is a remarkable thing what a difference a few hundred dollars can
make.

{time} 1745

Again, it is all part of the integrity of the bill when we talk about
debt forgiveness, alleviation of poverty, raising the standard of
living, raising the literacy rates, improving the health of children,
child survival; it is all of one piece, because the economic
opportunity that is there has a tremendous impact on families and the
empowerment of women.
So I commend the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) for his
leadership on this. It is a very, very important issue. I cannot think
of another place where a small amount of money goes such a very long
way.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, again, I want to thank
the gentleman from Indiana for his leadership. I look forward to
working with him on this very important issue, and I look forward to
working with the chairman.
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time to
conclude by thanking the eloquent Members of the House of
Representatives, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the
ranking member on the Committee on Intelligence, who has, in her
previous job on the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations fought so hard
and so successfully for these programs; the gentlewoman from New York
(Mrs. Lowey), who is a real champion of these programs, visiting them
across the world; and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), who is so
articulate and champions this program, and I hope will continue to work
with Senator Leahy to see that more funds are included for this good
effort and goodwill in conference.
I do not think if I pushed this to a vote, Mr. Chairman, and won
unanimously that I could get the kind of eloquence and support from
such important people making decisions in conference as I have from
this colloquy. So with that, I would like to work with the chairman on
some report language on poverty assessment tools.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Indiana?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

international disaster assistance

For necessary expenses for international disaster relief,
rehabilitation, and reconstruction assistance pursuant to
section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as
amended, $200,000,000, to remain available until expended.

Amendment No. 32 Offered by Ms. Pelosi

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 32 offered by Ms. Pelosi:
Page 11, after line 12, insert the following:
In addition, for international disaster assistance for El
Salvador, $250,000,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress as
an emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985: Provided further, That such amount shall be available
only to the extent that an official budget request, that
includes designation of the entire amount of the request as
an emergency requirement as defined in the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, is transmitted by
the President to the Congress.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) and a Member opposed each will
control 20 minutes.
Does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) seek to control time in
opposition?
Mr. KOLBE. I do, Mr. Chairman, and I also reserve a point of order on
this amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) reserves a point
of order and will control the time in opposition.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) for
20 minutes.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This amendment will provide $250 million in emergency international
disaster assistance for El Salvador. The United States has been a
leader and a major contributor to international humanitarian disasters.
Last year, the committee provided $135 million in emergency funding for
Mozambique and southern Africa, so there is precedent for doing this
funding under the emergency funding in this bill.
Two years ago, the committee provided approximately $621 million in
emergency funding for Hurricane Mitch. The earthquakes in El Salvador
this year in January and February, caused more damage in El Salvador
than Hurricane Mitch did in the entire area of Central America. This is
a terrible, terrible disaster.
During Hurricane Mitch, the United States provided approximately 40
percent of the overall international contribution. This amendment for
$250 million would increase the overall U.S. contribution to about 40
percent of the overall international contribution.
USAID called the El Salvador earthquakes the worst disasters in the
region in over 50 years. Estimated costs of rebuilding El Salvador
ranged between $1.6 and $2.8 billion.
It is important to note that in terms of the disaster and the tragedy
there, in terms of housing, 200,000 homes were destroyed by the
earthquake, leaving about a half a million people homeless. Roads,
bridges, health care and water facilities were either damaged or
destroyed and hundreds of people died. On March 7, 2001, the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) led a bipartisan group of 75 Members
of Congress in sending a letter to President Bush asking for a
significant emergency package for El Salvador. On March 21, 2001, the
House passed H. Con. Res. 41 by a vote of 405 to 1 supporting
substantially increasing reconstruction and relief assistance for El
Salvador in connection with the earthquakes.
For many years, Mr. Chairman, the United States took a leading role
in the affairs of El Salvador, and it is only right that we remain
involved today. This tragedy has left thousands of children, women, and
men at risk, and the entire country's future is in serious jeopardy. A
compassionate and generous response from the United States is essential
to those lives and to the region's stability.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment for $250
million in emergency spending for disaster relief in El Salvador.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief on this, as I reserve the point of
order.
I would just say that the gentlewoman's amendment again, like many
others here, I think, is right from the heart; and there is no question
that the devastation that has occurred in El Salvador has been
tremendous. I have been down there since the earthquake just a month
after the second earthquake occurred down there. The devastation is
tremendous. I was down there just a few days after Hurricane Mitch in
Honduras and in Nicaragua.
The gentlewoman is absolutely right; in the areas where this is
concentrated, the damage is even worse and the number of deaths that
occurred is greater than we experienced in Hurricane Mitch. So the
devastation to this one tiny country of El Salvador, which was working
so hard and making so much progress to get back on its feet
economically, has been tremendous.
However, let me just say that we believe that we have in our account
for disaster assistance, we have sufficient funds to pay for what is
going to be needed to help in the immediate future to help do three
things: one, the cleanup after the disaster; and now, the housing, the
temporary housing and converting that into more permanent housing; and
then the beginnings of the rebuilding of the infrastructure. The
amounts that we have available in our account for that this year, in my
opinion, are sufficient.
Since the gentlewoman is removing so much money from a particular
account, I would have real objections to doing that. But again, I want
to say to the gentlewoman that I certainly accept in good faith what
she is trying to do and I believe that the problem down there is a very
major one, and I hope that these words that she has said and that I am
saying are being listened to

[[Page H4489]]

by our people in the State Department and USAID, and that we are going
to move as quickly as possible to give all assistance that we can to El
Salvador.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
I would just like to respond to the distinguished chairman. I know
that he is concerned about the people of El Salvador, and I accept as a
compliment his statement that my amendment comes from the heart, and
maybe it does, but it indeed also comes from the head.
A tremendous need is there, and we can express all the compassion in
the world that we want, but it is no substitute for real funding to
meet the needs of the people of El Salvador.
My concern about what the distinguished chairman has said is that the
funds that will be used under his plan are coming from other disaster
assistance. It is coming out of funding for the Sudan, Afghanistan, the
Congo, and even taking money from the child survival and development
assistance account. I do not think the poorest children in the world
should have to pay for the compassion of the American people to meet
the needs of the El Salvadorans at this time of tragedy.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Olver), who has helped fight this fight in full
committee, who has visited El Salvador and speaks with authority on the
subject.
Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Chairman, on January 13 of this year, a 7.6 Richter magnitude
earthquake hit El Salvador. It was followed 1 month later on February
13 by a quake that measured 6.6 on the Richter scale. The combined
devastation included 1,200 people killed and more than $2 billion in
damage. Approximately 175,000 homes lie anywhere between severe damage
and utter rubble, leaving 15 percent of the population of the country
without habitable homes; homeless.
Now, the gentlewoman's amendment will add $250 million in disaster
relief to the promised $100 million in the bill. This is really a very
modest sum. The $100 million in the bill is a small sum; even with the
250 added, it would be a modest sum, particularly when we consider
America's recent involvement in El Salvador.
During the 1980s, there was an 11-year period when more than 75,000
people lost their lives in El Salvador's civil war and at least 20
percent of the population went into exile. Nearly three-quarters of a
million of those exilees are in the United States, many of them
citizens, and others very close to citizenship. So we have a large
Salvadoran population in the United States. The U.S. Congress helped to
fuel this devastation by $1 billion over those years in military aid,
mostly to the military government in El Salvador, which helped to lead
to the devastation.
In addition, there was a good deal of other aid. Total U.S. aid was
nearly $300 million per year other than the military assistance; $300
million per year for 11 years in that Nation. So indeed, the $100
million for this disaster is a very modest sum, and even with the $250
million added, it is still a modest sum.
I had the opportunity to visit El Salvador with the distinguished
chairman of the subcommittee, and there is some reluctance in making
the argument on this, because I know how hard he works, and I know he
views this as a serious matter. But we had an opportunity to see
villages and towns that had the worst of the destruction near the
epicenter, the capital city, the large capital city was not much
affected. We saw communities of 10,000 and 20,000 where virtually every
home was so severely damaged that it was not habitable. We visited a
large town where the hospital was so severely damaged that the
operating room was out in the front yard in the patio under a tent.
So there is no question about the need. The increased U.S. funding is
needed to ensure that aid reaches the places of greatest need. The best
disaster relief work is being done by local municipalities in
combination with churches and grass-roots groups and NGOs. Our disaster
aid agency, USAID, can help to address this by delivering assistance
through the nongovernmental channels and using the aid process to
support decentralization and the development of municipal governments
there.
Mr. Chairman, the disaster has ravaged our neighbor, El Salvador. It
is critically important that we help the people of El Salvador rebuild
their lives. The money promised in this bill is a step in the right
direction, but the amendment that has been offered by the gentlewoman
from California is needed. I urge my colleagues to support this
amendment.

{time} 1800

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), who has worked so hard to
better the lives of the Salvadoran people.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the Pelosi
amendment to provide some more emergency disaster assistance to El
Salvador, but I want to take a moment to thank the gentleman from
Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) for putting $100 million in the current
legislation before us to send down there.
Two devastating and deadly earthquakes rocked the central American
Nation of El Salvador on January 13 and again on February 13. The first
quake measured 7.6 on the Richter scale and had a depth of 9.6 miles
and occurred off the El Salvadoran coastline 5.6 miles southwest of San
Miguel.
The second quake measured 6.6 on the Richter scale, had a depth of
about 20 miles, and occurred 48 miles east of San Salvador. Neighboring
countries of Guatemala and Honduras also felt this quake. I visited El
Salvador and personally saw the destruction these quakes left in El
Salvador.
Recently, I visited this proud country and had the opportunity to see
firsthand the devastation and effect these quakes have had on the
people. I met with many Salvadorans who shared with me their personal
tragedies which resulted from the earthquakes. Crops have been ruined,
homes destroyed, and families left destitute.
I also met with the President of El Salvador, who shared his concerns
about the fate of El Salvador and its people. This tragedy has directly
affected hundreds of thousands of children, women, and men throughout
the country. These devastating earthquakes were responsible for over
1,100 deaths and more than 8,500 injuries. In addition, the quakes
damaged or destroyed over 330,000 homes. In total, over 1.5 million
Salvadorans have been affected by these national catastrophes.
The humanitarian needs of our neighbors in El Salvador are
substantial. El Salvadorans need clean water, health care, homes,
schools, crop assistance, and paved roads. These needs are compounded
by severe poverty, particularly in the rural areas, which affects 63
percent of El Salvador's rural population.
The damage assessments continue to rise. The United States Agency for
International Development reports that the cost of rebuilding after the
two earthquakes will be more than $2.8 billion.
Adding to the devastation are the aftershocks that continue to occur
in El Salvador. The United States Geological Survey reports that
hundreds of landslides have occurred, making the roads impassible in
some places around lakes, while debris flowing around such lakes have
altered drainage patterns, which will cause sediment dams to form
during the rainy season.
In addition, many roads and bridges have been washed out or blocked
by landslides and mudslides. Tens of thousands of people still lack
adequate drinking water and must depend on clean water transported by
trucks. Currently, UNICEF is organizing the distribution of water and
working closely with the Pan American Health Organization and the World
Health Organization.
Mr. Chairman, I believe the Pelosi amendment is critical to provide
much-needed funding for emergency international disaster assistance to
El Salvador. The U.S. has been a leader and major contributor to relief
of humanitarian disasters.
For example, last year Congress provided $135 million in emergency
funding for Mozambique and southern Africa. Two years ago, Congress
provided approximately $621 million in emergency funding for Hurricane
Mitch.

[[Page H4490]]

USAID has rated the El Salvador earthquakes as the worst disasters in
the region in over 50 years, dwarfing damage done by Hurricane Mitch to
all of Central America.
At this time, estimated costs of rebuilding El Salvador are
substantial. Humanitarian needs are staggering. Efforts thus far to
reprogram funds will not adequately address the needs of Salvadorans at
this critical time.
I believe this emergency funding is a necessary first step to address
the needs of the rural poor and the areas hit hardest by the
earthquakes. The $250 million in the Pelosi amendment would help to
restore community infrastructure in housing, schools, health
facilities, potable water systems, and municipal facilities.
After years of brutal civil war and unrest, El Salvador has emerged
as one of the most stable nations in Central America. Not only has El
Salvador developed a thriving economy, but also it has instituted many
significant democratic reforms.
I am deeply concerned that the damage and human suffering caused by
these earthquakes threaten the future stability and the economic
success of this great country. I cannot stand by and allow this tragedy
to result in sociopolitical backsliding.
I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) for raising this
issue, and encourage the Congress to reexamine the possibility of
providing much-needed additional emergency assistance to the people of
El Salvador.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran), who has been in this
fight for a long time for this funding for disaster assistance to the
people of El Salvador. On any number of occasions in the full committee
under the supplemental and on this bill he has been a champion.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, the very
distinguished gentlewoman from California, for yielding time to me. She
has introduced an amendment that we should all support.
Mr. Chairman, our neighbor needs our help desperately. What is our
excuse for not helping our neighbor? We have a $10 trillion economy, we
have more surplus than we have ever had, we just gave ourselves a $2
trillion tax cut, and our neighbor needs our help desperately. They had
an earthquake that they could not have done anything about.
Imagine, 1.6 million, one out of four people in El Salvador has been
affected. In fact, about 10,000 were killed or seriously injured. Our
neighbor needs our help.
Three hundred thirty-five thousand homes were destroyed, and El
Salvador tells us that they do not possibly have the money to build
even 30,000. So 90 percent of the people lost their homes and are not
going to be able to rebuild a home. They are families. They all have
kids. They are living in tents. Our neighbor needs our help.
We have never had as much capacity as we do today to help. We have no
excuse not to help. When we think of the health care, the sanitation
needs, the housing, they need it all.
We provided $6 billion during the 1980s in military aid. Where are
our priorities? Tens of thousands of Salvadorans are in this country
because of the terror of the ``death squads'' that we contributed to.
Where are our priorities? We have $100 million in this bill to help our
neighbor. They need $2.1 billion, according to the United Nations
development program; and we pledge $110 million, 5 percent.
Where is the other 95 percent going to come from? They have no other
neighbors as close nor as capable as we are of helping. So we are going
to turn our backs on our neighbors? That is what we are doing with 5
percent? It is an insult.
Mr. Chairman, this is defining of who we are as a nation. I know the
gentleman's heart is in the right place. Certainly his words were in
the right place in the supplemental. This should have been in the
emergency supplemental. We were told when we tried to get the money
that there was going to be more money in the regular bill, but it is
not here. The money is available; but the priorities are not in the
right place.
This is wrong, not to do more for our neighbor. One out of four
people were affected, killed, injured, homeless. They are desperate. We
need to go to their assistance. We need to define what kind of a
country, what kind of a people we are. There are a lot of Salvadoran
Americans who believe in the compassion and greatness of that
definition, who came to this country because they believed we were
capable of doing more than we are doing now for their home country.
This should be a national priority. We should support the Pelosi
amendment.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief. I just wanted to respond to the
gentleman from Virginia, who I have great admiration for and who I have
traveled with on many occasions, including to Latin America.
It is not a correct statement, though, to say that we have no money
in our legislation. We have $100 million, and it is earmarked. It is a
legal earmark. We have it set aside specifically for El Salvador.
One can argue and make a case that that is not sufficient. We tried
to balance the various priorities that we have. I know Members have
heard that before. But I do not want that to go unchallenged here. I do
not want Members to go away thinking that we have not provided anything
for El Salvador. We have, indeed. We do have $100 million.
He also made the statement that the money is there for the rest of
it. I do not know where he is referring to, but since we know all of
our allocation is used, if we want to put more money in, if we do not
do it as an emergency, we cannot. If we do it as an emergency, it is
there, from the American taxpayers, by borrowing or reducing the
surplus. But it has to come from someplace. It comes from the American
taxpayers.
If we are talking about taking it out of our current bill, our
current allocation, I would just note that it is entirely used, so we
do have to take it from someplace else. I would say that, as we have
heard here earlier, whatever the issue is, there are a lot of competing
interests here.
I just want to make it clear to my colleagues who might be listening
to this debate that we do indeed have $100 million earmarked in the
bill for reconstruction and for relief, disaster relief in El Salvador.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), the Vice-Chair of the
Democratic Caucus and a champion on this issue.
(Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, let me first thank the gentlewoman, not
only for yielding time to me but for her amendment and for her work in
this regard. She has helped bring us to the forefront on this issue. I
appreciate her work, working with me as the ranking Democrat on the
Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere.
Earlier this year, the Central American nation of El Salvador was
devastated by two earthquakes. The U.S. Agency for International
Development estimates that close to 1,200 people died and over 85,000
were injured. There were 335,000 homes that were destroyed or damaged.
Nearly 1.6 million Salvadorans have been affected, almost one in every
four of the country's population; and the estimated costs of rebuilding
El Salvador ranges between $1.6 and 2.8 billion.
The January and February earthquakes caused more damage in El
Salvador than Hurricane Mitch did throughout the whole of Central
America. In fact, USAID called the El Salvador earthquakes the worst
disaster in the region in over 50 years, dwarfing the damage done by
Hurricane Mitch.
Yet, in the aftermath of Hurricane Mitch, the United States provided
approximately $621 million in emergency funding and close to $1 billion
when DOD costs were included. That is about 40 percent of the overall
relief contribution. In response to this calamity, we introduced, along
with 26 of my colleagues, the recovery bill to authorize emergency
appropriations of about $350 million in international disaster
assistance for El Salvador. The House and Senate responded by passing
resolutions in support of increased funding for El Salvador.
On March 7 of this year, our beloved late colleague, the gentleman
from

[[Page H4491]]

Massachusetts, Mr. Moakley, led a bipartisan group of 75 Members of
Congress in sending a letter to President Bush asking for a significant
emergency aid package for El Salvador.
On March 21, the House passed House Concurrent Resolution 41 by a
vote of 405 to 1 supporting ``substantially increasing reconstruction
and relief assistance for El Salvador in connection with the
earthquakes.''
But the House Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing
and Related Programs has included a paltry $100 million from existing
programs for El Salvador in this bill. That is certainly better than
the $58 million requested by the administration, and I appreciate the
chairman doing that, but it remains woefully inadequate and certainly
does not substantially increase, as the resolution calls for, the
funding. In fact, it provides just about 5 to 6 percent of what the
country actually needs.
The Salvadoran people have set an example for the entire world with
their impressive transition from authoritarian rule and horrific civil
war, in which 75,000 Salvadorans died, to democracy and peace. Our
nations are closer than ever. The U.S. is El Salvador's largest trading
partner and is an important ally on many fronts, including drug
trafficking.
We invested billions of dollars in Central America during the 1980s
in terms of promoting peace and democracy, but we did it through a
military context. Now, since those peace accords were signed in 1992,
El Salvador has developed a thriving economy and instituted significant
democratic reforms, making it one of the most stable nations in the
region.
How could we let that investment go to rot? Because what is happening
in that country, with such enormous displacement, is to put at risk the
very stability, the very democratic institutions, the very
underpinnings of democracy that we spent billions in Central America
trying to create.
That is not in the national interest of the United States; and it is
not in the national security interests of the United States when we
allow the consequences of what is happening in El Salvador in
immigration, in a variety of health consequences, in a variety of
subjects that we are concerned about, as our neighbors to the south
have those problems, affect us as well.
It is in the national interest of the United States to support the
Pelosi amendment. I do hope that the other side will allow it to be
made in order so this House can have a vote on this most important
issue.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra), and thank him for his
leadership in this fight, as well.
Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentlewoman for yielding
time to me but, more importantly, for her longstanding and abiding
concern and help in areas of Latin America, and for understanding the
issues so well.
I would also like to make sure I recognize the chairman of this
subcommittee from the Committee on Appropriations for his long-standing
work in the area as well.
Mr. Chairman, this is not just help, but it is an investment. This is
a chance to help Salvadorans get on their feet and back to work. It is
a chance to help them rebuild their homes and businesses in El Salvador
and not have them think about going to other places to have those
opportunities to feed the family and have an opportunity to grow.

{time} 1815

Let us help them in their home country.
Remember, El Salvador is a nascent democracy. It is a fragile
democracy that 15, 20 years ago did not exist. Rather than forget it
and let it go back to the old days when they did not have a chance to
let their people make decisions for that country, let us help them get
back on their feet.
Salvadorans are doing their best to get back on their feet, and
Americans of Salvadoran descent are doing their fair share. More than
$1.7 billion on an annual basis goes from Americans of Salvadoran
descent to family members still in El Salvador to try to help them in
their home country of El Salvador. We should be there to help as well.
We can do more; we should do more. This assistance is not a handout;
it is an investment with a partner to say to them we will help you roll
up your sleeves and with your own hands rebuild your country. It is the
right thing to do.
I join my colleague and friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom
Davis), in supporting this request. I know we have limited dollars, but
I believe that the good work of the gentleman from Arizona, who has
been so demonstrative in his efforts to try to help so many people
around the world, and with the good efforts of the gentlewoman from
California we can get this thing done and show the people of El
Salvador we are ready to help them; not with a handout but to let them,
with their own hands, rebuild their country with the good assistance of
a partner like the United States of America.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Farr), a member of the Committee on Appropriations, and
thank him for his leadership on this issue.
Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for
yielding me this time. I want to also thank the chairman of the
committee for inviting me to go to El Salvador right after the
earthquake. As a former Peace Corps volunteer from South America, I was
able to bring some insight into it.
What I learned is more than what I took, and that is that Congress
needs to step up to the plate and do more. And not only Congress needs
to do more. The churches that have done a wonderful job need to do
more; the people-to-people programs need to do more; and the adoptive
city programs that have been so effective in El Salvador need to do
more. We all need to do more because we cannot afford not to make El
Salvador's modernization work. It is a country that has gone through
all the struggles we have watched.
If, indeed, nation building is going to work, peacekeeping is going
to work, microloan programs are going to work, trade policy is going to
work, if indeed the credibility of the United States is going to work,
then we have to step up to that plate and continue to be there in this
incredible disaster.
I was able to visit after Hurricane Mitch in Honduras and in
Venezuela. El Salvador even needs more help than those countries.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I want to thank the chairman for allowing us to have the debate,
because he could have insisted on his point of order at a much earlier
time. I am grateful for that so that our colleagues and those who
follow Congress can know about this important issue.
I do regret, however, that at the end of the day we are not going to
have a respectable package of assistance to El Salvador. When the
emergency supplemental bill came before our committee, which would have
been the vehicle for all of this emergency spending, the representation
that was made to us was that we will revisit this in our bill for the
fiscal year 2002, and that we did less in the supplemental than we
would have liked to have done.
Well, we have come down this road from supplemental to subcommittee
to full committee to the floor, and what we have is a nice contribution
but not a real sign of seriousness of how we take the disaster in El
Salvador. I am very sad because the $100 million that the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) has in the package comes from other disaster
assistance, from the child survival account, from economic support
funds. Why do those important programs, why do the poorest children in
the world have to pay for U.S. assistance to El Salvador?
I visited El Salvador in the 1980s. I saw the military assistance, $6
billion worth, going down there because it was said it was in our
national interest. Well, if El Salvador is an area of concern to the
United States to the tune of $6 billion in the middle 1980s, why can we
not be generous to the tune of $250 million to do our share in helping
the people of El Salvador in this time of need?
Again, I wish the chairman would not insist on his point of order,
and I thank my colleagues for this very serious debate.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time,
before I

[[Page H4492]]

make a point of order, and say to the gentlewoman that I appreciate her
comments and again would say that I am very sympathetic.
The Salvadoran people are wonderful people. I have known many of them
in my own community and had one of them who came as a refugee from
Salvador as an intern working for me and is today one of my very close
friends. They are wonderful people, and they deserve all the help we
can give them; and I hope we will be able to give them support and even
more support than perhaps is in this bill.
But I would note that we do have the $100 million, and while $25
million may come from current assistance accounts, the rest is money
that would be added. So I do think that we are making a good start in
helping El Salvador.

Point of Order

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
make a point of order against the amendment.
I would make a point of order against the amendment because it
proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an
appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The
rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general
appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''
The amendment includes an emergency designation under section 251 of
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 and, as
such, constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.
I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
If no Member wishes to be heard on the point of order, the Chair is
prepared to rule.
The Chair finds this amendment includes an emergency designation
under section 251(b)(2)(a) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985. The amendment, therefore, constitutes legislation
in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.
The point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I rise for some additional comments on the Pelosi
amendment. The recent earthquakes in El Salvador devastated the
country, destroying 175,000 homes, leaving over 1 million people
homeless, leveling schools, community buildings, and demolishing key
components of the country's infrastructure. Although we did include
$100 million, as our chairman has stated, in this bill, the low level
of assistance, especially to a country where we invested billions of
dollars to end conflict and achieve stability, is simply tragic.
I am proud that the United States was able to react to the
devastation quickly. Our relief supplies reached those who needed them
most in a timely manner and earthquake victims appreciate our help. It
is time, my colleagues, to make a larger commitment to helping the
people of El Salvador recover from this natural disaster. We should not
be satisfied with shifting funds around to piece together an assistance
package. We must, in my judgment, make a serious investment in building
infrastructure, constructing permanent housing, reconstructing schools
and clinics and creating jobs.
The United States needs to show leadership in helping El Salvador.
The international community will follow our lead. Our lack of
generosity in this instance has affected and will continue to affect
the willingness of the international community to devote funds to
relief and construction efforts.
The United States has had a strong national security interest in
achieving stability in El Salvador and has demonstrated this interest
in past years with serious investment. It would be unconscionable, in
my judgment, to turn our backs on El Salvador at this critical point
when the future of the country is hanging by a thread.
If we invest in the short- and long-term health of El Salvador now,
we will avoid costly problems later on. If we continue to withhold a
serious commitment of resources, there is no telling what the price
will be in terms of instability and unrest later on. And that is why I
strongly support the Pelosi amendment.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder
of the bill through page 20, line 7 be considered as read, printed in
the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Arizona?
There was no objection.
The text of the bill from page 11, line 13, through page 20, line 7,
is as follows:

transition initiatives

For necessary expenses for international disaster
rehabilitation and reconstruction assistance pursuant to
section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$40,000,000, to remain available until expended, to support
transition to democracy and to long-term development of
countries in crisis: Provided, That such support may include
assistance to develop, strengthen, or preserve democratic
institutions and processes, revitalize basic infrastructure,
and foster the peaceful resolution of conflict: Provided
further, That the United States Agency for International
Development shall submit a report to the Committees on
Appropriations at least 5 days prior to beginning a new
program of assistance.

development credit authority

(including transfer of funds)

For the cost of loan guarantees, up to $12,500,000, as
authorized by sections 108 and 635 of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961: Provided, That such funds shall be derived by
transfer from funds appropriated by this Act to carry out
part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and under the
heading ``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic
States'': Provided further, That such funds shall be made
available only for micro and small enterprise programs and
other programs which further the purposes of part I of the
Act: Provided further, That during fiscal year 2002,
commitments to guarantee loans shall not exceed $177,500,000:
Provided further, That such costs shall be as defined in
section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided
further, That the provisions of section 107A(d) (relating to
general provisions applicable to the Development Credit
Authority) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as
contained in section 306 of H.R. 1486 as reported by the
House Committee on International Relations on May 9, 1997,
shall be applicable to loan guarantees provided under this
heading. In addition, for administrative expenses to carry
out credit programs administered by the United States Agency
for International Development, $7,500,000, all of which may
be transferred to and merged with the appropriation for
Operating Expenses of the Agency for International
Development: Provided further, That funds appropriated under
this heading shall remain available until September 30, 2003.

payment to the foreign service retirement and disability fund

For payment to the ``Foreign Service Retirement and
Disability Fund'', as authorized by the Foreign Service Act
of 1980, $44,880,000.

operating expenses of the united states agency for international
development

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 667, $549,000,000: Provided, That none of the funds
appropriated under this heading may be made available to
finance the construction (including architect and engineering
services), purchase, or long term lease of offices for use by
the United States Agency for International Development,
unless the Administrator has identified such proposed
construction (including architect and engineering services),
purchase, or long term lease of offices in a report submitted
to the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days prior to
the obligation of these funds for such purposes: Provided
further, That the previous proviso shall not apply where the
total cost of construction (including architect and
engineering services), purchase, or long term lease of
offices does not exceed $1,000,000.

operating expenses of the united states agency for international
development office of inspector general

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 667, $30,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2003, which sum shall be available for the Office of the
Inspector General of the United States Agency for
International Development.

Other Bilateral Economic Assistance

economic support fund

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
chapter 4 of part II, $2,199,000,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2003: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $720,000,000
shall be available only for Israel, which sum shall be
available on a grant basis as a cash transfer and shall be
disbursed within 30 days of the enactment of this Act or by
October 31, 2001, whichever is later: Provided further, That
not less than $655,000,000 shall be available only for Egypt,
which sum shall be provided on a grant basis, and of which
sum cash transfer assistance shall be provided with the
understanding that Egypt will undertake significant economic
reforms which are additional to those which were undertaken
in previous fiscal years: Provided further, That in
exercising the authority to provide cash transfer assistance
for Israel, the President shall ensure that the level of such
assistance does not

[[Page H4493]]

cause an adverse impact on the total level of nonmilitary
exports from the United States to such country and that
Israel enters into a side letter agreement in an amount
proportional to the fiscal year 1999 agreement: Provided
further, That not less than $35,000,000 of the funds
appropriated under this heading should be made available for
Lebanon to be used, among other programs, for scholarships
and direct support of the American educational institutions
in Lebanon: Provided further, That not less than $15,000,000
of the funds appropriated under this heading should be made
available for Cyprus to be used only for scholarships,
administrative support of the scholarship program, bicommunal
projects, and measures aimed at reunification of the island
and designed to reduce tensions and promote peace and
cooperation between the two communities on Cyprus: Provided
further, That funds appropriated under this heading may be
used, notwithstanding any other provision of law, to provide
assistance to the National Democratic Alliance of Sudan to
strengthen its ability to protect civilians from attacks,
slave raids, and aerial bombardment by the Sudanese
Government forces and its militia allies, and the provision
of such funds shall be subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: Provided
further, That in the previous proviso, the term
``assistance'' includes non-lethal, non-food aid such as
blankets, medicine, fuel, mobile clinics, water drilling
equipment, communications equipment to notify civilians of
aerial bombardment, non-military vehicles, tents, and shoes.

international fund for ireland

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$25,000,000, which shall be available for the United States
contribution to the International Fund for Ireland and shall
be made available in accordance with the provisions of the
Anglo-Irish Agreement Support Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-
415): Provided, That such amount shall be expended at the
minimum rate necessary to make timely payment for projects
and activities: Provided further, That funds made available
under this heading shall remain available until September 30,
2003.

assistance for eastern europe and the baltic states

(a) For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Support for East
European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989, $600,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2003, which shall be
available, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
assistance and for related programs for Eastern Europe and
the Baltic States: Provided, That funds made available for
assistance for Kosovo from funds appropriated under this
heading and under the headings ``Economic Support Fund'' and
``International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement''
should not exceed 15 percent of the total resources pledged
by all donors for calendar year 2002 for assistance for
Kosovo as of March 31, 2002: Provided further, That none of
the funds made available under this Act for assistance for
Kosovo shall be made available for large scale physical
infrastructure reconstruction.
(b) Funds appropriated under this heading or in prior
appropriations Acts that are or have been made available for
an Enterprise Fund may be deposited by such Fund in interest-
bearing accounts prior to the Fund's disbursement of such
funds for program purposes. The Fund may retain for such
program purposes any interest earned on such deposits without
returning such interest to the Treasury of the United States
and without further appropriation by the Congress. Funds made
available for Enterprise Funds shall be expended at the
minimum rate necessary to make timely payment for projects
and activities.
(c) Funds appropriated under this heading shall be
considered to be economic assistance under the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 for purposes of making available the
administrative authorities contained in that Act for the use
of economic assistance.
(d) With regard to funds appropriated under this heading
for the economic revitalization program in Bosnia and
Herzegovina, and local currencies generated by such funds
(including the conversion of funds appropriated under this
heading into currency used by Bosnia and Herzegovina as local
currency and local currency returned or repaid under such
program) the Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development shall provide written approval for
grants and loans prior to the obligation and expenditure of
funds for such purposes, and prior to the use of funds that
have been returned or repaid to any lending facility or
grantee.
(e) The provisions of section 529 of this Act shall apply
to funds made available under subsection (e) and to funds
appropriated under this heading: Provided, That
notwithstanding any provision of this or any other Act,
including provisions in this subsection regarding the
application of section 529 of this Act, local currencies
generated by, or converted from, funds appropriated by this
Act and by previous appropriations Acts and made available
for the economic revitalization program in Bosnia may be used
in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States to carry out the
provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the
Support for East European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989.
(f) The President is authorized to withhold funds
appropriated under this heading made available for economic
revitalization programs in Bosnia and Herzegovina, if he
determines and certifies to the Committees on Appropriations
that the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina has not
complied with article III of annex 1-A of the General
Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina
concerning the withdrawal of foreign forces, and that
intelligence cooperation on training, investigations, and
related activities between Iranian officials and Bosnian
officials has not been terminated.

assistance for the independent states of the former soviet union

(a) For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
chapters 11 and 12 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 and the FREEDOM Support Act, for assistance for the
Independent States of the former Soviet Union and for related
programs, $768,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2003: Provided, That the provisions of such chapters
shall apply to funds appropriated by this paragraph: Provided
further, That of the funds made available for the Southern
Caucasus region, notwithstanding any other provision of law,
15 percent may be used for confidence-building measures and
other activities in furtherance of the peaceful resolution of
the regional conflicts, especially those in the vicinity of
Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabagh: Provided further, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading, not less than
$1,500,000 should be available only to meet the health and
other assistance needs of victims of trafficking in persons.

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
(b) Of the funds appropriated under this heading, not to
exceed $125,000,000 may be made available for assistance for
Ukraine.

Amendment No. 50 Offered by Ms. Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 50 offered by Ms. Kaptur:
Page 20, beginning on line 8, strike ``not to exceed
$125,000,000 may'' and insert ``not less than $125,000,000
should''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) and a Member opposed each will
control 10 minutes.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition and
to reserve a point of order against the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. A point of order is reserved on the amendment, and the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) will control the time in opposition.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) for 10
minutes.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I rise and wish to present to the committee an amendment that
concerns Ukraine.
The real issue for us here in the House today is whether the United
States should begin walking away from the most strategic country in
Central Europe: Ukraine. My amendment says stay the course with the
democratic forces for reform. It says do not single out Ukraine as the
only nation in the world that will receive a one-third cut from last
year's allocation. My amendment will allow the committee and will allow
this Congress more flexibility as we move towards floor passage and
conference in order to restore the funds that rightfully should go to
democracy building in that new republic.
Let me just say that proposing to reduce assistance for Ukraine comes
at absolutely the wrong time. The third set of parliamentary elections
are about to occur. During the last week of August, Ukraine will
celebrate its 10th year of independence. This kind of ill-advised
action by this Congress is going to give the forces that are against
reform a greater share of authority inside that country. I do not
really think that the gentleman, the chairman of the committee and
other Members that proposed this initially, really want that to happen.
Put it in the context of our own country. It took us 11 years from
the time of the Declaration of Independence to adopt our own
Constitution, 89 years to end slavery at the end of the Civil War, 141
years to give women the right to vote, and 188 years for the adoption
of the civil rights acts of our country. Now, I am not suggesting
Ukraine should take that long. All I am saying is that after 10 years
certain Members may be expecting too much.
Let me also say that other nations, like Russia, are making very
favorable overtures toward Ukraine, particularly with the recent
appointment of former Russian Prime Minister Viktor

[[Page H4494]]

Chernomyrdin as the new Russian Ambassador to Ukraine. America should
be no less interested in Ukraine. Further, the House bill does not even
meet the administration's request of $170 million for Ukraine, and
President Bush and Secretary Powell have both stressed the importance
of this strategic partnership.
Even the wife of the slain journalist Heorhiy Gongadze wrote a letter
to all of us in which she says, ``Do not do this. It would be a
terrible mistake to adopt the House committee version.'' She says,
``Condemn the actions and inactions of the Ukrainian executive power
when appropriate, demand open and honest investigations, seek the truth
about my husband's murder, and cut off funding or restrict it, if you
deem it necessary, but please do not reduce the aid to Ukraine that is
so important in the building of a normal Democratic society.'' I will
insert her full letter in the Record.
This September, we are going to have the first Rada-Congressional
exchange to try to more completely work together as legislative bodies
in our respective communities, to try to help to integrate Ukraine more
fully into the world community.

{time} 1830

Do I think everything is rosy in Ukraine? I would be the first to say
no. Much more remains to be done on nuclear safety.
I wish to insert in the Record two letters. One from our U.S.
Department of Energy and one from the Ukrainian Ambassador to the
United States talking about the serious nuclear safety issues that
still remain and need to be addressed in Ukraine.
We need full investigations into the suspicious deaths of independent
journalists. We need an independent and free press and media and allow
them to develop and help them to develop in that country. We need to
urge Ukraine to create a judicial system and rule of law that yields
justice. We need to ensure human rights and free speech to help advance
that country toward a more open free market economy with reliable and
transparent credit institutions, and we need to help them complete land
title reform and agricultural transition to a privatized system of
production.
The report that accompanies the bill is also inadequate. I am going
to also insert into the Record tonight more complete language that
should be in the report that urges Ukraine toward these types of
reforms.
But let me remind our colleagues, Ukraine has had major
accomplishments over the last decade. It has, at our request,
completely dismantled its nuclear weapons. It has worked to become and
wishes to be part of the full union of European and western states.
Ukraine refused to sell turbines to Iran giving up an economic sale in
excess of over $100 million.
The current President of the Ukraine personally invited Pope John
Paul II for an historic visit with Ukraine. I might say to the chairman
of the full subcommittee, with all due respect, last week you spoke
eloquently of not isolating China and you voted on behalf of opening
China up. I can tell you China arrests Catholic bishops. She would not
invite the Pope into that country. In fact, she ordains phony bishops.
So I would say do not treat Ukraine in a manner any worse than you
would treat China.
If you look at Ukraine, she has a growing middle class. It has grown
at over 6 percent this last year. Industrial production is up by a
fifth. Land privatization is occurring. Small businesses are up by 40
percent. Small bank accounts have started. In fact, and this is really
important for our colleagues to understand, almost all of the U.S.
assistance to Ukraine does not go to the government. In fact, it goes
to help the development of the very organizations that are working for
all the good causes I have just talked about: small business
development, exchange programs, support for independent media,
municipal development, nuclear clean up; all these very, very worthy
causes.
So in offering this amendment today it was my hope to put some of
this on the Record. It is my hope that as this bill moves toward full
passage and over to the Senate that we might get some perfecting
language that would not single out Ukraine for this type of harsh
treatment by the people of the United States.
In fact, our hope is that this discussion today and the chairman's
willingness to allow us to talk about this in giving us some time on
the floor will help to give us a meeting of minds so that we can, in
fact, perfect the House language and help Ukraine move herself into the
company of the free nations of the world.
Department of Energy,

National Nuclear Security Administration,

Washington, DC, July 23, 2001.
Ambassador William B. Taylor, Jr.,
Coordinator of U.S. Assistance to the NIS, U.S. Department of
State, Washington, DC
Dear Ambassador Taylor: We understand that the House
Committee on Appropriations report on foreign operations
limits Ukraine assistance in 2002 to $125 million, based
partly on the completion of major nuclear safety projects.
The International Nuclear Safety Program has completed the
safety parameter display system project, the simulator
project, and the Chernobyl Replacement Heat Plant project.
However, additional nuclear safety work is needed in Ukraine.
Projects that are not yet complete include: simulator and
operator training; completion of in-depth safety assessments;
physical security upgrades; nondestructive examination
improvements; operational safety improvement's; emergency
cooling reliability upgrades; plant computer upgrades; and
nuclear fuel qualification.
I recently returned from a visit to Ukraine for
commissioning of the Chernobyl replacement heat plant and for
reviewing State/AID supported projects at the Khmelnytskyy
nuclear power plant. I saw impressive progress due to State/
AID assistance at both locations. The Ukraine safety program
is at a pivotal stage. On the one hand, clear improvements to
safety and operations are evident and documented. However, an
enduring safety culture has not taken hold and important
projects remain to be completed which Ukraine is currently
unable to provide for itself. Until that safety culture is
firmly established, cutbacks may endanger the progress made
to date, e.g., they may drive Ukraine to seek help from
Russia in some areas.
We plan to complete nuclear safety improvements at reactors
in the countries of the former Soviet Union by 2006. A
reduction in funding would prevent current projects from
being completed, and reduce the sustainability of the already
completed projects. We hope you will support this important
work at the same level as last year. We look forward to
continuing to work with you.
Sincerely,
James M. Turner,
Assistant Deputy Administrator.
____

Embassy of Ukraine,

July 17, 2001.

Re Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill--Assistance for
Ukraine.

Hon. Jim Kolbe,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Foreign Operations Appropriations,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Kolbe: This letter is written to express my alarm
about the level of funds provided for assistance to Ukraine
in the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill. I am the widow
of Georgiy Gongadze, the Ukrainian journalist whose brutal,
unsolved murder has received so much international attention
and which led to my seeking refuge in America. As I
understand it, the House Appropriations Committee reduced the
President's recommendation for aid to Ukraine by $44 million.
I think this is a terrible mistake. Furthermore the
Committee's proposal indirectly refers to my husband's murder
to justify their reduction.
If Congress uses my husband's murder as justification to
reduce U.S. aid to Ukraine, this will send absolutely the
wrong message to those honorable people who are still working
(and with whom I worked) so hard to build a democratic
nation. Conversely, such an approach will play into the hands
of the anti-reformists who seek to thwart democracy and
benefit from the perpetuation of the corrupt legacy of the
Soviet system. My husband sought the development of a free
and independent media, of non-governmental and of local
organizations to build a civil society in Ukraine--these
entities are the ones that desperately need America's help.
The assistance provided in your bill goes to such programs to
help the very people who need and should have American money
and counsel, good people who will be isolated and alone
without U.S. support. As a lawyer who worked with such
groups, I know that American assistance is the lifeblood of
these programs--and it is here where the seeds of democracy
must be sown.
I am sure that we share very serious concerns about the
direction and actions of the Executive branch of Ukraine.
However, please do not let these concerns keep the United
States from providing the level of aid needed by those that
are making a real and valuable difference, especially at the
grass roots level. Condemn the actions and inactions of the
Ukrainian executive power when appropriate, demand open and
honest investigations, seek the truth about my husband's
murder and cut off funding or restrict it if you deem
necessary, but please--do not reduce the aid to Ukraine that
is so important in the building of a normal, democratic
society.

[[Page H4495]]

Thank you for your time and consideration of my concerns.
Respectfully,
Myroslava Gongadze.
____

Embassy of Ukraine,

Washington, DC, July 9, 2001.
Hon. Marcy Kaptur,
The House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Congresswoman Kaptur, I wish to address you on a
matter of urgency for the country and people I represent as
Ambassador here in Washington.
I was informed that a few days ago the Appropriations
Subcommittee on Foreign Operations approved a draft Foreign
Operations Bill that instituted a cap of $125 million of
technical assistance to be made available for Ukraine next
fiscal year, thus reducing by $44 million the amount
requested for my country by the US Administration.
The draft Committee's Report advances three reasons for
this reduction: ``the completion of a long term projects in
nuclear safety, the continuing setbacks to needed reform, and
the unresolved deaths of prominent dissidents and journalists
in Ukraine''.
I believe that both Subcommittee's recommendation and its
substantiation would be quite different if all the relevant
facts were taken into consideration.
Of particular concern to all Ukrainians would be the
message that ``projects in nuclear safety have been
completed''. Ukraine just a few months ago marked that 15th
anniversary of the Chernoby meltdown and mourned its
countless victims. Disastrous effects of that tragedy are
still having tremendous negative impact on everyday life of
millions in Ukraine--diverting close to 10% of the GDP for
programs to alleviate the damage from this horrific calamity.
The message that the United States considers its involvement
in upgrading nuclear safety of the existing nuclear reactors
in Ukraine as ``completed'' would only exacerbate deeply felt
sense of so many Ukrainians that we have been abandoned by
the international community to deal single-handedly with the
problem of a global magnitude.
As to ``continuing setbacks to needed reform'', it is clear
that we could have done better in the past. On the other
hand, the country has demonstrated spectacular sustained
economic growth over the last 18 months while being fully
dependent on imports of gas and oil and getting no assistance
from the international financial institutions. It is rather
difficult to imagine how this could have been achieved
without reforms finally starting to produce the positive
effects on the economy.
As for the last reasoning of the Subcommittee
recommendation, let me unequivocally state that the
disappearance of journalist Heorhiy Gongadze is considered in
Ukraine not only as a terrible human tragedy but also as a
case that needs to be fully investigated in a manner that
would leave no doubt as to its circumstances and culprits. We
value assistance provided by the FBI to the Ukrainian law
enforcement agencies in the investigation and hope that this
cooperation will help resolve the case in the near future.
This August Ukraine marks 10th Anniversary of our
independence. After hundreds of years of oppression,
unimaginable sufferings and millions of deaths the Ukrainian
people will be celebrating our first decade of freedom. This
will be the time for festivities but also for deep
reflections on our past, present and future. This will also
be the time when Ukrainians will remember the crucial role of
the United States in helping us achieve this long sought and
hard earned freedom. When Ukraine was under Soviet dominance
the United States Congress created a strong bond between the
Ukrainian and American peoples by adopting each year
resolutions demanding freedom for captive nations. Ten years
after this freedom had become reality this bond could and
should be reinforced by continuous assistance provided by the
Congress directly to the Ukrainian people.
I rely on your deep knowledge and understanding of the
crushing problems a newly independent state has to overcome
and your vision of Ukraine's future as a democratic and
prosperous member of Western community of nations, that you
have shared with me, in helping to provide next fiscal year
adequate funds for effective and meaningful technical
assistance to the People of Ukraine.
Sincerely,
Kostyantyn Gryshchenko,
Ambassador.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I will be brief on this as I reserve my point of order
on this.
I would just like to respond to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms.
Kaptur) and the comments she has made. I understand how strongly she
feels about this issue. I also feel strongly about the people of the
Ukraine and their rights to have a free and an open society.
Mr. Chairman, this bill does not signal an abandonment of Ukraine.
Let me note that we have $125 million in the bill for the Ukraine. Is
that down? Yes, it is down. Last year was $170 million; before that it
was $225 million. Nonetheless, at $125 million we are two and a half
times the amount that we have in the bill for India, a country of a
billion people. So the $125 million that we are spending on this one
country, we hope this newly emerging democracy in Central Europe, is
certainly not pocket change.
As the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) knows, the Ukraine is a
struggling new republic. I am quoting here from her own letter, ``a
struggling new republic riddled with corruption, lacking a robust
justice system and crawling its way to an open society. There are
horrendous abuses there.''
Those are her words from her own dear colleague letter.
After 10 years and after spending more than $1 billion in U.S.
taxpayers money in aid to the Ukraine, this subcommittee, this
committee has decided to send a strong message to the government of the
Ukraine, and that is that our admiration for the long suffering and
freedom loving people of the Ukraine does not excuse the abysmal
failures that we have seen demonstrated over and over again by its
government. Most recently, as the gentlewoman has referred to the
letter from the widow of the person murdered in that horrible and
tragic murder of a journalist in the Ukraine, one that remains unsolved
these weeks later with not much prospect that we are going to see a
resolution of it.
Mr. Chairman, I would say when we go to conference that the House
position on aid to the Ukraine is going to hinge on what happens in
Kiev between now and then. It does not hinge on perfecting language
here on the floor of the House of Representatives. It hinges on actions
by the government of the Ukraine. If that happens, we will certainly,
in the conference committee, be able to make changes to the amount of
aid that we make available to that country. But until then I think
clearly we were sending the right message.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Smith).
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of
the Kaptur amendment which would create a floor rather than a ceiling
for the level of funding to the U.S. assistance to the Ukraine. The
level of funding provided for assistance to Ukraine, as has been
pointed out, $125 million, is not insignificant. However, it does
represent a precipitous $44 million reduction from last year, the 2001
level of $169 million.
I share the concerns about some of the recent developments in the
Ukraine which are raised in the report language, including the
unresolved deaths of Ukrainian journalists. In fact, I was the first
Member to express concerns about murdered journalist Georgiy Gongadze
following his disappearance last September.
In May, the Helsinki Commission, which I co-chair, held a hearing
devoted exclusively to the situation in Ukraine. Clearly the downward
trends and negative developments in Ukraine were enumerated, and the
leadership of Ukraine were strongly encouraged to demonstrate in word,
and as the chairman pointed out, in deed as well, greater respect for
human rights and the rule of law.
Mr. Chairman, 2 weeks ago I co-chaired the U.S. delegation to the
OSCE Parliamentary Assembly in Paris. One of the most moving and most
powerful moments of that entire meeting was Mrs. Gongadze's acceptance
of the OSCE Prize for Journalism and Democracy on behalf of her
murdered husband. And as the gentlewoman pointed out, she has called on
this body not to cut this funding.
While we were troubled by the developments in the Ukraine, including
the situation of the media and the April ouster of Ukraine's reformist
Prime Minister, we cannot deny the positive developments either. These
include for the first time in over a decade strong economic growth,
continued good relations with her neighbors, and a cooperative
partnership with the West, especially the United States.
Now is not the time to cut assistance. Ukraine still has tremendous
needs. For example, the Chernobyl

[[Page H4496]]

power plant was shut down last December, but the consequences of that
nuclear disaster still leaves an indelible mark on the Ukrainian
nation.
They need continued assistance in overcoming this devastating legacy,
especially its toll in cancer and other serious illnesses. Ukraine's
weak medical infrastructure still faces considerable challenges, such
as the growing AIDS problem. As the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur)
pointed out, very little of our assistance benefits directly the
Ukrainian government. Instead, it goes to programs that help NGOs and
the independent media or municipal and small business development.
With the parliamentary elections approaching next March, NGOs,
political parties and reform-oriented local governments working to
strengthen democracy in Ukraine need our support, as does the
independent media.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, in his address at Warsaw University during his
visit to Poland last month, President Bush stated, ``The Europe we are
building must include Ukraine, a nation struggling with the trauma of
transition. Some in Kiev speak of their country's European destiny. If
this is their aspiration, we should reward it.''
Mr. Chairman, I hope the gentlewoman's amendment is adopted as this
work-in-progress makes its way through the House and conference.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Schaffer).
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Schaffer).
Mr. SCHAFFER. Mr. Chairman, Ukraine has demonstrated a consistent
willingness to develop a robust friendship and mutually beneficial
partnership with the United States.
At our request, Ukraine has abolished the third largest nuclear
arsenal in the world and has maintained a consistent nonproliferation
policy ever since. I might add that in some cases this has been done at
considerable fiscal detriment to Ukraine. The refusal of aid to Iran in
their nuclear program is one such program that warrants our praise and
appreciation.
Ukraine has successfully and peacefully negotiated border treaties
with all of its neighboring countries and has maintained a distinctive
partnership with NATO. Ukraine has made significant contributions to
regional and international peace and stability through its
participation in NATO-led peacekeeping missions.
The economic growth of Ukraine is integral to its development as a
democracy. Without Ukraine's stable government and infrastructure, the
hope of further Democratic reforms will fade because a government
preoccupied with its own survival cannot guarantee even basic rights
for its citizens.
There are members of government in Ukraine, hard-line Communists, who
would like to see Ukraine return to the days before Ukraine's
independence. It has been a consistent struggle for Ukraine to come so
far, and I think, frankly, the timing of the cut proposed in the bill
here could not be worse. In my estimation, it will unwittingly empower
the antireformists and stall the progress for years which have been
made.
Ukraine, on August 24, will celebrate its 10th anniversary of
independence. The Ukrainian people will mark their first 10-year
anniversary of freedom after hundreds of years of oppression. This is a
monumental achievement and should be welcomed and praised. While I
understand the concerns that were raised by the committee and do not
wish to minimize them, there are very, very many positive achievements
in Ukraine that have been achieved with the support and assistance of
this Congress.
Mr. Chairman, I hope that we can stand behind those positive reforms
and see them sustained. I would ask the gentleman's assistance as this
process moves forward in achieving that.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) has \1/2\ minute
remaining. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) has 4 minutes
remaining.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield \1/2\ minute to myself.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the Kaptur-Schaffer
amendment and to maintain levels of funding for Ukraine. Help Ukraine
move toward reform, especially in memory of the slain journalists. Many
of those independent journalists would want us to help their cause
inside Ukraine. Do not walk away from her now.
Mr. Chairman, I want to also express my great appreciation to the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), the chairman of the subcommittee,
for allowing this discussion to ensue this afternoon, for the serious
manner with which he has dealt with those who do not share his
position, and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) for her
graciousness as we move this amendment forward.

{time} 1845

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I wanted to extend my congratulations to the gentlewoman for her
strong support of the people of Ukraine. I know of her work as the
ranking member of the Subcommittee on Agriculture in providing
technology and assistance to the good people, understanding that by
giving them the tools and giving them the skills they can help
themselves to a strong democracy.
I just want to assure the gentlewoman that I support maintaining a
robust assistance program in Ukraine. Our aid helps build democracy,
strengthens local government, encourages a free press and builds a
stable and prosperous society. The current situation in Ukraine
dictates that we maintain support for those in Ukrainian society who
seek democracy, freedom and stability.
Again, I want to thank her for her important work. I know that we
will continue to work together.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, before I yield back my time, continuing to
reserve my point of order, I would just like to say I also thank the
gentlewoman from Ohio and the gentleman from Colorado for their
contributions not only to this debate but to the ongoing work that both
of them and other Members of the House of Representatives have done to
help support the people of the Ukraine.
I think there is no doubt, Mr. Chairman, that we have a common
objective. We all want to make sure that the Ukrainian people have
their opportunity to have a democracy, to have their voices heard in
their country. They want to have freedom. They want to have the same
rights that Americans have and that other peoples around the world
have. We have no disagreement with that. We have no disagreement among
ourselves about the objectives. There are sometimes differences over
how we achieve that objective. Sometimes it is carrot, and sometimes it
is a stick. Sometimes we do not always agree on which is the right time
to administer either the carrot or the stick, and we may have that
disagreement here, but we do not have any disagreement over the
objectives that we are trying to achieve for the Ukraine.
I will certainly pledge to continue to work with the gentlewoman from
Ohio on making sure that everything that we do in our subcommittee is
designed to help promote democracy and a civil society in the Ukraine.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Point of Order

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes
legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of
rule XXI.
That rule states, in pertinent part, ``an amendment to a general
appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''
The amendment gives affirmative direction, in effect.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment does do that and therefore, I believe,
is not in order.
I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
The Chair finds that this amendment includes language imparting
direction.
The amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of
clause 2 of rule XXI.
The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is not in order.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word for the
purpose of entering into a colloquy with the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Miller).

[[Page H4497]]

I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Chairman, today I had planned to offer an
amendment to the Foreign Operations bill that would allow aid to only
be given to countries who have extradition treaties with the United
States.
Mr. Chairman, I will not be offering that amendment today, but I
would like to take this opportunity to discuss the importance of
placing international extradition treaties higher on our foreign policy
priority list. Will the committee agree that this is a pressing issue
that needs to be addressed?
Mr. KOLBE. Yes, I would say that the current process of extradition
certainly is a very troubled one and needs to be reformed.
Mr. MILLER of Florida. This past week Ira Einhorn was finally
extradited from France. While this is a notable victory, the
extradition came only after several years of legal maneuvering and
political posturing by Einhorn and the government of France. The
Pennsylvania legislature actually had to pass a new law in order for
the French to agree to the extradition. Four long years after the first
request and 24 years after the murder of Holly Maddux, justice has
finally been served. I know that Holly's family is more than relieved
to have their sister's killer behind bars, but had they not had the
financial resources to continue their pursuit of justice for 24 years,
he may never have been returned.
Whether or not a country approves of the U.S. system of justice
should not be a factor in the decision to return a convicted killer to
the United States. For those countries receiving foreign aid, that
point could not be more valid. I cross-referenced the list of nations
who would receive aid in this year's Foreign Operations bill with the
list of countries who do not have extradition treaties. The result was
a distressing 65 countries. That means that the United States taxpayer
dollar goes to 65 countries who have not taken the time to negotiate a
treaty with the United States on extraditing violent criminals. That is
unacceptable. The problem needs to be addressed.
An extradition treaty is not a matter of rocket science. It is a
document typically no longer than a few pages that establishes an
agreement of cooperation in returning criminals.
The blame cannot be placed entirely on these countries. Our own
Department of State needs to make negotiating extradition treaties a
higher priority. Some of these nations are willing to come to the table
and work with us, but the United States must also be willing to put
forth the effort needed to get the job done. It is a mutually shared
responsibility that we have put off for far too long.
For every Ira Einhorn there is another 3,000 cases that remain open.
Families of these victims need closure. It is not right for the U.S. to
willingly support countries who spit in the face of our system of
justice.
Last Thursday, I introduced legislation that would reform
international extradition. H.R. 2574 would put uncooperative nations on
notice. This bill gives teeth to the Departments of State and Justice
in requesting that a criminal be extradited. Right now, all we can say
is ``please,'' and most of the time that is insufficient.
H.R. 2574 would require the Department of State to submit a country
by country report on outstanding extradition cases. The President would
then, based on that report, submit to Congress a list of uncooperative
countries. Those nations would then face the threat of sanctions,
including a loss of U.S. foreign aid, refusal of visas to government
officials visiting the U.S., and U.S. votes against the country in any
international financial institution.
Mr. Chairman, I hope the gentleman can help with this in the future.
Mr. KOLBE. Reclaiming my time, the gentleman from Florida has
certainly been a leader on this issue. I appreciate his calling this
matter to our attention and highlighting it today. I look forward to
working with him on ways that we can improve our extradition laws and
will be sure to discuss this topic with any of the countries that come
before our committee or approach me on receiving aid.
Mr. MILLER of Florida. I thank the gentleman. I hope we can get the
Department of State to put this at a higher priority and we can
continue to push this issue.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder
of the bill through page 25, line 2, be considered as read, printed in
the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Arizona?
There was no objection.
The text of the bill from page 20, line 11, through page 25, line 2,
is as follows:
(c) Of the funds appropriated under this title, not less
than $82,500,000 should be made available for assistance for
Georgia.
(d) Of the funds appropriated under this title, not less
than $82,500,000 should be made available for assistance for
Armenia.
(e) Section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act shall not apply
to--
(1) activities to support democracy or assistance under
title V of the FREEDOM Support Act and section 1424 of Public
Law 104-201;
(2) any assistance provided by the Trade and Development
Agency under section 661 of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 (22 U.S.C. 2421);
(3) any activity carried out by a member of the United
States and Foreign Commercial Service while acting within his
or her official capacity;
(4) any insurance, reinsurance, guarantee, or other
assistance provided by the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation under title IV of chapter 2 of part I of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2191 et seq.);
(5) any financing provided under the Export-Import Bank Act
of 1945; or
(6) humanitarian assistance.
(f) Not more than 30 percent of the funds appropriated
under this heading may be made available for assistance for
any country in the region. Activities authorized under title
V (nonproliferation and disarmament programs and activities)
of the FREEDOM Support Act shall not be counted against the
30 percent limitation.
(g)(1) Of the funds appropriated under this heading that
are allocated for assistance for the Government of the
Russian Federation, 60 percent shall be withheld from
obligation until the President determines and certifies in
writing to the Committees on Appropriations that the
Government of the Russian Federation:
(A) has terminated implementation of arrangements to
provide Iran with technical expertise, training, technology,
or equipment necessary to develop a nuclear reactor, related
nuclear research facilities or programs, or ballistic missile
capability; and
(B) is providing full access to international non-
government organizations providing humanitarian relief to
refugees and internally displaced persons in Chechnya.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
(A) assistance to combat infectious diseases or assistance
for victims of trafficking in persons; and
(B) activities authorized under title V (Nonproliferation
and Disarmament Programs and Activities) of the FREEDOM
Support Act.
(h) Of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less
than $45,000,000 should be made available, in addition to
funds otherwise available for such purposes, for assistance
for child survival, environmental and reproductive health,
and to combat infectious diseases, and for related
activities.

Independent Agencies

inter-american foundation

For expenses necessary to carry out the functions of the
Inter-American Foundation in accordance with the provisions
of section 401 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1969, and to
make commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations,
as provided by 31 U.S.C. 9104(b)(3), $12,000,000.

african development foundation

For expenses necessary to carry out title V of the
International Security and Development Cooperation Act of
1980, Public Law 96-533, and to make commitments without
regard to fiscal year limitations, as provided by 31 U.S.C.
9104(b)(3), $16,042,000: Provided, That funds made available
to grantees may be invested pending expenditure for project
purposes when authorized by the President of the Foundation:
Provided further, That interest earned shall be used only for
the purposes for which the grant was made: Provided further,
That this authority applies to interest earned both prior to
and following enactment of this provision: Provided further,
That notwithstanding section 505(a)(2) of the African
Development Foundation Act, in exceptional circumstances the
board of directors of the Foundation may waive the $250,000
limitation contained in that section with respect to a
project: Provided further, That the Foundation shall provide
a report to the Committees on Appropriations after each time
such waiver authority is exercised.

peace corps

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
Peace Corps Act (75 Stat. 612), $275,000,000, including the
purchase of not to exceed five passenger motor vehicles for
administrative purposes for use outside of the United States:
Provided, That none of the funds appropriated under this
heading shall be used to pay for abortions: Provided further,
That funds appropriated under this heading shall remain
available until September 30, 2003.

[[Page H4498]]

Department of State

international narcotics control and law enforcement

For necessary expenses to carry out section 481 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $217,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That any funds made
available under this heading for anti-crime programs and
activities shall be made available subject to the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations:
Provided further, That during fiscal year 2002, the
Department of State may also use the authority of section 608
of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, without regard to its
restrictions, to receive excess property from an agency of
the United States Government for the purpose of providing it
to a foreign country under chapter 8 of part I of that Act
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading, not more than
$16,660,000 may be available for administrative expenses.

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

andean counterdrug initiative

For necessary expenses to carry out section 481 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 solely to support counterdrug
activities in the Andean region of South America,
$676,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That these funds are in addition to amounts otherwise
available for such purposes and are available without regard
to section 3204(b)(1)(B) of Public Law 106-246: Provided
further, That section 482(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 shall not apply to funds appropriated under this
heading: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated
under this heading, not more than $14,240,000 may be for
administrative expenses.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Conyers

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Conyers:
Page 25, line 8, strike ``these'' and all that follows
through the colon on line 13, and insert: section 3204(b) of
Public Law 106-246 is amended by adding a new subsection
(b)(3) as follows:
``(3) Further exception.--Notwithstanding paragraph (2),
the limitation contained in paragraph (1)(B) may be waived
(i) if the President certifies to the appropriate committees
of the Congress that the aggregate ceiling of 800 United
States personnel contained in paragraph (1) will not be
exceeded by such waiver, and (ii) if Congress is informed of
the extent to which the limitation under paragraph (1)(B) is
exceeded by such certification.'': Provided further, That
section 482(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 shall
not apply to funds appropriated under this heading for
assistance for Colombia: Provided further, That assistance
provided with funds appropriated under this heading that is
made available notwithstanding section 482(b) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, shall be made available
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations:

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and a Member opposed each will
control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this is a very critical discussion that we are about to
enter into involving the Andean Regional Initiative. When Plan Colombia
was passed in the appropriations bill last year, Congress assured the
public that we would not be getting into Colombia's 37-year-old civil
war and there would be no mission creep. The goal of assistance to
Colombia was to support counterdrug activities. Safeguards were put
into Plan Colombia to prevent an escalation of U.S. involvement without
congressional oversight, which included a 500-person U.S. military cap
and a 300-person U.S. civilian contractor cap. Civilian contractors are
those many ex-military people who work closely with the military
although they are civilians.
Now, while the appropriations bill before us maintains the 500-person
cap on military, it lifts the 300-person civilian contractor cap for
Colombia under the Andean Regional Initiative. The current language
would permit unlimited increases of U.S. civilian contractors without
notifying Congress.
Now, thanks to so many people here on the committee, I have new
admiration for the ranking member, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Obey), and all of my friends on the other side, but particularly the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) and the gentlewoman from
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky). We have reached an agreement. This amendment
that we now have before us is an amendment in place of amendments 9 and
10 which creates safeguards against an unlimited increase in civilian
contractors without congressional notification. The agreement reached
would maintain an aggregate ceiling of 800 United States personnel in
Colombia which consists of a 500-person cap on U.S. military personnel
and 300 on U.S. civilian contractors.
Mr. Chairman, let me just give my colleagues the operative problem
that we are working under. Ninety percent of the cocaine and 60 percent
of the heroin that reaches the United States is produced in Colombia,
and so this is very critical. We have several forces working down
there. Besides the U.S. military, we have the Colombian military.
Beside three rebel organizations, we have a reactionary paramilitary in
Colombia which, once we get the Colombian army to lighten up, then we
have the paramilitary coming in doing even more damage than the
Colombian army was doing. And then we have our own private civilian
contractors doing God knows what under the loose arrangements that we
have.
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman
from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, let me thank my colleague from Michigan
for his leadership on this issue and actually my other colleague from
Michigan for his great leadership on this issue as well. I want to make
sure that every Member understands the importance of this amendment.
The current law now limits the use of military personnel in Colombia
to 500 people and civilian personnel to 300. In order to increase that
number of civilian contract personnel, the President must first report
to Congress and Congress would have to approve by passing a joint
resolution. That is the current law right now.
The bill that then was before us without explanation would have
revoked Congress' oversight authority entirely on this subject. But
fortunately now we have the Conyers-Hoekstra-Schakowsky amendment that
has been agreed to, a unanimous-consent amendment, that would restore
the aggregate limit of 800 personnel in Colombia, that would maintain
the 500 personnel cap for U.S. military and that would allow an
increase of the 300 U.S. civilian contractors but only to the extent
that the 500-person military cap has not been reached.

{time} 1900

Fortunately, this amendment still requires that a report be made,
that Congress be informed if we are going to go beyond the 300.
My concern with the increase in contract personnel has been expressed
many times. We all learned with dismay that two American civilians,
Veronica Bowers and her infant daughter, Charity, were killed when the
missionary plane they were in was shot down over Peru. What was even
more shocking was that it became clear that the plane was first
identified as suspicious by U.S. civilians working under contract for
the CIA.
With all the shock and sadness came a lot of questions; but
unfortunately, the CIA, the Department of State, and the private firms
involved have not come forward to provide any answers. We also know
that employees of these firms have been involved in gun battles in
Colombia, some contract employees have died. I have recently found out
that we are still employing one of the private firms implicated in the
Iran Contra scandal. To me, it is clear we should not be employing
private companies to carry out military activities in Colombia at all
on behalf of the United States.
But this is not a debate about the use of contractors. Whether or not
Members agree on the need for private military contractors or
contractors to carry out other duties, Congress must maintain oversight
responsibility and a limit for this very important aspect of U.S.
policy.
I thank the sponsor of this amendment for maintaining those aspects
of oversight and limitations.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) seek to
control the time in opposition?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I seek to control the time in opposition. I
will take a page out of the book of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Obey) and

[[Page H4499]]

say at the moment I am opposed to the amendment, and will claim the
time in opposition to it.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) is recognized
for 20 minutes.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I do not expect to be in opposition to this amendment
at the close of the time. I think it is important to take time to talk
about this, because I think, frankly, there has been a lot of
misinformation about this issue. I want to thank the gentleman from
Michigan and the gentlewoman from Illinois for their efforts to work
with us to find what I think is a reasonable compromise, which I will
come back to very shortly here in talking about it.
There are two issues that are involved in this amendment. One is the
cap on civilian contractors. That is section 3204(b)(1)(B) of public
law 106-246. It refers to the cap on the number of civilian contractors
that is a part of Plan Colombia funding that was enacted in the
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill in fiscal year 2000.
As part of the Plan Colombia supplemental, we put a cap both on
military personnel and on civilian personnel. We did not want to get
into another Vietnam. We wanted to try to avoid that, so this cap was
placed specifically on there for that purpose. It was placed at a level
of 500 persons on the military side and 300 on the civilian side.
The military personnel cap has not and is not an issue at all with
this committee. We are not close to that, and there are no indications
that we would ever reach that amount. The gentleman's amendment would
combine the two caps, so the total number of personnel, military and
civilian, cannot exceed 800.
Now, why is that important, that we give this greater flexibility by
combining those two and making the total number of contractors in
Colombia 800? The civilian contractors include those that are
associated, of course, with the Department of Defense; but it also
includes those that are in the State Department, the Agency for
International Development, and the Departments of Justice, Commerce,
Treasury and Customs.
The cap applies to all, and I want to repeat that, all U.S.
contractors in Colombia. It also includes the search-and-rescue teams
for U.S. spray planes. It includes the NGOs helping to improve civil
society, including guaranteeing human rights for Colombians and
assisting internally displaced persons.
Let me also point out I have been very disappointed in the pace of
implementation of the alternative development plans in Colombia. I have
been vocal about my concerns, and in our report we address this very
specifically I think with some pretty strong language about the
economic development and economic assistance side of the Plan Colombia
and moving that forward. Less than 5 percent of the funds for judicial
reform have been obligated, let alone spent. Less than 5 percent of the
funds at USAID have been spent.
While I am extremely disappointed with the pace they have had, it is
relevant to note those figures here now, because we do expect that to
pick up very dramatically in the months ahead. We believe those funds
are going to begin to flow here in the remainder of this fiscal year,
and certainly in the beginning of the new fiscal year. These funds will
be contracted out to the same civilian contractors that are limited in
number by the cap.
Now, the civilian cap of 300 has not been approached to date. As of
May 15, the number of civilian contractors in Colombia totalled 171.
The number of civilian contractors has also remained steady for about
the last 6 months. But with the delivery of the Blackhawk helicopters,
and the first of them arrived this month, and the alternative
development that is finally beginning to get going as we have been
prodding USAID to get moving with that, the number of contractors
in Colombia could very easily come close to or could exceed the number
of 300 in fiscal year 2002.

For example, deliveries late this year and early next year of 12 new
spray planes will require the use of civilian contractors for training
and logistical assistance. Contractor support is also required in
connection with the delivery of the Blackhawk and the Huey II
helicopters in the next year. These are very complicated machinery; and
they require a great deal of material and assistance, support, and
personnel support, to maintain.
So I think that it is very likely that we could find ourselves
bumping up against this cap just when we are talking about the
maintenance personnel on the aircraft programs we have down there, not
including anything we are trying to do in the civil society, in the
justice programs and the other AID programs. So I think that it is very
important that we give greater flexibility.
I am interested in seeing this work. I know there is disagreement
about the Andean Initiative; but I think all of us, if we are going to
spend the money, want to see it have some success. We cannot do that if
we do not have the personnel there.
I again thank the gentleman for agreeing to this amendment to give
this flexibility. I think the gentleman's amendment does give the
flexibility that we need to give to the administration.
If I might, Mr. Chairman, let me take another minute to talk about
the other issue, and that is the one where the gentleman from Michigan
references section 482(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act. This is the
one that prohibits the use of funds to buy arms except for arming of
anti-narcotics aircraft, U.S. personnel or U.S. contractors.
Let me state this very clearly: our inclusion in the bill of a waiver
of this provision, is not, repeat, not, a change in U.S. policy. There
are no secrets that are being kept here. This same provision was in the
legislation that was requested by the Clinton administration; it was in
the law, the bill, that we passed in 2000, the supplemental
appropriation legislation; it was requested again by the Bush
administration this year; and it is included again by the subcommittee
and the committee this year when we did our report.
So the provision is needed again by the administration in order to
train Colombian army counternarcotics battalions that support and
protect the eradication efforts. The exceptions provided in this
section do not allow for this, and thus a waiver is needed again this
year.
When Plan Colombia was introduced last year, a key to the Clinton
administration proposal was the training and equipping of three
Colombian counternarcotics battalions. The section 482(b) waiver was
needed by the administration to complete these goals.
Of the $1.3 billion appropriated for Plan Colombia, $6 million was
used to equip the battalions with guns and ammunition, less than \1/2\
of 1 percent of the total funds provided for Plan Colombia.
So let me say one more time, the inclusion of this provision is not a
change in policy. We have seen the waiver as a part of the law for over
a year, and we have heard of no abuses of the authority in it. The
success of the counternarcotics battalions is key to the success of
Plan Colombia, what we now call the Andean initiative.
These battalions are a basic pillar of our policy to strengthen
Colombia's ability to counter the drug traffickers, provide a safer
environment for eradication efforts, and to protect development and the
human rights for the non-governmental organizations that operate down
there. We should not tie the hands of this administration just as Plan
Colombia is getting started. Not only is this an eradication and
interdiction effort, but it is also a chance to offer alternatives to
the small farmers and the communities in southern Colombia, to
strengthen their judicial system and provide human rights monitoring.
The gentleman's amendment does allow for that waiver, with
notification; and I have no problem with the notification provision in
there. Therefore, I would say that I will vote to accept the Conyers
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the gentleman from Michigan for
offering this amendment and to explain why I think it is necessary. I
have great misgivings about this entire Andean initiative. I think it
is a dubious enterprise put together by someone who qualifies more to
be permanent

[[Page H4500]]

president of an Optimist Club than president of anything else. But,
nonetheless, I think we have to work with what limited opportunities we
have.
My misgivings about this program were expanded even more and
magnified even more by one of the provisions in this bill which this
amendment corrects. Last year, as part of an effort to ease the passage
of this $1.3 billion initiative in the appropriations supplemental, the
administration, then the Clinton administration, accepted the Byrd
amendment, which limited overall personnel in the region to 800. This
bill originally sought to eliminate that cap, and the amendment being
offered by the gentleman from Michigan today restores that cap. I want
to tell you why I think that is important.
When the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution came up back in the sixties,
Senator Gaylord Nelson from my home State was determined to offer an
amendment to the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which specified that that
resolution would not be used in any way to inject troops into Vietnam.
He was told by then Senator Bill Fulbright, chairman of the Foreign
Affairs Committee, that Fulbright was convinced that there was no need
for Nelson to offer that amendment, because President Johnson had
assured Mr. Fulbright that he would never use the resolution for that
purpose. So Nelson reluctantly agreed not to offer that amendment,
preventing the use of that resolution as an excuse to inject American
troops above the advisers that were then present. Everyone lived to
regret it, except for about 50,000 Americans, who did not when they
went to Vietnam.
That is why I think it is important to retain this cap. Better to be
safe than sorry.
While I appreciate the gentleman from Arizona's indication that he
did not believe this amendment was necessary in order to restrain the
administration, I think it is always better for the Congress in
instances like this to be safe, rather than sorry. It seems to me that
I have only been around here 32 years, and in that time I have had
plenty of occasions where I have seen administrations of both parties
lie to me.
So, with all due respect to any administration, I would prefer to see
the Congress retain its ability to keep us out of a mess. That is what
I think this amendment seeks to do; and I hope, as we move to the
Senate, we can tighten it even further.
I strongly believe that this Andean effort, while well-intentioned,
is misguided and misdirected. I really believe if we want to deal with
the drug problem, we will only win that problem by dealing with it here
at home.
I firmly believe that every single dollar which we are committing to
this effort would be much better spent to see to it that every single
American who ought to be in a drug treatment program and is not in that
program is afforded the opportunity to get into one of those programs.
To me, if we want to solve the problem of drugs, we will solve it in
the end by dealing on the demand side of the ledger. If you can gain a
little bonus on the interdiction side, so be it. But I can recall after
chairing the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations for a number of years,
being told by the deputy in charge of interdiction under President
Reagan that in fact we did not during all of those years interdict more
than 2 percent of the drugs that were aimed at entry into the United
States. I hardly think that statistic, while it has improved somewhat
these days, we are not exactly having a crashing success when it comes
to interdiction; and I think in the end it would be better if we used
money to reduce demand in our own society. But for the moment, we do
not have the ability to do that because of the rule under which we are
debating this bill.
Meanwhile, I think this is a good reasonable action, and I
congratulate the gentleman for agreeing to this compromise. I want to
express my appreciation to the gentleman from Arizona for accepting the
compromise.

{time} 1915

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. CONYERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Kolbe), the chairman of the subcommittee, for the recent way that
he and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking member of
the full committee, and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) and
the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) have all helped us come
to what I think is an important part of this appropriations bill as any
I can think of.
I would like the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) and his staff to
join with me in examining something that Arianna Huffington has brought
to our national attention. There are two reports, one from the Center
for Public Integrity, which has found that the United States' antidrug
money is frequently funneled through corrupt organizations in the Latin
America side, sometimes it is the military, sometimes it is the
paramilitary, sometimes it is their intelligence organizations; and
that this money is really going nowhere and meeting none of the
objectives that we voted on it for. In addition, it ends up frequently
contributing to the violation of human rights. This cannot go on.
I have a lot of respect, growing respect for the people of Colombia
who have to carry the burden of what their government is doing, what
their army is doing, what the paramilitary is doing, what the rebel
countries are doing, and it seems to me that we need to take a close
look at this study to which I have referred.
The other study to which I refer is with much less enthusiasm, but I
think it gives a telling message. Here we have the Rand Corporation, a
wonderfully dedicated public sector organization commissioned by the
United States Air Force to study this whole question of how we deal
with the narcotics issue in Colombia. What was their recommendation?
They said well, look, why do you not just cut out the pretense of the
counternarcotics approach? Why do you not just get in the war and
settle this thing and come to the direct assistance of the Colombian
government?
For 37 years there has been a fierce civil war going on; 37 years,
and their recommendation, because they were paid by the U.S. Government
to study this, and their recommendation is, get in the war, help the
Colombian Government put down the rebel organizations, of which there
are three or more by this time, who hold and have held parts of this
country under their command.
So we have to tiptoe through this set of tulips with great care. This
is not a simple matter of sending over some ``private contractors'' to
join in with our military. Remember, everything the private contractors
do is a part of our military operation. They are armed. They are mostly
veterans. They know what war is about. They are not there to practice
peace. So it is very, very important that we recognize that we are
being torn and tested by these two very different reports, one which
was done by a nonprofit group, not at government expense, and the other
was done, paid for by the U.S. Air Force that said, let us get in the
war and really help our Colombian Government out.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Hoekstra).
Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for
yielding me this time. I applaud the gentleman for bringing forward
this amendment, and the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) and
the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for agreeing to this revised
amendment.
I think, as the gentleman from Michigan has stated very effectively,
it is important that Congress maintain its oversight and that it
preserves our ability to review and monitor what the administration is
doing, and in Plan Colombia, one of those measurements that Congress
should keep its fingers on, are the number of contractors and the
number of U.S. military personnel involved in this process. As the
gentleman stated, when this plan was approved in the fiscal year 2001
supplemental appropriations bill, there were many of us that were
concerned about ``mission creep.'' These gaps were put in place to
ensure that there would be no ``mission creep'' without congressional
review and oversight. This amendment preserves that.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H4501]]

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 44 Offered by Mr. Hoekstra

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 44 offered by Mr. Hoekstra:
Page 25, line 16, insert before the period the following:
Provided further, That, of the funds appropriated under
this heading, $65,000,000 shall not be available for
obligation until (1) the Secretary of State submits to the
Congress a full report on the incident of April 20, 2001, in
which Veronica ``Roni'' Bowers and her 7-month old daughter,
Charity, were needlessly killed when a Peruvian Air Force jet
opened fire on their plane after the crew of another plane,
owned by the Department of Defense and chartered by the
Central Intelligence Agency, mistakenly targeted the plane to
be potentially smuggling drugs in the Andean region; and (2)
the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and Director of
Central Intelligence certify to the Congress, 30 days before
any resumption of United States involvement in counter-
narcotic flights and a force-down program that continues to
permit the ability of the Peruvian Air Force to shoot down
aircraft, that the force-down program will include enhanced
safeguards and procedures to prevent the occurrence of any
incident similar to the April 20, 2001, incident.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, while I expect to change my position by the
end of the debate, for the moment, I rise to claim the time in
opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) will control the
time in opposition.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra).
Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Let me explain the amendment, but before I do that, I would like to
thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for agreeing to work
with me on this amendment. I also want to thank the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), the chairman of the subcommittee, for working out
an agreement that enables us to move forward and reach a compromise
that I think we all feel very good about.
Let me explain my amendment. My amendment withholds $65 million from
the $676 million in H.R. 2506 for the Andean counter-drug initiative
for the Peruvian military and police forces until two things happen.
First, the Secretary of State submits to Congress a full report on the
incident of April 20, 2001; and secondly, that the Secretary of State,
the Secretary of Defense, and the director of the Central Intelligence
Agency certify to Congress 30 days before any resumption of the U.S.
involvement in counter-narcotics flights in a force-down policy that
permits the shooting down of an aircraft by the Peruvian Air Force
until enhanced safeguards and procedures are in place to prevent any
similar incidents from the April 20, 2001 event, that any incidents in
the future would be prevented from occurring.
Let me explain what happened on April 20. On April 20, 2001, two
American families engaged in missionary work in South America became
innocent victims of our Nation's war on drugs. A young mother and her
7-year-old daughter were needlessly killed when a Peruvian Air Force
jet opened fire on their plane which was returning her, her husband,
and their two children to their missionary home after flying from
Iquitos, Peru to obtain adoption papers for their daughter.
The pilot, who was seriously wounded in the shoot-down, amazingly was
able to safely land the plane on the Amazon River, saving the lives of
his other passengers and himself.
How did this tragedy happen? While we know a lot of details;
unfortunately, at this point in time, Congress and the public have not
yet been able to review the investigative report which is still being
developed.
Basically, the Peruvian Air Force shot the missionary plane after
another plane owned by the United States Department of Defense,
chartered by the CIA, and staffed with U.S. Government ``contractors''
mistakenly targeted the missionary plane to be potentially smuggling
drugs in the Andean region.
For several years now, the U.S. has been participating in a joint
drug interdiction effort with Peru that has a force-down intercept
program that permits the Peruvians to shoot down aircraft that our
government identifies and targets. I have learned that there have been
other concerns about certain actions of the Peruvian Air Force in the
past. The kinds of concerns that could have and should have raised a
red flag warning that tragedies such as this could occur.
With so many questions and concerns over obvious procedural, legal,
and moral flaws with this type of policy, we have an obligation to
review the information. We should review the findings before making a
decision whether or not to continue funding our country's direct
involvement in a counternarcotics effort that permits the killing of
innocent people and treats it as an acceptable loss. We should be
having a serious debate on the merits of our country's participation in
this type of force-down policy which, according to the State
Department, is only permitted in two Andean countries.
I ask that my colleagues please remember what the real cost of this
event has been: a young woman, a daughter, a wife, a mother, a friend,
and a woman dedicated to sharing her faith with the people of Peru,
along with her young adopted daughter, was killed.
There was no reason for this, there was no purpose, and there was no
gain. This is only devastation laid on the doorstep of a family whose
life was devoted to sharing the message of God.
As we consider the lives lost and forever altered by this event, we
must consider the policy that led to the involvement of the United
States. As a Congress, we must weigh our desire to stop the flow of
drugs into this country against the need to keep innocent people, no
matter what their country of origin, safe. We must carefully consider
whether we should continue to embrace a policy that can and has
resulted in unnecessary and unwarranted and unacceptable loss of life.
As we reflect on the actual events, the policy that led to those
events, and the reasons the policy contributed to these events, please
do not forget we are talking about real people.
In a July 17, CNN article, a senior Bush administration official was
quoted as follows: ``We better ensure that the likelihood of this
happening again is as close to zero as humanly possible.'' With the
report, review and certification, we can move closer to ensuring that
this never happens again.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
say that I do not intend to oppose the gentleman's amendment. I
understand that the intention of the amendment is to limit the funds,
to withhold them until there are two conditions, which the gentleman
has described, two conditions met by the administration.
There is no reason why the administration should not be willing to or
able to meet these conditions. The gentleman is entitled to have a
report, and the Members of Congress are entitled to have a report so
that we know fully what happened in the tragic incident that the
gentleman has described.
Secondly, before there ever is a resumption of this shoot-down
policy, there needs to be adequate safeguards to make sure that this
kind of tragic accident cannot occur again.
Let me take a moment of my time to discuss the merits of the United
States program, assistance program in Peru, because I believe that
cutting funds to Peru would be counterproductive in our drug
eradication efforts and development assistance to our South American
ally.

{time} 1930

I know that the administration is going to meet the conditions of the
gentleman as soon as possible, but let me point out just last year this
very bill included a provision limiting assistance to Peru until free
and fair democratic elections took place. And they did, so I do not
think it would be the intention of any Member of this body to respond
now, after this important event has taken place in Peru, by

[[Page H4502]]

responding and cutting off aid because of another incident that we are
unhappy about.
They met the conditions that we asked them to do, and I do not think
that we would want to cut off the aid to Peru, which is now emerging so
strongly as a democracy.
Peru is the world's second largest producer of coca leaf and cocaine
base. Peruvian traffickers transport the cocaine base to Colombia and
Bolivia, where it is converted to cocaine. The alarming recent evidence
of a surge in opium and poppy cultivation being established under the
direction of Colombian traffickers should be a matter of concern to all
of us.
Peru is a prime candidate for spillover effects from Colombia as our
eradication efforts in Colombia are successful. But still, for a fifth
year in a row, Peruvian coca cultivation declined, an estimated decline
of 70 percent since 1995. So the U.S.-Peruvian interdiction program and
the manual coca eradication program that is continuing has been a major
factor in this reduction.
Our support of law enforcement efforts is complemented by an
aggressive effort to establish an alternative development program for
coca farmers in key coca growing areas to voluntarily reduce and
eliminate coca cultivation. We are now seeing the private sector
beginning to cooperate with the effort to create markets for new goods,
primarily for coffee and for cacao.
Commitments to coca reduction have increased significantly, with
communities coming forward demanding to participate in the program.
Over 500 communities in Peru have agreed to a reduction in coca
production and coca cultivation, and for the first time leaders of one
entire geographic region, the 77 municipalities in San Martin, have
agreed to eliminate coca production.
These are good news events that I described. This is progress that we
are making; and, for that reason, I would think it would be a terrible
mistake for us to cut off our program, our assistance to Peru
altogether.
But because I believe that the conditions the gentleman from Michigan
has suggested need to be met before we resume this program, I am
certainly willing to withhold that aid until they can meet those
conditions, as I understand that they are prepared to do. For that
reason, I would vote to accept this amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder
of the bill through page 75, line 16, be considered as read, printed in
the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Arizona?
There was no objection.
The text of the bill from page 25, line 17, through page 75, line 16,
is as follows:

migration and refugee assistance

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary to
enable the Secretary of State to provide, as authorized by
law, contributions to the International Committee of the Red
Cross, assistance to refugees, including contributions to the
International Organization for Migration and the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and other activities
to meet refugee and migration needs; salaries and expenses of
personnel and dependents as authorized by the Foreign Service
Act of 1980; allowances as authorized by sections 5921
through 5925 of title 5, United States Code; purchase and
hire of passenger motor vehicles; and services as authorized
by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, $715,000,000,
which shall remain available until expended: Provided, That
of the funds appropriated under this heading, not more than
$15,000,000 may be available for administrative expenses:
Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading
may be made available for a headquarters contribution to the
International Committee of the Red Cross only if the
Secretary of State determines (and so reports to the
appropriate committees of the Congress) that the Magen David
Adom Society of Israel is not being denied participation in
the activities of the International Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement.

united states emergency refugee and migration assistance fund

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 2(c) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of
1962, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601(c)), $15,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That the funds made
available under this heading are appropriated notwithstanding
the provisions contained in section 2(c)(2) of the Act which
would limit the amount of funds which could be appropriated
for this purpose.

nonproliferation, anti-terrorism, demining and related programs

For necessary expenses for nonproliferation, anti-
terrorism and related programs and activities, $311,000,000,
to carry out the provisions of chapter 8 of part II of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for anti-terrorism assistance,
chapter 9 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
section 504 of the FREEDOM Support Act, section 23 of the
Arms Export Control Act or the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
for demining activities, the clearance of unexploded
ordnance, the destruction of small arms, and related
activities, notwithstanding any other provision of law,
including activities implemented through nongovernmental and
international organizations, section 301 of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 for a voluntary contribution to the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and a voluntary
contribution to the Korean Peninsula Energy Development
Organization (KEDO), and for a United States contribution to
the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Preparatory
Commission: Provided, That the Secretary of State shall
inform the Committees on Appropriations at least 20 days
prior to the obligation of funds for the Comprehensive
Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Preparatory Commission: Provided
further, That of this amount not to exceed $14,000,000, to
remain available until expended, may be made available for
the Nonproliferation and Disarmament Fund, notwithstanding
any other provision of law, to promote bilateral and
multilateral activities relating to nonproliferation and
disarmament: Provided further, That such funds may also be
used for such countries other than the Independent States of
the former Soviet Union and international organizations when
it is in the national security interest of the United States
to do so following consultation with the appropriate
committees of Congress: Provided further, That funds
appropriated under this heading may be made available for the
International Atomic Energy Agency only if the Secretary of
State determines (and so reports to the Congress) that Israel
is not being denied its right to participate in the
activities of that Agency.

Department of the Treasury

International Affairs Technical Assistance

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 129 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (relating
to international affairs technical assistance activities),
$6,000,000, to remain available until expended, which shall
be available notwithstanding any other provision of law:
Provided, That these funds shall be subject to the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

debt restructuring

For the cost, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, of modifying loans and loan
guarantees, as the President may determine, for which funds
have been appropriated or otherwise made available for
programs within the International Affairs Budget Function
150, including the cost of selling, reducing, or canceling
amounts owed to the United States as a result of concessional
loans made to eligible countries, pursuant to parts IV and V
of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and of modifying
concessional credit agreements with least developed
countries, as authorized under section 411 of the
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, as
amended, and concessional loans, guarantees and credit
agreements, as authorized under section 572 of the Foreign
Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461), and of
canceling amounts owed, as a result of loans or guarantees
made pursuant to the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, by
countries that are eligible for debt reduction pursuant to
title V of H.R. 3425 as enacted into law by section
1000(a)(5) of Public Law 106-113, $224,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That of unobligated
balances of funds available under this heading from prior
year appropriations acts, not less than $25,000,000 may be
made available to carry out the provisions of part V of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961: Provided further, That funds
appropriated or otherwise made available under this heading
in this Act may be used by the Secretary of the Treasury to
pay to the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Trust Fund
administered by the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development amounts for the benefit of countries that are
eligible for debt reduction pursuant to title V of H.R. 3425
as enacted into law by section 1000(a)(5) of Public Law 106-
113: Provided further, That amounts paid to the HIPC Trust
Fund may be used only to fund debt reduction under the
enhanced HIPC initiative by--
(1) the Inter-American Development Bank;
(2) the African Development Fund;
(3) the African Development Bank; and
(4) the Central American Bank for Economic Integration:

Provided further, That funds may not be paid to the HIPC
Trust Fund for the benefit of any country if the Secretary of
State has credible evidence that the government of such
country is engaged in a consistent pattern of gross
violations of internationally

[[Page H4503]]

recognized human rights or in military or civil conflict that
undermines its ability to develop and implement measures to
alleviate poverty and to devote adequate human and financial
resources to that end: Provided further, That on the basis of
final appropriations, the Secretary of the Treasury shall
consult with the Committees on Appropriations concerning
which countries and international financial institutions are
expected to benefit from a United States contribution to the
HIPC Trust Fund during the fiscal year: Provided further,
That the Secretary of the Treasury shall inform the
Committees on Appropriations not less than 15 days in advance
of the signature of an agreement by the United States to make
payments to the HIPC Trust Fund of amounts for such countries
and institutions: Provided further, That the Secretary of the
Treasury may disburse funds designated for debt reduction
through the HIPC Trust Fund only for the benefit of countries
that--
(a) have committed, for a period of 24 months, not to
accept new market-rate loans from the international financial
institution receiving debt repayment as a result of such
disbursement, other than loans made by such institution to
export-oriented commercial projects that generate foreign
exchange which are generally referred to as ``enclave''
loans; and
(b) have documented and demonstrated their commitment to
redirect their budgetary resources from international debt
repayments to programs to alleviate poverty and promote
economic growth that are additional to or expand upon those
previously available for such purposes:

Provided further, That any limitation of subsection (e) of
section 411 of the Agricultural Trade Development and
Assistance Act of 1954 shall not apply to funds appropriated
under this heading: Provided further, That none of the funds
made available under this heading in this or any other
appropriations Acts shall be made available for Sudan or
Burma unless the Secretary of Treasury determines and
notifies the Committees on Appropriations that a
democratically elected government has taken office: Provided
further, That the authority provided by section 572 of Public
Law 100-461 may be exercised only with respect to countries
that are eligible to borrow from the International
Development Association, but not from the International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development, commonly referred to as
``IDA-only'' countries.

TITLE III--MILITARY ASSISTANCE

Funds Appropriated to the President

international military education and training

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 541 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$65,000,000, of which up to $1,000,000 may remain available
until expended: Provided, That the civilian personnel for
whom military education and training may be provided under
this heading may include civilians who are not members of a
government whose participation would contribute to improved
civil-military relations, civilian control of the military,
or respect for human rights: Provided further, That funds
appropriated under this heading for grant financed military
education and training for Indonesia and Guatemala may only
be available for expanded international military education
and training and funds made available for Indonesia and
Guatemala may only be provided through the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

foreign military financing program

For expenses necessary for grants to enable the President
to carry out the provisions of section 23 of the Arms Export
Control Act, $3,627,000,000: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $2,040,000,000
shall be available for grants only for Israel, and not less
than $1,300,000,000 shall be made available for grants only
for Egypt: Provided further, That the funds appropriated by
this paragraph for Israel shall be disbursed within 30 days
of the enactment of this Act or by October 31, 2001,
whichever is later: Provided further, That to the extent that
the Government of Israel requests that funds be used for such
purposes, grants made available for Israel by this paragraph
shall, as agreed by Israel and the United States, be
available for advanced weapons systems, of which not less
than $535,000,000 shall be available for the procurement in
Israel of defense articles and defense services, including
research and development: Provided further, That foreign
military financing program funds estimated to be outlayed for
Egypt during fiscal year 2002 shall be transferred to an
interest bearing account for Egypt in the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York within 30 days of enactment of this Act or
by October 31, 2001, whichever is later: Provided further,
That funds appropriated by this paragraph shall be
nonrepayable notwithstanding any requirement in section 23 of
the Arms Export Control Act: Provided further, That funds
made available under this paragraph shall be obligated upon
apportionment in accordance with paragraph (5)(C) of title
31, United States Code, section 1501(a).
None of the funds made available under this heading shall
be available to finance the procurement of defense articles,
defense services, or design and construction services that
are not sold by the United States Government under the Arms
Export Control Act unless the foreign country proposing to
make such procurements has first signed an agreement with the
United States Government specifying the conditions under
which such procurements may be financed with such funds:
Provided, That all country and funding level increases in
allocations shall be submitted through the regular
notification procedures of section 515 of this Act: Provided
further, That none of the funds appropriated under this
heading shall be available for assistance for Sudan and
Liberia: Provided further, That funds made available under
this heading may be used, notwithstanding any other provision
of law, for demining, the clearance of unexploded ordnance,
and related activities, and may include activities
implemented through nongovernmental and international
organizations: Provided further, That none of the funds
appropriated under this heading shall be available for
assistance for Guatemala: Provided further, That only those
countries for which assistance was justified for the
``Foreign Military Sales Financing Program'' in the fiscal
year 1989 congressional presentation for security assistance
programs may utilize funds made available under this heading
for procurement of defense articles, defense services or
design and construction services that are not sold by the
United States Government under the Arms Export Control Act:
Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading
shall be expended at the minimum rate necessary to make
timely payment for defense articles and services: Provided
further, That not more than $35,000,000 of the funds
appropriated under this heading may be obligated for
necessary expenses, including the purchase of passenger motor
vehicles for replacement only for use outside of the United
States, for the general costs of administering military
assistance and sales: Provided further, That not more than
$348,000,000 of funds realized pursuant to section
21(e)(1)(A) of the Arms Export Control Act may be obligated
for expenses incurred by the Department of Defense during
fiscal year 2002 pursuant to section 43(b) of the Arms Export
Control Act, except that this limitation may be exceeded only
through the regular notification procedures of the Committees
on Appropriations.

peacekeeping operations

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 551 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$135,000,000: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated
under this heading shall be obligated or expended except as
provided through the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.

TITLE IV--MULTILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

funds appropriated to the president

international financial institutions

global environment facility

For the United States contribution for the Global
Environment Facility, $82,500,000, to the International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development as trustee for the Global
Environment Facility, by the Secretary of the Treasury, to
remain available until expended.

contribution to the international development association

For payment to the International Development Association
by the Secretary of the Treasury, $803,400,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That in negotiating
United States participation in the next replenishment of the
International Development Association, the Secretary of the
Treasury shall accord high priority to providing the
International Development Association with the policy
flexibility to provide new grant assistance to countries
eligible for debt reduction under the enhanced HIPC
Initiative.

contribution to the multilateral investment guarantee agency

For payment to the Multilateral Investment Guarantee
Agency by the Secretary of the Treasury, $10,000,000, for the
United States paid-in share of the increase in capital stock,
to remain available until expended.

limitation on callable capital subscriptions

The United States Governor of the Multilateral Investment
Guarantee Agency may subscribe without fiscal year limitation
for the callable capital portion of the United States share
of such capital stock in an amount not to exceed $50,000,000.

Contribution to the Inter-American Investment Corporation

For payment to the Inter-American Investment Corporation,
by the Secretary of the Treasury, $10,000,000, for the United
States share of the increase in subscriptions to capital
stock, to remain available until expended.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE ASIAN DEVELOPMENT FUND

For the United States contribution by the Secretary of
the Treasury to the increase in resources of the Asian
Development Fund, as authorized by the Asian Development Bank
Act, as amended, $103,017,050, to remain available until
expended.

Contribution to the African Development Bank

For payment to the African Development Bank by the
Secretary of the Treasury, $5,100,000, for the United States
paid-in share of the increase in capital stock, to remain
available until expended.

[[Page H4504]]

limitation on callable capital subscriptions

The United States Governor of the African Development
Bank may subscribe without fiscal year limitation for the
callable capital portion of the United States share of such
capital stock in an amount not to exceed $79,991,500.

contribution to the african development fund

For the United States contribution by the Secretary of
the Treasury to the increase in resources of the African
Development Fund, $100,000,000, to remain available until
expended.

contribution to the european bank for reconstruction and development

For payment to the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development by the Secretary of the Treasury, $35,778,717,
for the United States share of the paid-in portion of the
increase in capital stock, to remain available until
expended.

limitation on callable capital subscriptions

The United States Governor of the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development may subscribe without fiscal
year limitation to the callable capital portion of the United
States share of such capital stock in an amount not to exceed
$123,237,803.

contribution to the international fund for agricultural development

For the United States contribution by the Secretary of
the Treasury to increase the resources of the International
Fund for Agricultural Development, $20,000,000, to remain
available until expended.

international organizations and programs

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 301 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and of
section 2 of the United Nations Environment Program
Participation Act of 1973, $196,000,000: Provided, That none
of the funds appropriated under this heading shall be made
available for the United Nations Fund for Science and
Technology: Provided further, That none of the funds
appropriated under this heading may be made available to the
Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) or
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

obligations during last month of availability

Sec. 501. Except for the appropriations entitled
``International Disaster Assistance'', and ``United States
Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund'', not more
than 15 percent of any appropriation item made available by
this Act shall be obligated during the last month of
availability.

private and voluntary organizations

Sec. 502. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this Act for development assistance may be
made available to any United States private and voluntary
organization, except any cooperative development
organization, which obtains less than 20 percent of its total
annual funding for international activities from sources
other than the United States Government: Provided, That the
United States Administrator of the Agency for International
Development, after informing the Committees on
Appropriations, may, on a case-by-case basis, waive the
restriction contained in this paragraph, after taking into
account the effectiveness of the overseas development
activities of the organization, its level of volunteer
support, its financial viability and stability, and the
degree of its dependence for its financial support on the
agency.
(b) Funds appropriated or otherwise made available under
title II of this Act should be made available to private and
voluntary organizations at a level which is at least
equivalent to the level provided in fiscal year 1995.

limitation on residence expenses

Sec. 503. Of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act, not to exceed $126,500 shall be for
official residence expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development during the current fiscal year:
Provided, That appropriate steps shall be taken to assure
that, to the maximum extent possible, United States-owned
foreign currencies are utilized in lieu of dollars.

limitation on expenses

Sec. 504. Of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act, not to exceed $5,000 shall be for
entertainment expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development during the current fiscal year.

limitation on representational allowances

Sec. 505. Of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act, not to exceed $95,000 shall be
available for representation allowances for the United States
Agency for International Development during the current
fiscal year: Provided, That appropriate steps shall be taken
to assure that, to the maximum extent possible, United
States-owned foreign currencies are utilized in lieu of
dollars: Provided further, That of the funds made available
by this Act for general costs of administering military
assistance and sales under the heading ``Foreign Military
Financing Program'', not to exceed $2,000 shall be available
for entertainment expenses and not to exceed $150,000 shall
be available for representation allowances: Provided further,
That of the funds made available by this Act under the
heading ``International Military Education and Training'',
not to exceed $50,000 shall be available for entertainment
allowances: Provided further, That of the funds made
available by this Act for the Inter-American Foundation, not
to exceed $2,000 shall be available for entertainment and
representation allowances: Provided further, That of the
funds made available by this Act for the Peace Corps, not to
exceed a total of $4,000 shall be available for entertainment
expenses: Provided further, That of the funds made available
by this Act under the heading ``Trade and Development
Agency'', not to exceed $2,000 shall be available for
representation and entertainment allowances.

prohibition on financing nuclear goods

Sec. 506. None of the funds appropriated or made
available (other than funds for ``Nonproliferation, Anti-
terrorism, Demining and Related Programs'') pursuant to this
Act, for carrying out the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, may
be used, except for purposes of nuclear safety, to finance
the export of nuclear equipment, fuel, or technology.

prohibition against direct funding for certain countries

Sec. 507. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or
expended to finance directly any assistance or reparations to
Cuba, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Iran, Sudan, or Syria:
Provided, That for purposes of this section, the prohibition
on obligations or expenditures shall include direct loans,
credits, insurance and guarantees of the Export-Import Bank
or its agents.

military coups

Sec. 508. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or
expended to finance directly any assistance to any country
whose duly elected head of government is deposed by decree or
military coup: Provided, That assistance may be resumed if
the President determines and reports to the Committees on
Appropriations that subsequent to the termination of
assistance a democratically elected government has taken
office or substantial progress has been made towards the
holding of democratic elections.

transfers between accounts

Sec. 509. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be obligated under an appropriation account to which they
were not appropriated, except for transfers specifically
provided for in this Act, unless the President, prior to the
exercise of any authority contained in the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 to transfer funds, consults with and provides a
written policy justification to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the
Senate.

deobligation/reobligation authority

Sec. 510. Obligated balances of funds appropriated to
carry out section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act as of the
end of the fiscal year immediately preceding the current
fiscal year are, if deobligated, hereby continued available
during the current fiscal year for the same purpose under any
authority applicable to such appropriations under this Act:
Provided, That the authority of this subsection may not be
used in fiscal year 2002.

availability of funds

Sec. 511. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation after the
expiration of the current fiscal year unless expressly so
provided in this Act: Provided, That funds appropriated for
the purposes of chapters 1, 8, 11, and 12 of part I, section
667, chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, as amended, section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act,
and funds provided under the heading ``Assistance for Eastern
Europe and the Baltic States'', shall remain available for an
additional four years from the date on which the availability
of such funds would otherwise have expired, if such funds are
initially obligated before the expiration of their respective
periods of availability contained in this Act: Provided
further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Act, any funds made available for the purposes of chapter 1
of part I and chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 which are allocated or obligated for cash
disbursements in order to address balance of payments or
economic policy reform objectives, shall remain available
until expended.

limitation on assistance to countries in default

Sec. 512. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be used to furnish assistance to any country which
is in default during a period in excess of one calendar year
in payment to the United States of principal or interest on
any loan made to the government of such country by the United
States pursuant to a program for which funds are appropriated
under this Act unless the President determines, following
consultations with the Committees on Appropriations, that
assistance to such country is in the national interest of the
United States.

commerce and trade

Sec. 513. (a) None of the funds appropriated or made
available pursuant to this Act for direct assistance and none
of the funds otherwise made available pursuant to this Act to
the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation shall be obligated or expended to finance any

[[Page H4505]]

loan, any assistance or any other financial commitments for
establishing or expanding production of any commodity for
export by any country other than the United States, if the
commodity is likely to be in surplus on world markets at the
time the resulting productive capacity is expected to become
operative and if the assistance will cause substantial injury
to United States producers of the same, similar, or competing
commodity: Provided, That such prohibition shall not apply to
the Export-Import Bank if in the judgment of its Board of
Directors the benefits to industry and employment in the
United States are likely to outweigh the injury to United
States producers of the same, similar, or competing
commodity, and the Chairman of the Board so notifies the
Committees on Appropriations.
(b) None of the funds appropriated by this or any other
Act to carry out chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 shall be available for any testing or
breeding feasibility study, variety improvement or
introduction, consultancy, publication, conference, or
training in connection with the growth or production in a
foreign country of an agricultural commodity for export which
would compete with a similar commodity grown or produced in
the United States: Provided, That this subsection shall not
prohibit--
(1) activities designed to increase food security in
developing countries where such activities will not have a
significant impact in the export of agricultural commodities
of the United States; or
(2) research activities intended primarily to benefit
American producers.

surplus commodities

Sec. 514. The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct
the United States Executive Directors of the International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International
Development Association, the International Finance
Corporation, the Inter-American Development Bank, the
International Monetary Fund, the Asian Development Bank, the
Inter-American Investment Corporation, the North American
Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, the African Development Bank, and the African
Development Fund to use the voice and vote of the United
States to oppose any assistance by these institutions, using
funds appropriated or made available pursuant to this Act,
for the production or extraction of any commodity or mineral
for export, if it is in surplus on world markets and if the
assistance will cause substantial injury to United States
producers of the same, similar, or competing commodity.

notification requirements

Sec. 515. (a) For the purposes of providing the executive
branch with the necessary administrative flexibility, none of
the funds made available under this Act for ``Child Survival
and Health Programs Fund'', ``Development Assistance'',
``International Organizations and Programs'', ``Trade and
Development Agency'', ``International Narcotics Control and
Law Enforcement'', ``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the
Baltic States'', ``Assistance for the Independent States of
the Former Soviet Union'', ``Economic Support Fund'',
``Peacekeeping Operations'', ``Operating Expenses of the
United States Agency for International Development'',
``Operating Expenses of the Agency for United States
International Development Office of Inspector General'',
``Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and Related
Programs'', ``Foreign Military Financing Program'',
``International Military Education and Training'', ``Peace
Corps'', and ``Migration and Refugee Assistance'', shall be
available for obligation for activities, programs, projects,
type of materiel assistance, countries, or other operations
not justified or in excess of the amount justified to the
Appropriations Committees for obligation under any of these
specific headings unless the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress are previously notified 15 days in
advance: Provided, That the President shall not enter into
any commitment of funds appropriated for the purposes of
section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act for the provision
of major defense equipment, other than conventional
ammunition, or other major defense items defined to be
aircraft, ships, missiles, or combat vehicles, not previously
justified to Congress or 20 percent in excess of the
quantities justified to Congress unless the Committees on
Appropriations are notified 15 days in advance of such
commitment: Provided further, That this section shall not
apply to any reprogramming for an activity, program, or
project under chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 of less than 10 percent of the amount previously
justified to the Congress for obligation for such activity,
program, or project for the current fiscal year: Provided
further, That the requirements of this section or any similar
provision of this Act or any other Act, including any prior
Act requiring notification in accordance with the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations,
may be waived if failure to do so would pose a substantial
risk to human health or welfare: Provided further, That in
case of any such waiver, notification to the Congress, or the
appropriate congressional committees, shall be provided as
early as practicable, but in no event later than 3 days after
taking the action to which such notification requirement was
applicable, in the context of the circumstances necessitating
such waiver: Provided further, That any notification provided
pursuant to such a waiver shall contain an explanation of the
emergency circumstances.

limitation on availability of funds for international organizations and
programs

Sec. 516. Subject to the regular notification procedures
of the Committees on Appropriations, funds appropriated under
this Act or any previously enacted Act making appropriations
for foreign operations, export financing, and related
programs, which are returned or not made available for
organizations and programs because of the implementation of
section 307(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, shall
remain available for obligation until September 30, 2003.

independent states of the former soviet union

Sec. 517. (a) None of the funds appropriated under the
heading ``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former
Soviet Union'' shall be made available for assistance for a
government of an Independent State of the former Soviet
Union--
(1) unless that government is making progress in
implementing comprehensive economic reforms based on market
principles, private ownership, respect for commercial
contracts, and equitable treatment of foreign private
investment; and
(2) if that government applies or transfers United States
assistance to any entity for the purpose of expropriating or
seizing ownership or control of assets, investments, or
ventures.

Assistance may be furnished without regard to this subsection
if the President determines that to do so is in the national
interest.
(b) None of the funds appropriated under the heading
``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet
Union'' shall be made available for assistance for a
government of an Independent State of the former Soviet Union
if that government directs any action in violation of the
territorial integrity or national sovereignty of any other
Independent State of the former Soviet Union, such as those
violations included in the Helsinki Final Act: Provided, That
such funds may be made available without regard to the
restriction in this subsection if the President determines
that to do so is in the national security interest of the
United States.
(c) None of the funds appropriated under the heading
``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet
Union'' shall be made available for any state to enhance its
military capability: Provided, That this restriction does not
apply to demilitarization, demining or nonproliferation
programs.
(d) Funds appropriated under the heading ``Assistance for
the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union'' for the
Russian Federation, Armenia, Georgia, and Ukraine shall be
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.
(e) Funds made available in this Act for assistance for
the Independent States of the former Soviet Union shall be
subject to the provisions of section 117 (relating to
environment and natural resources) of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961.
(f) Funds appropriated in this or prior appropriations
Acts that are or have been made available for an Enterprise
Fund in the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union may
be deposited by such Fund in interest-bearing accounts prior
to the disbursement of such funds by the Fund for program
purposes. The Fund may retain for such program purposes any
interest earned on such deposits without returning such
interest to the Treasury of the United States and without
further appropriation by the Congress. Funds made available
for Enterprise Funds shall be expended at the minimum rate
necessary to make timely payment for projects and activities.
(g) In issuing new task orders, entering into contracts,
or making grants, with funds appropriated in this Act or
prior appropriations Acts under the heading ``Assistance for
the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union'' and under
comparable headings in prior appropriations Acts, for
projects or activities that have as one of their primary
purposes the fostering of private sector development, the
Coordinator for United States Assistance to the New
Independent States and the implementing agency shall
encourage the participation of and give significant weight to
contractors and grantees who propose investing a significant
amount of their own resources (including volunteer services
and in-kind contributions) in such projects and activities.

prohibition on funding for abortions and involuntary sterilization

Sec. 518. None of the funds made available to carry out
part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may
be used to pay for the performance of abortions as a method
of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to
practice abortions. None of the funds made available to carry
out part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended,
may be used to pay for the performance of involuntary
sterilization as a method of family planning or to coerce or
provide any financial incentive to any person to undergo
sterilizations. None of the funds made available to carry out
part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may
be used to pay for any biomedical research which relates in
whole or in part, to methods of, or the performance of,

[[Page H4506]]

abortions or involuntary sterilization as a means of family
planning. None of the funds made available to carry out part
I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may be
obligated or expended for any country or organization if the
President certifies that the use of these funds by any such
country or organization would violate any of the above
provisions related to abortions and involuntary
sterilizations: Provided, That none of the funds made
available under this Act may be used to lobby for or against
abortion.

export financing transfer authorities

Sec. 519. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation
other than for administrative expenses made available for
fiscal year 2001, for programs under title I of this Act may
be transferred between such appropriations for use for any of
the purposes, programs, and activities for which the funds in
such receiving account may be used, but no such
appropriation, except as otherwise specifically provided,
shall be increased by more than 25 percent by any such
transfer: Provided, That the exercise of such authority shall
be subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.

special notification requirements

Sec. 520. None of the funds appropriated by this Act
shall be obligated or expended for Colombia, Haiti, Liberia,
Sudan, Zimbabwe, Pakistan, or the Democratic Republic of
Congo except as provided through the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

definition of program, project, and activity

Sec. 521. For the purpose of this Act, ``program,
project, and activity'' shall be defined at the
appropriations Act account level and shall include all
appropriations and authorizations Acts earmarks, ceilings,
and limitations with the exception that for the following
accounts: Economic Support Fund and Foreign Military
Financing Program, ``program, project, and activity'' shall
also be considered to include country, regional, and central
program level funding within each such account; for the
development assistance accounts of the Agency for
International Development ``program, project, and activity''
shall also be considered to include central program level
funding, either as: (1) justified to the Congress; or (2)
allocated by the executive branch in accordance with a
report, to be provided to the Committees on Appropriations
within 30 days of the enactment of this Act, as required by
section 653(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

child survival and disease prevention activities

Sec. 522. Up to $16,000,000 of the funds made available
by this Act for assistance under the heading ``Child Survival
and Health Programs Fund'', may be used to reimburse United
States Government agencies, agencies of State governments,
institutions of higher learning, and private and voluntary
organizations for the full cost of individuals (including for
the personal services of such individuals) detailed or
assigned to, or contracted by, as the case may be, the United
States Agency for International Development for the purpose
of carrying out activities under that heading: Provided, That
up to $1,500,000 of the funds made available by this Act for
assistance under the heading ``Development Assistance'' may
be used to reimburse such agencies, institutions, and
organizations for such costs of such individuals carrying out
other development assistance activities: Provided further,
That funds appropriated by this Act that are made available
for child survival activities or disease programs including
activities relating to research on, and the prevention,
treatment and control of, Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
may be made available notwithstanding any provision of law
that restricts assistance to foreign countries: Provided
further, That funds appropriated under title II of this Act
may be made available pursuant to section 301 of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 if a primary purpose of the assistance
is for child survival and related programs.

prohibition against indirect funding to certain countries

Sec. 523. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated to
finance indirectly any assistance or reparations to Cuba,
Iraq, Libya, Iran, Syria, North Korea, or Sudan, unless the
President of the United States certifies that the withholding
of these funds is contrary to the national interest of the
United States.

NOTIFICATION ON EXCESS DEFENSE EQUIPMENT

Sec. 524. Prior to providing excess Department of Defense
articles in accordance with section 516(a) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, the Department of Defense shall
notify the Committees on Appropriations to the same extent
and under the same conditions as are other committees
pursuant to subsection (f ) of that section: Provided, That
before issuing a letter of offer to sell excess defense
articles under the Arms Export Control Act, the Department of
Defense shall notify the Committees on Appropriations in
accordance with the regular notification procedures of such
Committees if such defense articles are significant military
equipment (as defined in section 47(9) of the Arms Export
Control Act) or are valued (in terms of original acquisition
cost) at $7,000,000 or more, or if notification is required
elsewhere in this Act for the use of appropriated funds for
specific countries that would receive such excess defense
articles: Provided further, That such Committees shall also
be informed of the original acquisition cost of such defense
articles.

AUTHORIZATION REQUIREMENT

Sec. 525. Funds appropriated by this Act, except funds
appropriated under the headings ``Trade and Development
Agency'', ``Peace Corps'', ``International Military Education
and Training'', and ``Foreign Military Financing Program'',
may be obligated and expended notwithstanding section 10 of
Public Law 91-672 and section 15 of the State Department
Basic Authorities Act of 1956.

democracy programs

Sec. 526. Funds appropriated by this Act that are
provided to the National Endowment for Democracy may be
provided notwithstanding any other provision of law or
regulation: Provided, That notwithstanding any other
provision of law, of the funds appropriated by this Act to
carry out the provisions of chapter 4 of part II of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, not to exceed $3,000,000 may
be made available to nongovernmental organizations located
outside the People's Republic of China to support activities
which preserve cultural traditions and promote sustainable
development and environmental conservation in Tibetan
communities in that country: Provided further, That funds
made available pursuant to the authority of this section for
programs, projects, and activities for the People's Republic
of China shall be subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

PROHIBITION ON BILATERAL ASSISTANCE TO TERRORIST COUNTRIES

Sec. 527. (a) Funds appropriated for bilateral assistance
under any heading of this Act and funds appropriated under
any such heading in a provision of law enacted prior to the
enactment of this Act, shall not be made available to any
country which the President determines--
(1) grants sanctuary from prosecution to any individual
or group which has committed an act of international
terrorism; or
(2) otherwise supports international terrorism.
(b) The President may waive the application of subsection
(a) to a country if the President determines that national
security or humanitarian reasons justify such waiver. The
President shall publish each waiver in the Federal Register
and, at least 15 days before the waiver takes effect, shall
notify the Committees on Appropriations of the waiver
(including the justification for the waiver) in accordance
with the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.

DEBT-FOR-DEVELOPMENT

Sec. 528. In order to enhance the continued participation
of nongovernmental organizations in economic assistance
activities under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
including endowments, debt-for-development and debt-for-
nature exchanges, a nongovernmental organization which is a
grantee or contractor of the United States Agency for
International Development may place in interest bearing
accounts funds made available under this Act or prior Acts or
local currencies which accrue to that organization as a
result of economic assistance provided under title II of this
Act and any interest earned on such investment shall be used
for the purpose for which the assistance was provided to that
organization.

SEPARATE ACCOUNTS

Sec. 529. (a) Separate Accounts for Local Currencies.--
(1) If assistance is furnished to the government of a foreign
country under chapters 1 and 10 of part I or chapter 4 of
part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 under
agreements which result in the generation of local currencies
of that country, the Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development shall--
(A) require that local currencies be deposited in a
separate account established by that government;
(B) enter into an agreement with that government which
sets forth--
(i) the amount of the local currencies to be generated;
and
(ii) the terms and conditions under which the currencies
so deposited may be utilized, consistent with this section;
and
(C) establish by agreement with that government the
responsibilities of the United States Agency for
International Development and that government to monitor and
account for deposits into and disbursements from the separate
account.
(2) Uses of Local Currencies.--As may be agreed upon with
the foreign government, local currencies deposited in a
separate account pursuant to subsection (a), or an equivalent
amount of local currencies, shall be used only--
(A) to carry out chapter 1 or 10 of part I or chapter 4
of part II (as the case may be), for such purposes as--
(i) project and sector assistance activities; or
(ii) debt and deficit financing; or
(B) for the administrative requirements of the United
States Government.
(3) Programming Accountability.--The United States Agency
for International Development shall take all necessary steps
to ensure that the equivalent of the local currencies
disbursed pursuant to subsection (a)(2)(A) from the separate
account established pursuant to subsection (a)(1) are used
for the purposes agreed upon pursuant to subsection (a)(2).

[[Page H4507]]

(4) Termination of Assistance Programs.--Upon termination
of assistance to a country under chapter 1 or 10 of part I or
chapter 4 of part II (as the case may be), any unencumbered
balances of funds which remain in a separate account
established pursuant to subsection (a) shall be disposed of
for such purposes as may be agreed to by the government of
that country and the United States Government.
(5) Reporting Requirement.--The Administrator of the
United States Agency for International Development shall
report on an annual basis as part of the justification
documents submitted to the Committees on Appropriations on
the use of local currencies for the administrative
requirements of the United States Government as authorized in
subsection (a)(2)(B), and such report shall include the
amount of local currency (and United States dollar
equivalent) used and/or to be used for such purpose in each
applicable country.
(b) Separate Accounts for Cash Transfers.--(1) If
assistance is made available to the government of a foreign
country, under chapter 1 or 10 of part I or chapter 4 of part
II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as cash transfer
assistance or as nonproject sector assistance, that country
shall be required to maintain such funds in a separate
account and not commingle them with any other funds.
(2) Applicability of Other Provisions of Law.--Such funds
may be obligated and expended notwithstanding provisions of
law which are inconsistent with the nature of this assistance
including provisions which are referenced in the Joint
Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference
accompanying House Joint Resolution 648 (House Report No. 98-
1159).
(3) Notification.--At least 15 days prior to obligating
any such cash transfer or nonproject sector assistance, the
President shall submit a notification through the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations,
which shall include a detailed description of how the funds
proposed to be made available will be used, with a discussion
of the United States interests that will be served by the
assistance (including, as appropriate, a description of the
economic policy reforms that will be promoted by such
assistance).
(4) Exemption.--Nonproject sector assistance funds may be
exempt from the requirements of subsection (b)(1) only
through the notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.

compensation for united states executive directors to international
financial institutions

Sec. 530. (a) No funds appropriated by this Act may be
made as payment to any international financial institution
while the United States Executive Director to such
institution is compensated by the institution at a rate
which, together with whatever compensation such Director
receives from the United States, is in excess of the rate
provided for an individual occupying a position at level IV
of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5,
United States Code, or while any alternate United States
Director to such institution is compensated by the
institution at a rate in excess of the rate provided for an
individual occupying a position at level V of the Executive
Schedule under section 5316 of title 5, United States Code.
(b) For purposes of this section, ``international
financial institutions'' are: the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American
Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the Asian
Development Fund, the African Development Bank, the African
Development Fund, the International Monetary Fund, the North
American Development Bank, and the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development.

compliance with united nations sanctions against iraq

Sec. 531. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available pursuant to this Act to carry out the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (including title IV of chapter 2 of
part I, relating to the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation) or the Arms Export Control Act may be used to
provide assistance to any country that is not in compliance
with the United Nations Security Council sanctions against
Iraq unless the President determines and so certifies to the
Congress that--
(1) such assistance is in the national interest of the
United States;
(2) such assistance will directly benefit the needy
people in that country; or
(3) the assistance to be provided will be humanitarian
assistance for foreign nationals who have fled Iraq and
Kuwait.

authorities for the peace corps, inter-american foundation and african
development foundation

Sec. 532. Unless expressly provided to the contrary,
provisions of this or any other Act, including provisions
contained in prior Acts authorizing or making appropriations
for foreign operations, export financing, and related
programs, shall not be construed to prohibit activities
authorized by or conducted under the Peace Corps Act, the
Inter-American Foundation Act or the African Development
Foundation Act. The agency shall promptly report to the
Committees on Appropriations whenever it is conducting
activities or is proposing to conduct activities in a country
for which assistance is prohibited.

impact on jobs in the united states

Sec. 533. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may
be obligated or expended to provide--
(a) any financial incentive to a business enterprise
currently located in the United States for the purpose of
inducing such an enterprise to relocate outside the United
States if such incentive or inducement is likely to reduce
the number of employees of such business enterprise in the
United States because United States production is being
replaced by such enterprise outside the United States; or
(b) assistance for any project or activity that
contributes to the violation of internationally recognized
workers rights, as defined in section 502(a)(4) of the Trade
Act of 1974, of workers in the recipient country, including
any designated zone or area in that country: Provided, That
in recognition that the application of this subsection should
be commensurate with the level of development of the
recipient country and sector, the provisions of this
subsection shall not preclude assistance for the informal
sector in such country, micro and small-scale enterprise, and
smallholder agriculture.

special authorities

Sec. 534. (a) Afghanistan, Lebanon, Montenegro, Victims
of War, Displaced Children, and Displaced Burmese.--Funds
appropriated in titles I and II of this Act that are made
available for Afghanistan, Lebanon, Montenegro, and for
victims of war, displaced children, and displaced Burmese,
may be made available notwithstanding any other provision of
law: Provided, That any such funds that are made available
for Cambodia shall be subject to the provisions of section
531(e) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and section 906
of the International Security and Development Cooperation Act
of 1985: Provided further, That section 576 of the Foreign
Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, 1997, as amended, shall not apply to the
provision of loans and assistance to the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia through international financial institutions.
(b) Tropical Forestry and Biodiversity Conservation
Activities.--Funds appropriated by this Act to carry out the
provisions of sections 103 through 106, and chapter 4 of part
II, of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be used,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the purpose
of supporting tropical forestry and biodiversity conservation
activities and, subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations, energy
programs aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions:
Provided, That such assistance shall be subject to sections
116, 502B, and 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
(c) Personal Services Contractors.--Funds appropriated by
this Act to carry out chapter 1 of part I, chapter 4 of part
II, and section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
and title II of the Agricultural Trade Development and
Assistance Act of 1954, may be used by the United States
Agency for International Development to employ up to 25
personal services contractors in the United States,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the purpose
of providing direct, interim support for new or expanded
overseas programs and activities and managed by the agency
until permanent direct hire personnel are hired and trained:
Provided, That not more than 10 of such contractors shall be
assigned to any bureau or office: Provided further, That such
funds appropriated to carry out the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 may be made available for personal services contractors
assigned only to the Office of Health and Nutrition; the
Office of Procurement; the Bureau for Africa; the Bureau for
Latin America and the Caribbean; and the Bureau for Asia and
the Near East: Provided further, That such funds appropriated
to carry out title II of the Agricultural Trade Development
and Assistance Act of 1954, may be made available only for
personal services contractors assigned to the Office of Food
for Peace.
(d)(1) Waiver.--The President may waive the provisions of
section 1003 of Public Law 100-204 if the President
determines and certifies in writing to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the
Senate that it is important to the national security
interests of the United States.
(2) Period of Application of Waiver.--Any waiver pursuant
to paragraph (1) shall be effective for no more than a period
of 6 months at a time and shall not apply beyond 12 months
after the enactment of this Act.
(e) During fiscal year 2002, the President may use up to
$50,000,000 under the authority of section 451 of the Foreign
Assistance Act, notwithstanding the funding ceiling in
section 451(a).

policy on terminating the arab league boycott of israel and normalizing
relations with israel

Sec. 535. It is the sense of the Congress that--
(1) the Arab League countries should immediately and
publicly renounce the primary boycott of Israel and the
secondary and tertiary boycott of American firms that have
commercial ties with Israel and should normalize their
relations with Israel;
(2) the decision by the Arab League in 1997 to reinstate
the boycott against Israel was deeply troubling and
disappointing;
(3) the fact that only three Arab countries maintain full
diplomatic relations with Israel is also of deep concern;

[[Page H4508]]

(4) the Arab League should immediately rescind its
decision on the boycott and its members should develop normal
relations with their neighbor Israel; and
(5) the President should--
(A) take more concrete steps to encourage vigorously Arab
League countries to renounce publicly the primary boycotts of
Israel and the secondary and tertiary boycotts of American
firms that have commercial relations with Israel and to
normalize their relations with Israel;
(B) take into consideration the participation of any
recipient country in the primary boycott of Israel and the
secondary and tertiary boycotts of American firms that have
commercial relations with Israel when determining whether to
sell weapons to said country;
(C) report to Congress annually on the specific steps
being taken by the United States and the progress achieved to
bring about a public renunciation of the Arab primary boycott
of Israel and the secondary and tertiary boycotts of American
firms that have commercial relations with Israel and to
expand the process of normalizing ties between Arab League
countries and Israel; and
(D) encourage the allies and trading partners of the
United States to enact laws prohibiting businesses from
complying with the boycott and penalizing businesses that do
comply.

administration of justice activities

Sec. 536. Of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act for ``Economic Support Fund'',
assistance may be provided to strengthen the administration
of justice in countries in Latin America and the Caribbean
and in other regions consistent with the provisions of
section 534(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, except
that programs to enhance protection of participants in
judicial cases may be conducted notwithstanding section 660
of that Act. Funds made available pursuant to this section
may be made available notwithstanding section 534(c) and the
second and third sentences of section 534(e) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961.

eligibility for assistance

Sec. 537. (a) Assistance Through Nongovernmental
Organizations.--Restrictions contained in this or any other
Act with respect to assistance for a country shall not be
construed to restrict assistance in support of programs of
nongovernmental organizations from funds appropriated by this
Act to carry out the provisions of chapters 1, 10, 11, and 12
of part I and chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, and from funds appropriated under the heading
``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States'':
Provided, That the President shall take into consideration,
in any case in which a restriction on assistance would be
applicable but for this subsection, whether assistance in
support of programs of nongovernmental organizations is in
the national interest of the United States: Provided further,
That before using the authority of this subsection to furnish
assistance in support of programs of nongovernmental
organizations, the President shall notify the Committees on
Appropriations under the regular notification procedures of
those committees, including a description of the program to
be assisted, the assistance to be provided, and the reasons
for furnishing such assistance: Provided further, That
nothing in this subsection shall be construed to alter any
existing statutory prohibitions against abortion or
involuntary sterilizations contained in this or any other
Act.
(b) Public Law 480.--During fiscal year 2002,
restrictions contained in this or any other Act with respect
to assistance for a country shall not be construed to
restrict assistance under the Agricultural Trade Development
and Assistance Act of 1954: Provided, That none of the funds
appropriated to carry out title I of such Act and made
available pursuant to this subsection may be obligated or
expended except as provided through the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.
(c) Exception.--This section shall not apply--
(1) with respect to section 620A of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 or any comparable provision of law
prohibiting assistance to countries that support
international terrorism; or
(2) with respect to section 116 of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 or any comparable provision of law prohibiting
assistance to the government of a country that violate
internationally recognized human rights.

earmarks

Sec. 538. (a) Funds appropriated by this Act which are
earmarked may be reprogrammed for other programs within the
same account notwithstanding the earmark if compliance with
the earmark is made impossible by operation of any provision
of this or any other Act: Provided, That any such
reprogramming shall be subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: Provided
further, That assistance that is reprogrammed pursuant to
this subsection shall be made available under the same terms
and conditions as originally provided.
(b) In addition to the authority contained in subsection
(a), the original period of availability of funds
appropriated by this Act and administered by the United
States Agency for International Development that are
earmarked for particular programs or activities by this or
any other Act shall be extended for an additional fiscal year
if the Administrator of such agency determines and reports
promptly to the Committees on Appropriations that the
termination of assistance to a country or a significant
change in circumstances makes it unlikely that such earmarked
funds can be obligated during the original period of
availability: Provided, That such earmarked funds that are
continued available for an additional fiscal year shall be
obligated only for the purpose of such earmark.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there amendments to that portion of the bill?

Point of Order

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a point
of order that the language on page 75, lines 21 through 23, is not in
order because it violates clause 21 of the House rules which prohibits
legislation in an appropriation bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I wish to be heard.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, the Committee on International Relations is
objecting to language in the bill that prevents authorization acts from
earmarking previously appropriated funds.
The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) on behalf of the committee
is objecting to language that has been carried in this bill for 3
years. I believe that the authorization committee should set policy and
funding ceilings, but they should not be allowed to earmark
appropriated funds or mandate minimum funding levels, either before or
after we have enacted appropriations bills.
However, as a technical matter, it is correct that this language is
legislative in nature, and I concede the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained, and
section 539 is stricken from the bill.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder
of the bill through page 107, line 10, be considered as read, printed
in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Arizona?
There was no objection.
The text of the bill from page 75, line 17, through page 107, line
10, is as follows:

ceilings and earmarks

Sec. 539. Ceilings and earmarks contained in this Act shall
not be applicable to funds or authorities appropriated or
otherwise made available by any subsequent Act unless such
Act specifically so directs. Earmarks or minimum funding
requirements contained in any other Act shall not be
applicable to funds appropriated by this Act.

prohibition on publicity or propaganda

Sec. 540. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within
the United States not authorized before the date of the
enactment of this Act by the Congress: Provided, That not to
exceed $750,000 may be made available to carry out the
provisions of section 316 of Public Law 96-533.

purchase of american-made equipment and products

Sec. 541. To the maximum extent possible, assistance
provided under this Act should make full use of American
resources, including commodities, products, and services.

prohibition of payments to united nations members

Sec. 542. None of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act for carrying out the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, may be used to pay in whole or in part any
assessments, arrearages, or dues of any member of the United
Nations or, from funds appropriated by this Act to carry out
chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
the costs for participation of another country's delegation
at international conferences held under the auspices of
multilateral or international organizations.

nongovernmental organizations--documentation

Sec. 543. None of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act shall be available to a nongovernmental
organization which fails to provide upon timely request any
document, file, or record necessary to the auditing
requirements of the United States Agency for International
Development.

Prohibition on Assistance to Foreign Governments that Export Lethal
Military Equipment to Countries Supporting International Terrorism

Sec. 544. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this Act may be available to any foreign
government which provides lethal military equipment to a
country the government of which the Secretary of State has
determined is a terrorist

[[Page H4509]]

government for purposes of section 6(j) of the Export
Administration Act. The prohibition under this section with
respect to a foreign government shall terminate 12 months
after that government ceases to provide such military
equipment. This section applies with respect to lethal
military equipment provided under a contract entered into
after October 1, 1997.
(b) Assistance restricted by subsection (a) or any other
similar provision of law, may be furnished if the President
determines that furnishing such assistance is important to
the national interests of the United States.
(c) Whenever the waiver of subsection (b) is exercised, the
President shall submit to the appropriate congressional
committees a report with respect to the furnishing of such
assistance. Any such report shall include a detailed
explanation of the assistance to be provided, including the
estimated dollar amount of such assistance, and an
explanation of how the assistance furthers United States
national interests.

withholding of assistance for parking fines owed by foreign countries

Sec. 545. (a) In General.--Of the funds made available for
a foreign country under part I of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961, an amount equivalent to 110 percent of the total
unpaid fully adjudicated parking fines and penalties owed to
the District of Columbia by such country as of the date of
the enactment of this Act shall be withheld from obligation
for such country until the Secretary of State certifies and
reports in writing to the appropriate congressional
committees that such fines and penalties are fully paid to
the government of the District of Columbia.
(b) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
``appropriate congressional committees'' means the Committee
on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of
the Senate and the Committee on International Relations and
the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives.

limitation on assistance for the plo for the west bank and gaza

Sec. 546. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
obligated for assistance for the Palestine Liberation
Organization for the West Bank and Gaza unless the President
has exercised the authority under section 604(a) of the
Middle East Peace Facilitation Act of 1995 (title VI of
Public Law 104-107) or any other legislation to suspend or
make inapplicable section 307 of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 and that suspension is still in effect: Provided,
That if the President fails to make the certification under
section 604(b)(2) of the Middle East Peace Facilitation Act
of 1995 or to suspend the prohibition under other
legislation, funds appropriated by this Act may not be
obligated for assistance for the Palestine Liberation
Organization for the West Bank and Gaza.

war crimes tribunals drawdown

Sec. 547. If the President determines that doing so will
contribute to a just resolution of charges regarding genocide
or other violations of international humanitarian law, the
President may direct a drawdown pursuant to section 552(c) of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, of up to
$30,000,000 of commodities and services for the United
Nations War Crimes Tribunal established with regard to the
former Yugoslavia by the United Nations Security Council or
such other tribunals or commissions as the Council may
establish to deal with such violations, without regard to the
ceiling limitation contained in paragraph (2) thereof:
Provided, That the determination required under this section
shall be in lieu of any determinations otherwise required
under section 552(c): Provided further, That the drawdown
made under this section for any tribunal shall not be
construed as an endorsement or precedent for the
establishment of any standing or permanent international
criminal tribunal or court: Provided further, That funds made
available for tribunals other than Yugoslavia or Rwanda shall
be made available subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

landmines

Sec. 548. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
demining equipment available to the United States Agency for
International Development and the Department of State and
used in support of the clearance of landmines and unexploded
ordnance for humanitarian purposes may be disposed of on a
grant basis in foreign countries, subject to such terms and
conditions as the President may prescribe.

restrictions concerning the palestinian authority

Sec. 549. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
obligated or expended to create in any part of Jerusalem a
new office of any department or agency of the United States
Government for the purpose of conducting official United
States Government business with the Palestinian Authority
over Gaza and Jericho or any successor Palestinian governing
entity provided for in the Israel-PLO Declaration of
Principles: Provided, That this restriction shall not apply
to the acquisition of additional space for the existing
Consulate General in Jerusalem: Provided further, That
meetings between officers and employees of the United States
and officials of the Palestinian Authority, or any successor
Palestinian governing entity provided for in the Israel-PLO
Declaration of Principles, for the purpose of conducting
official United States Government business with such
authority should continue to take place in locations other
than Jerusalem. As has been true in the past, officers and
employees of the United States Government may continue to
meet in Jerusalem on other subjects with Palestinians
(including those who now occupy positions in the Palestinian
Authority), have social contacts, and have incidental
discussions.

prohibition of payment of certain expenses

Sec. 550. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act under the heading ``International
Military Education and Training'' or ``Foreign Military
Financing Program'' for Informational Program activities or
under the headings ``Child Survival and Health Programs
Fund'', ``Development Assistance'', and ``Economic Support
Fund'' may be obligated or expended to pay for--
(1) alcoholic beverages; or
(2) entertainment expenses for activities that are
substantially of a recreational character, including entrance
fees at sporting events and amusement parks.

special debt relief for the poorest

Sec. 551. (a) Authority To Reduce Debt.--The President may
reduce amounts owed to the United States (or any agency of
the United States) by an eligible country as a result of--
(1) guarantees issued under sections 221 and 222 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961;
(2) credits extended or guarantees issued under the Arms
Export Control Act; or
(3) any obligation or portion of such obligation, to pay
for purchases of United States agricultural commodities
guaranteed by the Commodity Credit Corporation under export
credit guarantee programs authorized pursuant to section 5(f
) of the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act of June 29,
1948, as amended, section 4(b) of the Food for Peace Act of
1966, as amended (Public Law 89-808), or section 202 of the
Agricultural Trade Act of 1978, as amended (Public Law 95-
501).
(b) Limitations.--
(1) The authority provided by subsection (a) may be
exercised only to implement multilateral official debt relief
and referendum agreements, commonly referred to as ``Paris
Club Agreed Minutes''.
(2) The authority provided by subsection (a) may be
exercised only in such amounts or to such extent as is
provided in advance by appropriations Acts.
(3) The authority provided by subsection (a) may be
exercised only with respect to countries with heavy debt
burdens that are eligible to borrow from the International
Development Association, but not from the International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development, commonly referred to as
``IDA-only'' countries.
(c) Conditions.--The authority provided by subsection (a)
may be exercised only with respect to a country whose
government--
(1) does not have an excessive level of military
expenditures;
(2) has not repeatedly provided support for acts of
international terrorism;
(3) is not failing to cooperate on international narcotics
control matters;
(4) (including its military or other security forces) does
not engage in a consistent pattern of gross violations of
internationally recognized human rights; and
(5) is not ineligible for assistance because of the
application of section 527 of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995.
(d) Availability of Funds.--The authority provided by
subsection (a) may be used only with regard to funds
appropriated by this Act under the heading ``Debt
Restructuring''.
(e) Certain Prohibitions Inapplicable.--A reduction of debt
pursuant to subsection (a) shall not be considered assistance
for purposes of any provision of law limiting assistance to a
country. The authority provided by subsection (a) may be
exercised notwithstanding section 620(r) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 or section 321 of the International
Development and Food Assistance Act of 1975.

authority to engage in debt buybacks or sales

Sec. 552. (a) Loans Eligible for Sale, Reduction, or
Cancellation.--
(1) Authority to sell, reduce, or cancel certain loans.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the President
may, in accordance with this section, sell to any eligible
purchaser any concessional loan or portion thereof made
before January 1, 1995, pursuant to the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, to the government of any eligible country as
defined in section 702(6) of that Act or on receipt of
payment from an eligible purchaser, reduce or cancel such
loan or portion thereof, only for the purpose of
facilitating--
(A) debt-for-equity swaps, debt-for-development swaps, or
debt-for-nature swaps; or
(B) a debt buyback by an eligible country of its own
qualified debt, only if the eligible country uses an
additional amount of the local currency of the eligible
country, equal to not less than 40 percent of the price paid
for such debt by such eligible country, or the difference
between the price paid for such debt and the face value of
such debt, to support activities that link conservation and
sustainable use of natural resources with local community
development, and child survival and other child development,
in a manner consistent with sections 707 through 710

[[Page H4510]]

of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, if the sale,
reduction, or cancellation would not contravene any term or
condition of any prior agreement relating to such loan.
(2) Terms and conditions.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the President shall, in accordance with
this section, establish the terms and conditions under which
loans may be sold, reduced, or canceled pursuant to this
section.
(3) Administration.--The Facility, as defined in section
702(8) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, shall notify
the administrator of the agency primarily responsible for
administering part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 of
purchasers that the President has determined to be eligible,
and shall direct such agency to carry out the sale,
reduction, or cancellation of a loan pursuant to this
section. Such agency shall make an adjustment in its accounts
to reflect the sale, reduction, or cancellation.
(4) Limitation.--The authorities of this subsection shall
be available only to the extent that appropriations for the
cost of the modification, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, are made in advance.
(b) Deposit of Proceeds.--The proceeds from the sale,
reduction, or cancellation of any loan sold, reduced, or
canceled pursuant to this section shall be deposited in the
United States Government account or accounts established for
the repayment of such loan.
(c) Eligible Purchasers.--A loan may be sold pursuant to
subsection (a)(1)(A) only to a purchaser who presents plans
satisfactory to the President for using the loan for the
purpose of engaging in debt-for-equity swaps, debt-for-
development swaps, or debt-for-nature swaps.
(d) Debtor Consultations.--Before the sale to any eligible
purchaser, or any reduction or cancellation pursuant to this
section, of any loan made to an eligible country, the
President should consult with the country concerning the
amount of loans to be sold, reduced, or canceled and their
uses for debt-for-equity swaps, debt-for-development swaps,
or debt-for-nature swaps.
(e) Availability of Funds.--The authority provided by
subsection (a) may be used only with regard to funds
appropriated by this Act under the heading ``Debt
Restructuring''.

restrictions on voluntary contributions to united nations agencies

Sec. 553. (a) Prohibition on Voluntary Contributions for
the United Nations.--None of the funds appropriated by this
Act may be made available to pay any voluntary contribution
of the United States to the United Nations (including the
United Nations Development Program) if the United Nations
implements or imposes any taxation on any United States
persons.
(b) Certification Required for Disbursement of Funds.--None
of the funds appropriated by this Act may be made available
to pay any voluntary contribution of the United States to the
United Nations (including the United Nations Development
Program) unless the President certifies to the Congress 15
days in advance of such payment that the United Nations is
not engaged in any effort to implement or impose any taxation
on United States persons in order to raise revenue for the
United Nations or any of its specialized agencies.
(c) Definitions.--As used in this section the term ``United
States person'' refers to--
(1) a natural person who is a citizen or national of the
United States; or
(2) a corporation, partnership, or other legal entity
organized under the United States or any State, territory,
possession, or district of the United States.

haiti coast guard

Sec. 554. The Government of Haiti shall be eligible to
purchase defense articles and services under the Arms Export
Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), for the Coast Guard:
Provided, That the authority provided by this section shall
be subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.

limitation on assistance to the palestinian authority

Sec. 555. (a) Prohibition of Funds.--None of the funds
appropriated by this Act to carry out the provisions of
chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
may be obligated or expended with respect to providing funds
to the Palestinian Authority.
(b) Waiver.--The prohibition included in subsection (a)
shall not apply if the President certifies in writing to the
Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro
tempore of the Senate that waiving such prohibition is
important to the national security interests of the United
States.
(c) Period of Application of Waiver.--Any waiver pursuant
to subsection (b) shall be effective for no more than a
period of 6 months at a time and shall not apply beyond 12
months after the enactment of this Act.

limitation on assistance to security forces

Sec. 556. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be provided to any unit of the security forces of a foreign
country if the Secretary of State has credible evidence that
such unit has committed gross violations of human rights,
unless the Secretary determines and reports to the Committees
on Appropriations that the government of such country is
taking effective measures to bring the responsible members of
the security forces unit to justice: Provided, That nothing
in this section shall be construed to withhold funds made
available by this Act from any unit of the security forces of
a foreign country not credibly alleged to be involved in
gross violations of human rights: Provided further, That in
the event that funds are withheld from any unit pursuant to
this section, the Secretary of State shall promptly inform
the foreign government of the basis for such action and
shall, to the maximum extent practicable, assist the foreign
government in taking effective measures to bring the
responsible members of the security forces to justice.

Discrimination against minority religious faiths in the Russian
Federation

Sec. 557. None of the funds appropriated under this Act may
be made available for the Government of the Russian
Federation, after 180 days from the date of the enactment of
this Act, unless the President determines and certifies in
writing to the Committees on Appropriations and the Committee
on Foreign Relations of the Senate that the Government of the
Russian Federation has implemented no statute, executive
order, regulation or similar government action that would
discriminate, or would have as its principal effect
discrimination, against religious groups or religious
communities in the Russian Federation in violation of
accepted international agreements on human rights and
religious freedoms to which the Russian Federation is a
party.

assistance for the middle east

Sec. 558. Of the funds appropriated in titles II and III of
this Act under the headings ``Economic Support Fund'',
``Foreign Military Financing Program'', ``International
Military Education and Training'', ``Peacekeeping
Operations'', for refugees resettling in Israel under the
heading ``Migration and Refugee Assistance'', and for
assistance for Israel to carry out provisions of chapter 8 of
part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 under the
heading ``Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and
Related Programs'', not more than a total of $5,141,150,000
may be made available for Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, the
West Bank and Gaza, the Israel-Lebanon Monitoring Group, the
Multinational Force and Observers, the Middle East Regional
Democracy Fund, Middle East Regional Cooperation, and Middle
East Multilateral Working Groups: Provided, That any funds
that were appropriated under such headings in prior fiscal
years and that were at the time of the enactment of this Act
obligated or allocated for other recipients may not during
fiscal year 2002 be made available for activities that, if
funded under this Act, would be required to count against
this ceiling: Provided further, That funds may be made
available notwithstanding the requirements of this section if
the President determines and certifies to the Committees on
Appropriations that it is important to the national security
interest of the United States to do so and any such
additional funds shall only be provided through the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

enterprise fund restrictions

Sec. 559. Prior to the distribution of any assets resulting
from any liquidation, dissolution, or winding up of an
Enterprise Fund, in whole or in part, the President shall
submit to the Committees on Appropriations, in accordance
with the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations, a plan for the distribution of the assets of
the Enterprise Fund.

cambodia

Sec. 560. (a) The Secretary of the Treasury should instruct
the United States executive directors of the international
financial institutions to use the voice and vote of the
United States to oppose loans to the Central Government of
Cambodia, except loans to support basic human needs.
(b) None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be made
available for assistance (except for assistance for basic
education) for the Central Government of Cambodia.

FOREIGN MILITARY TRAINING REPORT

Sec. 561. (a) The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of
State shall jointly provide to the Congress by March 1, 2002,
a report on all military training provided to foreign
military personnel (excluding sales, and excluding training
provided to the military personnel of countries belonging to
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization) under programs
administered by the Department of Defense and the Department
of State during fiscal years 2001 and 2002, including those
proposed for fiscal year 2002. This report shall include, for
each such military training activity, the foreign policy
justification and purpose for the training activity, the cost
of the training activity, the number of foreign students
trained and their units of operation, and the location of the
training. In addition, this report shall also include, with
respect to United States personnel, the operational benefits
to United States forces derived from each such training
activity and the United States military units involved in
each such training activity. This report may include a
classified annex if deemed necessary and appropriate.
(b) For purposes of this section a report to Congress shall
be deemed to mean a report to the Appropriations and Foreign
Relations Committees of the Senate and the Appropriations and
International Relations Committees of the House of
Representatives.

korean peninsula energy development organization

Sec. 562. (a) Of the funds made available under the heading
``Nonproliferation, Anti-

[[Page H4511]]

terrorism, Demining and Related Programs'', not to exceed
$95,000,000 may be made available for the Korean Peninsula
Energy Development Organization (hereafter referred to in
this section as ``KEDO''), notwithstanding any other
provision of law, only for the administrative expenses and
heavy fuel oil costs associated with the Agreed Framework.
(b) Such funds may be made available for KEDO only if, 15
days prior to such obligation of funds, the President
certifies and so reports to Congress that--
(1) the parties to the Agreed Framework have taken and
continue to take demonstrable steps to implement the Joint
Declaration on Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula;
(2) North Korea is complying with all provisions of the
Agreed Framework; and
(3) the United States is continuing to make significant
progress on eliminating the North Korean ballistic missile
threat, including further missile tests and its ballistic
missile exports.
(c) The President may waive the certification requirements
of subsection (b) if the President determines that it is
vital to the national security interests of the United States
and provides written policy justifications to the appropriate
congressional committees. No funds may be obligated for KEDO
until 15 days after submission to Congress of such waiver.
(d) The Secretary of State shall, at the time of the annual
presentation for appropriations, submit a report providing a
full and detailed accounting of the fiscal year 2003 request
for the United States contribution to KEDO, the expected
operating budget of KEDO, proposed annual costs associated
with heavy fuel oil purchases, including unpaid debt, and the
amount of funds pledged by other donor nations and
organizations to support KEDO activities on a per country
basis, and other related activities.
(e) The final proviso under the heading ``International
Organizations and Programs'' in the Foreign Operations,
Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act,
1996 (Public Law 104-107) is repealed.

plo compliance report

Sec. 563. (a) Reporting Requirement.--The President shall,
at the time specified in subsection (b), submit a report to
the Congress assessing the steps that the Palestine
Liberation Organization (PLO), or the Palestinian Authority,
as appropriate, has taken to comply with its 1993 commitments
to renounce the use of terrorism and all other acts of
violence and to assume responsibility over all PLO or
Palestinian Authority elements and personnel in order to
assure their compliance, prevent violations, and discipline
violators, including the arrest and prosecution of
individuals involved in acts of terror and violence. The
President shall determine, based on such assessment, whether
the PLO or the Palestinian Authority, as appropriate, has
substantially complied with such commitments. If the
President determines based on the assessment that such
compliance has not occurred, then the President shall, for a
period of time of not less than six months, impose one or
more of the following sanctions:
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
President shall withdraw or terminate any waiver by the
President of the requirements of section 1003 of the Foreign
Relations Authorization Act of 1988 and 1989 (22 U.S.C. 5202)
(prohibiting the establishment or maintenance of a
Palestinian information office in the United States), and
such section shall apply so as to prohibit the operation of a
PLO or Palestinian Authority office in the United States from
carrying out any function other than those functions carried
out by the Palestinian information office in existence prior
to the Oslo Accords.
(2) The President shall designate the PLO, or one or more
of its constituent groups (including Fatah and Tanzim) or
groups operating as arms of the Palestinian Authority
(including Force 17) as a foreign terrorist organization, in
accordance with section 219(a) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act.
(3) United States assistance (except humanitarian
assistance) shall not be provided for the West Bank and Gaza
Program.
(b) Submission of Report.--The report required under
subsection (a) shall be transmitted not later than 60 days
after the date of enactment of this Act and shall cover the
period commencing June 13, 2001.
(c) Update of Report.--The President shall update the
report submitted pursuant to subsection (a) as part of the
next report required under the PLO Commitments Compliance Act
of 1989 (title VIII of Public Law 101-246).
(d) Waiver Authority.--The President may waive any or all
of the sanctions imposed under subsection (a) if the
President determines and reports to the appropriate
committees of the Congress that such a waiver is in the
national security interests of the United States.

PROHIBITION ON ASSISTANCE TO THE PALESTINIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION

Sec. 564. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used to provide equipment,
technical support, consulting services, or any other form of
assistance to the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation.

IRAQ

Sec. 565. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds
appropriated under the heading ``Economic Support Fund'' may
be made available for programs benefiting the Iraqi people
and to support efforts to bring about political transition in
Iraq.

west bank and gaza program

Sec. 567. For fiscal year 2002, 30 days prior to the
initial obligation of funds for the bilateral West Bank and
Gaza Program, the Secretary of State shall certify to the
appropriate committees of Congress that procedures have been
established to assure the Comptroller General of the United
States will have access to appropriate United States
financial information in order to review the uses of United
States assistance for the Program funded under the heading
``Economic Support Fund'' for the West Bank and Gaza.

INDONESIA

Sec. 568. (a) Funds appropriated by this Act under the
headings ``International Military Education and Training''
and ``Foreign Military Financing Program'' may be made
available for Indonesian Ministry of Defense or military
personnel if the President determines and submits a report to
the appropriate congressional committees that the Government
of Indonesia and the Indonesian Armed Forces are--
(1) taking effective measures to bring to justice members
of the armed forces and militia groups against whom there is
credible evidence of human rights violations;
(2) taking effective measures to bring to justice members
of the armed forces against whom there is credible evidence
of aiding or abetting militia groups;
(3) allowing displaced persons and refugees to return home
to East Timor, including providing safe passage for refugees
returning from West Timor;
(4) not impeding the activities of the United Nations
Transitional Authority in East Timor;
(5) demonstrating a commitment to preventing incursions
into East Timor by members of militia groups in West Timor;
and
(6) demonstrating a commitment to accountability by
cooperating with investigations and prosecutions of members
of the Indonesian Armed Forces and militia groups responsible
for human rights violations in Indonesia and East Timor.

man and the biosphere

Sec. 569. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be provided for the United Nations
Man and the Biosphere Program.

taiwan reporting requirement

Sec. 570. Not less than 30 days prior to the next round of
arms talks between the United States and Taiwan, the
President shall consult, on a classified basis, with
appropriate Congressional leaders and committee chairmen and
ranking members regarding the following matters:
(1) Taiwan's requests for purchase of defense articles and
defense services during the pending round of arms talks;
(2) the Administration's assessment of the legitimate
defense needs of Taiwan, in light of Taiwan's requests; and
(3) the decision-making process used by the Executive
branch to consider those requests.

restrictions on assistance to governments destabilizing sierra leone

Sec. 571. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this Act
may be made available for assistance for the government of
any country that the Secretary of State determines there is
credible evidence that such government has provided lethal or
non-lethal military support or equipment, directly or through
intermediaries, within the previous 6 months to the Sierra
Leone Revolutionary United Front (RUF), or any other group
intent on destabilizing the democratically elected government
of the Republic of Sierra Leone.
(b) None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be made
available for assistance for the government of any country
that the Secretary of State determines there is credible
evidence that such government has aided or abetted, within
the previous 6 months, in the illicit distribution,
transportation, or sale of diamonds mined in Sierra Leone.
(c) Whenever the prohibition on assistance required under
subsection (a) or (b) is exercised, the Secretary of State
shall notify the Committees on Appropriations in a timely
manner.

voluntary separation incentives

Sec. 572. Section 579(c)(2)(D) of the Foreign Operations,
Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act,
2000, as enacted by section 1000(a)(2) of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106-113), as amended, is
further amended by striking ``December 31, 2001'' and
inserting in lieu thereof ``December 31, 2002''.

contributions to united nations population fund

Sec. 573. (a) Limitations on Amount of Contribution.--Of
the amounts made available under ``International
Organizations and Programs'', not more than $25,000,000 for
fiscal year 2002 shall be available for the United Nations
Population Fund (hereafter in this subsection referred to as
the ``UNFPA'').
(b) Prohibition on Use of Funds in China.--None of the
funds made available under ``International Organizations and
Programs'' may be made available for the UNFPA for a country
program in the People's Republic of China.
(c) Conditions on Availability of Funds.--Amounts made
available under ``International Organizations and Programs''
for fiscal year 2002 for the UNFPA may not be made available
to UNFPA unless--

[[Page H4512]]

(1) the UNFPA maintains amounts made available to the UNFPA
under this section in an account separate from other accounts
of the UNFPA;
(2) the UNFPA does not commingle amounts made available to
the UNFPA under this section with other sums; and
(3) the UNFPA does not fund abortions.
(d) Report to the Congress and Withholding of Funds.--
(1) Not later than February 15, 2002, the Secretary of
State shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional
committees indicating the amount of funds that the United
Nations Population Fund is budgeting for the year in which
the report is submitted for a country program in the People's
Republic of China.
(2) If a report under subparagraph (A) indicates that the
United Nations Population Fund plans to spend funds for a
country program in the People's Republic of China in the year
covered by the report, then the amount of such funds that the
UNFPA plans to spend in the People's Republic of China shall
be deducted from the funds made available to the UNFPA after
March 1 for obligation for the remainder of the fiscal year
in which the report is submitted.

american churchwomen in el salvador

Sec. 574. (a) Information relevant to the December 2, 1980,
murders of four American churchwomen in El Salvador shall be
made public to the fullest extent possible.
(b) The Secretary of State and the Department of State are
to be commended for fully releasing information regarding the
murders.
(c) The President shall order all Federal agencies and
departments that process relevant information to make every
effort to declassify and release to the victims' families
relevant information as expeditiously as possible.
(d) In making determinations concerning the
declassification and release of relevant information, the
Federal agencies and departments shall presume in favor of
releasing, rather than of withholding, such information.

procurement and financial management reform

Sec. 575. (a) Funding Conditions.--Of the funds made
available under the heading ``International Financial
Institutions'' in this Act, 10 percent of the United States
portion or payment to such International Financial
Institution shall be withheld by the Secretary of the
Treasury, until the Secretary certifies to the Committees on
Appropriations that, to the extent pertinent to its lending
programs, the institution is--
(1) Implementing procedures for conducting annual audits by
qualified independent auditors for all new investment
lending;
(2) Implementing procedures for annual independent external
audits of central bank financial statements for countries
making use of International Monetary Fund resources under new
arrangements or agreements with the Fund;
(3) Taking steps to establish an independent fraud and
corruption investigative organization or office;
(4) Implementing a process to assess a recipient country's
procurement and financial management capabilities including
an analysis of the risks of corruption prior to initiating
new investment lending; and
(5) Taking steps to fund and implement programs and
policies to improve transparency and anti-corruption programs
and procurement and financial management controls in
recipient countries.
(b) Report.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall report on
March 1, 2002 to the Committees on Appropriations on progress
made by each International Financial Institution, and, to the
extent pertinent to its lending programs, the International
Monetary Fund, to fulfill the objectives identified in
subsection (a) and on progress of the International Monetary
Fund to implement procedures for annual independent external
audits of central bank financial statements for countries
making use of Fund resources under all new arrangements with
the Fund.
(c) Definitions.--The term ``International Financial
Institutions'' means the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, the International Development
Association, the International Finance Corporation, the
Inter-American Development Bank, the Inter-American
Investment Corporation, the Enterprise for the Americas
Multilateral Investment Fund, the Asian Development Bank, the
Asian Development Fund, the African Development Bank, the
African Development Fund, the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, and the International
Monetary Fund.

COMMERCIAL LEASING OF DEFENSE ARTICLES

Sec. 576. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations, the authority of section 23(a)
of the Arms Export Control Act may be used to provide
financing to Israel, Egypt and NATO and major non-NATO allies
for the procurement by leasing (including leasing with an
option to purchase) of defense articles from United States
commercial suppliers, not including Major Defense Equipment
(other than helicopters and other types of aircraft having
possible civilian application), if the President determines
that there are compelling foreign policy or national security
reasons for those defense articles being provided by
commercial lease rather than by government-to-government sale
under such Act.

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

abolition of the inter-american foundation

Sec. 577. Section 586 of the Foreign Operations, Export
Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2000, as
enacted by section 1000(a)(2) of Public Law 106-113, as
amended, is further amended by striking ``years 2000 and
2001'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``years 2000, 2001, and
2002''.

Point of Order

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order that
the language on page 107, lines 11 through 17, is not in order because
it violates clause 2 of rule XXI of the House rules which prohibits
legislation on an appropriations bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) wish to be
heard on the point of order?
Mr. KOLBE. No, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair finds that this provision directly amends
existing law. The provision therefore constitutes legislation in
violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained, and
section 577 is stricken from the bill.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

War Criminals

Sec. 578. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available pursuant to this Act may be made available for
assistance, with the exception of humanitarian assistance and
assistance for democratization, to any country, entity or
municipality whose competent authorities have failed, as
determined by the Secretary of State, to take necessary and
significant steps to implement its international legal
obligations to apprehend and transfer to the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (the
``Tribunal'') all persons in their territory who have been
publicly indicted by the Tribunal.
(b) The provisions of subsection (a) shall apply unless the
Secretary of State determines and reports to the appropriate
committees of the Congress that the competent authorities of
such country, entity, or municipality are--
(1) cooperating with the Tribunal, including access for
investigators, the provision of documents, and the surrender
and transfer of publicly indicted indictees or assistance in
their apprehension; and
(2) taking steps that are consistent with the Dayton
Accords.
(c) The Secretary of State may waive the application of
subsection (a) with respect to a country, entity, or
municipality upon a written determination to the Committees
on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the
Senate that provision of assistance that would otherwise be
prohibited by that subsection is in the national interest of
the United States.

Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment on behalf
of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) and myself.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 8 offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey:
Page 108, after line 20, insert the following:

sense of the congress relating to cooperation with the international
criminal tribunal for the former yugoslavia

Sec. 579. (a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
(1) All member states of the United Nations have the legal
obligation to cooperate fully with the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.
(2) All parties to the General Framework Agreement for
Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina have the legal obligation to
cooperate fully with the Tribunal in pending cases and
investigations.
(3) The United States Congress continues to insist, as a
condition for the receipt of foreign assistance, that all
governments in the region cooperate fully with the Tribunal
in pending cases and investigations.
(4) The United States Congress strongly supports the
efforts of the Tribunal to bring those responsible for war
crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in the former
Yugoslavia to justice.
(5) Those authorities in Serbia and the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia responsible for the transfer of Slobodan Milosevic
to the Tribunal at The Hague are congratulated.
(6) The governments of Croatia and Bosnia are congratulated
for their cooperation with the Tribunal, particularly
regarding the transfer of indictees to the Tribunal.
(7) At least 30 persons who have been indicted by the
Tribunal remain at large, especially in the Republika Srpska
entity of Bosnia-Herzegovina, including but not limited to
Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic.
(8) The Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe recently adopted a
resolution that emphasizes the importance of cooperation by
member states with the Tribunal.

[[Page H4513]]

(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that:
(1) All governments, entities, and municipalities in the
region, including but not limited to the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia, Serbia, and the Republika Srpska entity of Bosnia
and Herzegovina, are strongly encouraged to cooperate fully
and unreservedly with the International Criminal Tribunal for
the Former Yugoslavia in pending cases and investigations.
(2) All governments, entities, and municipalities in the
region should cooperate fully and unreservedly with the
Tribunal, including (but not limited to) through--
(A) the immediate arrest, surrender, and transfer of all
persons who have been indicted by the Tribunal but remain at
large in the territory which they control; and
(B) full and direct access to Tribunal investigators to
requested documents, archives, witnesses, mass grave sites,
and any officials where necessary for the investigation and
prosecution of crimes under the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House today, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and a Member opposed each will control 10
minutes.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, and I
reserve a point of order against this amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) reserves a point
of order, and will be recognized on the amendment.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for 10
minutes.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
This amendment, Mr. Chairman, underscores our resolve to bring to
justice those responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and
genocide.
Sometimes some people wonder if it is really worth introducing this
complex and complicating factor called justice into U.S. policy toward
the region. Justice may be nice, they argue, but regional stability is
what is really needed in the Balkans. Insisting on the prosecution of
war crimes, they continue, certainly does not help in this regard, and
if our European allies are not pushing this, why should we?
Mr. Chairman, in response, I ask that my colleagues make sure that
time has not faded the horrific images of the Yugoslav conflict, images
of prisoners interred in camps like Omarska, the mass graves of
Vukovar, Srebrenica, and in recent weeks those uncovered in Serbia
itself.
I would just say parenthetically on a trip the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and I made in the early months of the war against
Croatia, we went to Osijek and Vukovar. We were there when it was
surrounded by Serbian military snipers. There were MiGs flying
overhead. We met with people inside of wine cellars who would not come
out because every day snipers were just picking off innocent civilians,
killing these people as they walked down the street, as they leveled
one block after another.
The people who were in Vukovar Hospital, soon after we left, just
months after we left when that city under siege was overtaken, were
literally taken out and killed in a terrible, a horrible way, just shot
and put into a mass grave.
So I would respectfully submit that we must remember those
frightened, innocent peasants who we all saw the images of day in and
day out on CNN fleeing over mountain passes with whatever they could
carry. There were stories of snipers in Vukovar, in Sarajevo, in
Mostar, in other cities, shooting anybody that crossed the street; or
the militants lobbing shells at schools or kids who wrongfully hoped it
would be safe enough to do a little sleigh riding in their hilly
neighborhoods.
It is virtually impossible for us, I would submit, to comprehend what
it is like for these people who did nothing wrong, who posed no threat
to anyone, to have encountered such hostility and such hatred. We must
never forget nor should we ever stop seeking justice for those who
fled, for those who were tortured, for those who were raped repeatedly.
We had hearings, Mr. Chairman. The gentleman might recall in the
Helsinki Commissions we brought in rape victims who, as a matter of
state policy, the Serbian government and the Bosnian Serbs were trying
to make an example of these women to break the back of those people in
Serbia, in Bosnia. It was horrible to see the blank faces and the
vacant look in their eyes, the look of pain, as they came forward to
tell of their stories.
We must put ourselves in their shoes as we consider this amendment.
We must stand there on the edge of that ditch and try to ponder the
notion that these drunken people had their rifles pointed at their
backs, and those sons and daughters and fathers and everyone else were
killed. There needs to be an accounting.
We must remember that these culprits of these horrific crimes are
today living their lives at large, mostly in the Republic of Srpska,
and in Serbia as well.
As a matter of fact, a history of ancient hatreds is really a myth.
They like to throw that out, that somehow this was just all of these
animosities, generation after generation. Nothing was inevitable. This
did not have to happen. Those responsible for this carnage need to be
held to account, people like Karadzic, Mladic, and some 30 others who
have already been indicted by the tribunal who are walking the streets
free today. They need to be held to account.
Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment. I know the chairman may raise a
point of order. It does express our collective concerns as Democrats,
Republicans, and Independents in favor of going forward and being as
aggressive and attentive as we can be.
As I said at the outset, time should not fade these memories. As we
learned from the Holocaust and the atrocities of Nazis, we hunt down
until we bring to justice those who have committed these horrible acts.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
As the gentleman knows, we worked together to craft appropriate
language regarding aid to Yugoslavia and its cooperation with the War
Crimes Tribunal. The bill carries similar language to the fiscal year
2001 bill. It allows assistance to Serbia until March 30, 2002, at
which time the Secretary of State must certify that Serbia is
cooperating with the Tribunal, taking steps consistent with the Dayton
Accords to limit financial cooperation with the Republic of Srpska, and
is respecting minority rights.
The bill also carries separate language requiring that all countries
cooperate with the international criminal tribunal or face penalties.
We arrived at this language through negotiations with the chairman, and
it enjoys the support of most members of the committee.
I understand and agree with the concerns addressed in the gentleman's
amendment, and I am happy that the language included reflects many of
those concerns. I am pleased to note that soon after our subcommittee
marked up this bill former President Milosevic was turned over to the
Tribunal.
Despite this historic event, I strongly support retaining this
language. It recognizes the simple fact that many war criminals remain
at large and that our assistance should continue to be conditioned to a
great degree on continued cooperation with the Tribunal.
I thank the gentleman for his leadership on this issue.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve a point of order on
this amendment, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, let me just say about this issue, I understand the
concerns that people have, and it is one that I share. We want to make
sure that war criminals are brought to justice. We want to make sure
that we move in Serbia to help develop democracy in that region. These
are not mutually exclusive, by any means. But sometimes the orbits may
come into conflict.
We have two provisions in our bill relating to war criminals. Section
582 is a variation of last year's provision affecting Serbia. Section
578 is a streamlined replacement for the so-called Lautenburg amendment
that applies to all countries in the Balkans.
That language, and I was just reading it the other day, it is pages
and pages and pages in the bill that was so complicated it was just
routinely waived. The committee recommendation this year I think is
much more straightforward.

[[Page H4514]]

Regarding Serbia, last year's language prohibited most assistance to
Serbia after March 31 of 2001 unless the President can certify, among
other things, that Yugoslavia was cooperating with the War Crimes
Tribunal in The Hague. Such a certification was made last year. We have
received requests to continue and even to strengthen the language this
year.

{time} 1945

Our recommendation continues the language largely unchanged from last
year. I am not enthusiastic about doing that. We need to help the
people of Serbia and the reformers in that country and the long
struggle they have been facing to reform their society. Punishing them
for not fulfilling every aspect of The Hague Tribunal's directives may
not, and I think is not, positive in the long run. We want to help the
democratic governments in the Balkans. We are not trying to hurt them.
We are not trying to stunt their democratic growth.
The Hague Tribunal is part of an effort to promote democratic
governments. We cannot sacrifice the future of democratic governments
to the procedural niceties, however, of the tribunal. They need to work
together. They need to go hand in hand. The tribunal needs to do its
stuff, but the countries are not always going to find it possible to
comply with every single thing that the tribunal might ask them.
But I think it is worth noting, as every Member of this body is well
aware, that President Milosevic, the key war criminal we were insisting
that Serbia send to the tribunal, has been sent to The Hague. That has
caused an enormous political difficulty for the government in Serbia.
Let us not underestimate the great difficulties the Serbian Government,
both at the provincial level as well as at the national, the federation
level, has had in dealing with this problem.
We also recognize that Croatia needs to send additional war criminals
to The Hague. By bowing to international pressures, particularly
pressure from the United States, the new democratic governments in the
regions are facing tremendous risks, as we have been seeing with the
political upheaval that has followed the transfer of President
Milosevic to The Hague. So in our strong desire to have full compliance
with the tribunal, I hope we do not end up hurting the very governments
that we are trying to help.
So for that reason, I think this is bad legislation, a bad approach
to the problem.
Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time and also
the point of order.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes, just
to respond briefly. And I know a point of order is lodged against this,
or will be shortly, but the language really does focus on all
governments, entities, and municipalities in the region.
And, frankly, when we have a sense of impunity, and I know Kostunica
and others are trying to do their part to try to rein in. While I was
in Paris, at the OSCE parliamentary assembly, we had a very, very
meaningful, as did other members of our delegation, meeting with the
speaker of the parliament in Serbia. And I believe they really are
serious about trying to rein in on the impunity that unfortunately was
the modus operandi of Serbia for so long and the Republic of
Yugoslavia.
This language tries to say we are on your side, we want to help rid,
or at least get to justice, those people who have committed these
terrible crimes, because they intimidate their own people. On day two
of the bombing, one of the people who had come to our Helsinki
Commission and had testified on behalf of free media, at a time when
Milosevic had shut down S92, and other independent media, he was
murdered right after the bombing began. He was shot dead gangland-style
by the thugs of Slobodon Milosevic. Some of those same people are still
walking the streets.
Otpor has come out, and they are naming names of police who have
committed atrocities, putting themselves at considerable risk. So it
seems to me that the more we encourage those democratic forces, and
this is sense of the Congress language granted, the quicker they will
get to a free and hopefully a robust democracy.
Let me just finally say, and I say to this my good friend the
chairman, our hope is that we look very seriously at a police academy
for the Republic of Yugoslavia. We met with General Ralston, our
delegation, on our trip, and he made it very clear that the Kosovo
Academy, which has now graduated some 4,000 police, really is the model
for the region. It is the way we ought to be going.
If we want to exit and pull out NATO troops, U.S. troops, we need to
have on the ground the kind of stability and transparency that a
properly trained police academy with an emphasis on human rights can
bring. And it seems to me that Bosnia and the Republic of Srpska and,
of course, the Republic of Yugoslavia could benefit greatly from it. So
I ask the amendment be supported by my colleagues.

Point of Order

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
make a point of order on the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes
legislation on an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2
of rule XXI. That rule states in part: ``An amendment to a general
appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''
The amendment proposes to state a legislative position. This is a
sense of Congress, clearly states a legislative position, and therefore
violates that part of the rule. And I would ask for a ruling of the
Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
The amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey proposes to
state a legislative position of the House. As such, the amendment
constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The point
of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

User Fees

Sec. 579. The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the
United States Executive Director at each international
financial institution (as defined in section 1701(c)(2) of
the International Financial Institutions Act) and the
International Monetary Fund to oppose any loan of these
institutions that would require user fees or service charges
on poor people for primary education or primary healthcare,
including prevention and treatment efforts for HIV/AIDS,
malaria, tuberculosis, and infant, child, and maternal well-
being, in connection with the institutions' lending programs.

Basic Education Assistance for Pakistan

Sec. 580. Funds appropriated by this Act to carry out the
provisions of chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 may be made available for assistance for basic
education programs for Pakistan, notwithstanding any
provision of law that restricts assistance to foreign
countries.

heavily indebted poor countries trust fund authorization

Sec. 581. Section 801(b)(1) of the Foreign Operations,
Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act,
2001 (Public Law 106-429) is amended by striking
``$435,000,000'' and inserting ``$600,000,000''.

funding for serbia

Sec. 582. (a) Funds appropriated by this Act may be made
available for assistance for Serbia after March 31, 2002, if
the President has made the determination and certification
contained in subsection (c).
(b) After March 31, 2002, the Secretary of the Treasury
should instruct the United States executive directors to
international financial institutions to support loans and
assistance to the Government of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia subject to the conditions in subsection (c).
(c) The determination and certification referred to in
subsection (a) is a determination by the President and a
certification to the Committees on Appropriations that the
Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is--
(1) cooperating with the International Criminal Tribunal
for Yugoslavia including access for investigators, the
provision of documents, and the surrender and transfer of
indictees or assistance in their apprehension;
(2) taking steps that are consistent with the Dayton
Accords to end Serbian financial, political, security and
other support which has served to maintain separate Republika
Srpska institutions; and
(3) taking steps to implement policies which reflect a
respect for minority rights and the rule of law.
(d) Subsections (b) and (c) shall not apply to Montenegro,
Kosovo, humanitarian assistance or assistance to promote
democracy in municipalities.

[[Page H4515]]

improving global health through safe injections

Sec. 583. (a) In carrying out immunization programs and
other programs for the prevention, treatment, and control of
infectious diseases, including tuberculosis, HIV and AIDS,
polio, and malaria, the Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development, in coordination with
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National
Institutes of Health, national and local governments, and
other organizations, such as the World Health Organization
and the United Nations Children's Fund, shall develop and
implement effective strategies to improve injection safety,
including eliminating unnecessary injections, promoting the
availability and use of single-use auto-disable needles and
syringes and other safe injection technologies, strengthening
the procedures for proper needle and syringe disposal, and
improving the education and information provided to the
public and to health professionals.
(b) Not later than March 31, 2002, the Administrator of the
United States Agency for International Development shall
transmit to the Congress a report on the implementation of
subsection (a).

el salvador reconstruction

Sec. 584. During fiscal year 2002, not less than
$100,000,000 shall be made available for rehabilitation and
reconstruction assistance for El Salvador: Provided, That
such funds shall be derived as follows: (1) from funds
appropriated by this Act, not less than $65,000,000, of which
not less than $25,000,000 shall be from funds appropriated
under the heading ``Economic Support Fund'', not to exceed
$25,000,000 shall be from funds appropriated under the
heading ``International Disaster Assistance'', and not to
exceed a total of $15,000,000 shall be from funds
appropriated under the headings ``Child Survival and Health
Programs Fund'' and ``Development Assistance''; and (2) from
funds appropriated under such headings for foreign
operations, export financing, and related programs for fiscal
year 1999 and prior years, not less than $35,000,000:
Provided further, That none of the funds made available under
this section may be obligated for nonproject assistance:
Provided further, That prior to any obligation of funds made
available under this section, the Administrator of the United
States Agency for International Development (USAID) shall
provide the Committees on Appropriations with a detailed
report containing the amount of the proposed obligation and a
description of the programs and projects, on a sector-by-
sector basis, to be funded with such amount: Provided
further, That of the funds made available under this heading,
up to $2,500,000 may be used for administrative expenses,
including auditing costs, of USAID.

Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Conyers

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 11.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Conyers:
Page 112, after line 22, insert the following:

prohibition on aerial spraying efforts to eradicate illicit crops in
colombia

Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act under
the heading ``Department of State-international narcotics
control and law enforcement'' or ``Department of State-andean
counterdrug initiative'' may be used for aerial spraying
efforts to eradicate illicit crops in Colombia.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and a Member opposed each will
control 10 minutes.
Does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) wish to control the time
in opposition?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I seek to control the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Conyers) for 10 minutes.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My colleagues, this amendment is exceedingly uncomplicated. It calls
for the prohibition of aerial spraying efforts in Colombia in an
attempt to eradicate illicit crops. We are offering this amendment
because this program and this part of our Plan Colombia Andean
Initiative has been spectacularly unsuccessful.
We have a number of photographs that I just want to bring to my
colleagues' attention. The picture of the baby was taken by an American
photographer, Angeline Rudd, was taken on a delegation that she went on
to Colombia in March of this year. The little child was caught under
the aerial spray and the rash is a result of the exposure to the
herbicide. The photos of cows grazing in a typical pasture in Putumayo
were taken January 2001 by Paul Dix, professional photographer from
this country. And the next picture, several days later, shows a cow, a
dead cow that had grazed on a pasture that had been sprayed with our
defoliant of choice, Roundup.
This cow and others had failed to notice a warning Monsanto had
issued against grazing livestock within 30 days in fields that have
been sprayed with Roundup, the chemical used in aerial fumigation.
Now, here is the problem. I pose no preference of how we take care of
the eradication of drugs, coca crops; but the problem, if we destroy
farmer's crops before we have gotten to the agricultural alternative,
guess what happens to the farmers? Okay, this is not complicated, my
colleagues. No military background required or not much agricultural
background either. All we do is watch and see what happens as a result.
As results-oriented people, we cannot be destroying poor farmers'
crops, who then either have to, one, go further into the rain forest,
clearing virgin forest for more coca crops, which destabilizes the
ecosystem; or they join the 2 million or more internal refugees in
Colombia, who usually end up in the cities; or they join the largest
employers in the region, the right-wing paramilitary or the left-wing
guerrillas, if they do not get killed in a war between both of them,
who are trying to control more land. Not a pleasant picture.
And so supply-side eradication has a lot in common with its namesake,
supply-side economics.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from
Michigan for calling this to the attention of the House and to agree
with him in saying that aerial fumigation is not going to solve Latin
America's poverty problem, it sure is not going to deal with the drug
addiction problems here at home; but what it is accomplishing is it is
ruining farmers' land, it is damaging the health of farming families,
and it is damaging their livestock.
Surely the work that is being suggested by many leaders, which is
basically a manual inspection of crops, is preferable to an aerial
fumigation that wreaks havoc on land and human health. So I want to
thank the gentleman for his attention to this and indicate my support
for those efforts.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time, and I believe the gentleman from Michigan has raised a very
important point for us to ponder. Unfortunately, we kind of find
ourselves as a body in a ``darned if you do and darned if you don't
situation.'' Because there are areas that have been reported to us that
the best way to get to them is through aerial fumigation, and I think
the gentleman knows that.
But it is certainly not the intent of our Congress to hurt children,
hurt livestock, hurt crops and do inadvertent harm to the population of
these countries. I am not sure what the solution is, but I do want to
say there is a reason that we are doing this aerial fumigation, as the
learned gentleman knows. And I want to say that as a member of the
committee, and I am with the chairman on this, we want to work with the
gentleman on this in any way we can, and I appreciate the gentleman
bringing it up.

{time} 2000

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. KINGSTON. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, has the gentleman ever heard of manual
destruction of the crops as a process?
Mr. KINGSTON. Reclaiming my time, yes. Unfortunately, some of the
reports say in a high, mountainous remote area, the best way to get to
them is from the air because of the resistance.
I do agree that manual destruction is superior. One thing the
gentleman has not mentioned is the pollution to the water that comes
downstream when these agents are applied. We do need to continue to
work this thing through, and figure out the best way to destroy the
crops.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield as much time as she may consume to
the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

[[Page H4516]]

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, in February I had an opportunity to go
to Colombia along with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern),
and we met with all 12 mayors from Putumayo; and they had one message,
please stop the fumigation.
The next day we went along with Ambassador Anne Patterson to
Putumayo, and we met with impoverished farmers whose legal crops had
been destroyed by U.S. fumigation planes. We heard from Colombians
whose children suffered from severe rashes after being sprayed.
Mr. Chairman, after the birth of my granddaughter yesterday, I am
particularly sensitive to the picture of the baby shown by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), and the problems caused to
children. I saw some of those children.
It was reported to us that local drinking water sources were
contaminated from fumigation, as were fish farms. This testimony was
news to Ambassador Patterson, who agreed that more research on the
human health effects of the fumigation is needed.
So many of those suffering under our policy are the poor, working
families not involved in the coca trade. Those who admitted to us that
they grew coca also had compelling arguments for a different strategy
to eradicate the crop. They informed us that their plots were sprayed,
and they would simply move into the jungle, damaging more fragile
habitat, and still producing the product. Others said they would
continue to grow coca because Colombian and U.S. government promises to
provide alternative development and support and food aid yielded no
results.
All of the democratically elected mayors from the southern region
came to Washington, and they said, Let us use manual eradication, as we
have done in Peru in order to successfully get rid of coca. They want
to get rid of coca, too, but they want support for economic development
and alternatives without the coca.
The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) mentioned Monsanto's
Roundup. On the label it says when used in the United States, ``It is a
violation of Federal law to use this product in any manner inconsistent
with its labeling. Do not apply the product in a way that will contact
workers or other persons, either directly or through drift. Only
protected handlers may be in the area during application.''
Entire communities have been sprayed in Colombia. We see livestock,
we see crops, we see water, we see children being sprayed. It is time
for us to end this policy.
Mr. Chairman, even one of the companies that benefits from Roundup,
ICI, a British chemical company, announced 2 weeks ago it would no
longer supply one of the ingredients to the chemical herbicide because,
``it did not wish to be responsible for damage to humans, animals or
the ecology of southern Colombia.'' If it is good enough for this
company that wants to profit, it ought to be good enough for this
Congress to say no more fumigation.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Gilman), the distinguished former chairman of the Committee
on International Relations.
(Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, the use of eradication aerial spraying in
Colombia, while controversial, when put into overall perspective is not
as alarming as many would have us believe. While I admire the objective
of the gentleman who presented the amendment, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers), all of the coca eradication spraying sponsored
by U.S. policy in Colombia combined uses less than 10 percent of the
Roundup herbicide used overall each year in that same nation for their
legitimate farming and other usual eradication uses. That same
herbicide, Roundup, long licensed since 1993 by our own EPA for use
here in our own Nation, is used safely as well in many other areas of
legitimate agricultural production in Colombia. In fact, the drug
producers themselves often use this same herbicide to keep weeds down
around the illicit coca bush to be eradicated by our spray planes.
The real environmental damage is done by the drug producers who slash
and burn the Amazon jungle to plant coca and opium, and then pour tons
of chemicals into the rivers from their illicit laboratories.
Mr. Chairman, there is no other alternative but to help Colombia. We
must work with them to improve their military's human rights records,
which concerns all of us. And as to the manual eradication idea in
Colombia, the narcoterrorists will not let that happen. Just last year,
for example, when record levels of both opium and coca were aerially
eradicated by the anti-drug police, there was not one allegation of
human rights abuse against the anti-drug unit, as I pointed out earlier
today. It is a record we and they can be justly very proud of,
especially in the middle of a raging civil war, a war that is often
financed by the illicit drug monies.
Mr. Chairman, I urge the defeat of this amendment. It is a misguided
proposal to end aerial eradication of coca growth.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GILMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, has the gentleman from New York heard of
Agent Orange in Vietnam and the aftereffects?
Mr. GILMAN. Yes, I am familiar with that, but Agent Orange is not the
kind of spraying that they are using here. They are using Roundup that
the farmers themselves use for their weeds. The farmers in Colombia use
this Roundup themselves. We use it.
Mr. CONYERS. The gentleman from New York will endorse this brand,
Roundup?
Mr. GILMAN. Well, apparently it is being used in our own country as
well. The EPA has approved it.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
We have already stood and debated the record of implementation of
Plan Colombia. One thing which is crystal clear is that programs
designed to provide benefits of alternative development simply have not
materialized.
Assistance is currently being delivered in only two of the 29
communities that have signed pacts to voluntarily eradicate coca. There
are wide-ranging views about the effectiveness of aerial spraying, but
no one disputes the fact that you cannot expect farmers to stop growing
coca if there is no capacity to help them grow something else.
We have heard a lot of promises for improvement from the
administration, but the fact is that we have been promising
acceleration of the program since March, and we have seen very little
progress in terms of additional communities actually receiving
assistance.
Another basic concern is that there are no plans to set up
alternative development programs in other regions of Colombia where
they are spraying crops. In western portions of Colombia, for example,
where many Afro-Colombians reside, spraying has occurred, and there are
no alternative development programs and no plans to set them up.
This amendment simply says, let us take a time out to rethink our
policy. Getting poor farmers to voluntarily and manually eradicate coca
is the ultimate goal of the program. Should not we have programs in
place that demonstrate the rewards of such courageous actions before we
spray on such a wide scale?
In the rush to provide military assets and push into southern
Colombia, we left out a critical part of the plan. The only thing we
succeeded in was generating overwhelming public opposition and distrust
in the regions being sprayed. Is that the path to a long-term solution?
Will that muster the support of the local populations and governments?
This amendment would halt spraying in Colombia and would give planned
alternative development programs time to mature and demonstrate
success. If this were allowed to occur, it would speed eradication of
coca and bring us closer to the ultimate goals of Plan Colombia which
we all share.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume to insert into the Record a letter from

[[Page H4517]]

a senator of the Colombian legislature, Rafael Orduz, who makes the
case to the Congress to consider this problem that is being discussed
and hopes that we can learn as much about it and the harms that are
coming from it as we can so that we may be able to work together to
make the Andean Initiative as successful as it possibly can be made.
Mr. Chairman, I think this is a good time for me to indicate that
under consultation with the ranking members of both sides, I am going
to soon ask unanimous consent to withdraw this amendment. I think the
discussion has been important and I hope it will be useful for all
parties.

Bogota, Colombia,

July 23, 2001.
Congress of the United States of America
Dear Congressmen: You are debating the budget that would
finance anti-narcotics strategy in the framework of Plan
Colombia for fiscal year 2001-2002. As a Colombian Senator it
is my duty to express the concern of millions of Colombians
regarding the continuation of chemical fumigations (using
Round-Up) to eradicate illegal crops in Colombia. Three
arguments for suspending fumigation should be considered: 1.
The strategy is not productive. Since 1992, the year in which
the use of Round-Up for fumigations in Colombia was adopted,
the total area has expanded by 400 percent (40,000 hectares
in 1992, 160,000 hectares in 2001). You should consider the
cost-benefit relationship on behalf of your electorate.
American taxpayers are financing an inefficient strategy.
2. Evidence exists of environmental damage from the
application of the aerial fumigation. Legal crops meant to
feed families are frequently fumigated and water sources are
contaminated. The physical impossibility of acting with
precision has led to the fumigation of agricultural projects
financed with international technical cooperation. There are
serious doubts regarding the effects of additives that are
being used along with RoundUp (like Cosmoflux). I believe
that given the uncertainty regarding environmental effects,
in a society like that of the United Sated great caution
would be exercised in deciding to fumigate without having in
hand studies of environmental impact.
3. The fumigations have generated the forced displacement
of thousands of families toward the large cities, on the one
hand, and toward areas of the Amazon where the cultivation of
illegal crops is expanding due to the absence of alternative
agricultural development policies. In a context of armed
conflict and forced displacement in which the State must seek
a monopoly on the use of force [by] combating groups outside
the law, the fumigations are an attack on the civilian
populations, especially indigenous, Afro-Colombian and
humbles peasant communities.
There exists in some sections of the Congress [of
Colombia], for the reasons noted, the objective of reforming
the anti-narcotics legislation. On the one hand, to de-
criminalize the small producer with the objective of
involving him in plans for alternative development and manual
eradication of illegal crops, and on the other, to suspend
the fumigations.
The Governors of the south of Colombia, elected by popular
vote, have serious proposals for regional alternative
development and reject the fumigations.
With other senators we have encouraged a public debate in
Bogota for next July 31 on the inappropriateness of the
fumigations.
Your collaboration is very important. The tragic business
of narco-trafficking involves demand and supply. You must
examine the hypothesis that each dollar invested in
prevention and treatment of addictions is more cost-
effective. It is very importance to attack the financial
aspects of the business on the supply side, while manual
eradication accompanied by plans for alternative development
will be more efficient for combating narco-trafficking.
Cordially,
Rafael Orduz, Senator.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Souder).
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, first I would like to thank the
distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for his willingness
to work together.
This is a tough issue. Nobody wants to have children or families
damaged by any type of chemical eradication or any other sort of method
of destroying drugs. It is important that we understand that this is
not Agent Orange. This herbicide, the only one that is used in aerial
eradication, actually our government uses less than 10 percent of what
is used in Colombia. The remaining 90 percent is predominantly used to
spray coffee and also for other agricultural products such as soybeans.
It is used for weed control in plantations of fruit trees and bananas.
It is also used in areas for sugar cane.
We do not not drink Colombian coffee, not use the fruit nor the
soybeans nor the sugar cane from Colombia because it has been sprayed
with these items, nor do the people in Colombia. Furthermore, the
narco-people themselves use the same chemical to get rid of the weeds
inside the poppy and the coca.
We need to look at the best way possible to use this, but it is not
that the herbicide is dangerous. Yes, lawsuits can back off companies
from offering it, and say that there are potential problems in any
chemical. But 90 percent of this is used in Colombia for food products
and it is also used by the heroine coca growers themselves.
There were also some comments made about alternative developments not
being in many parts of Colombia. Alternative development is a very
difficult issue. For example, in Bolivia where they do the hand
eradication. Mr. Chairman, I have been down in Colombia at least five
or six times and down in Peru multiple times and in Bolivia about four
or five times. What we see in alternative development and in their
eradication, they were able to do the hand eradication which is very
expensive, but they were not getting shot at like in Colombia.
If you had agricultural extension agents in America who had to carry
an Uzi, we probably would not have as many people willing to be an
agricultural extension agent. We have to get some semblance of law and
order.
It would be better if we can do hand eradication. It would be more
expensive for us, more expensive for the Colombians, but first we have
to have some sense of order on the ground or the people trying to do
that manual eradication will be killed. They will be massacred.

{time} 2015

We have to look for ways to do this.
Furthermore, I have met with different people representing all the
regions of Colombia and in Peru and have seen projects, particularly in
Bolivia and Peru, where alternative development is starting to work.
This year's bill has $482 million for social, legal and alternative
development projects. We have some in Plan Colombia.
The funny thing about last year's bill is it takes a while to build a
helicopter. The helicopters are just getting there. The aid is just
getting there to Colombia. If we can get the order, hopefully the
alternative development and the social development can continue, and
then we can look at other ways to deal with eradication if we can get a
little bit of order.
One last story that I want to share, because it was a very unusual
moment for me and several other Members. While we were waiting for
Speaker Hastert to come together with the rest of our delegation, we
met a young man who had been with the FARC, and he had been collecting
the dues from the agricultural growers. We asked him, just offhand, if
he had ever killed anybody.
He said, ``Yes.''
We said, ``Why?''
He said, ``Because the man was late in his payment.''
We said, ``How did you kill him?''
He said, ``I warned him twice. The man was late on his bill.''
We said, ``But how would you do something like that?''
He said, ``Well, I tried to collect it twice. Then he and his son
were eating in town, and I went up behind him with a gun and shot him
in the back of the head. But he deserved to die. He hadn't paid his
money to us.''
That is the type of battle that we are in in Colombia because of our
drug habits in America. We need to work on drug treatment, prevention,
but we also need to help these people whose country is being overrun.
We need to do it in a way that is safe for children and families.
Hopefully, we can work together to do that.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I yield
to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), hoping that he will reserve
a little time for me so I can respond to the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it very much. I will only take 1
minute.
I want to illustrate something. What is this? That is the sound of
one hand clapping. The only point the gentleman from Michigan is trying
to make is that eradicating coca without giving farmers something else
to do is not very effective. It produces the same results as one hand
clapping.

[[Page H4518]]

All he is trying to suggest, I believe, is that if you want to
continue the spraying, at least deliver the aid that we said would be
delivered in a simultaneous fashion. Because if you do not you
guarantee the failure of the program.
I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. KOLBE. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I think most of the
points that need to be made about the eradication, the fumigation, the
spraying program in Colombia have been made. There is only one that I
would like to make before responding directly to the question or the
comments that were made by the gentleman from Michigan, and that is
that we have seen over and over again that unless we have this, I do
not like to use the word hammer, but unless we have this leverage of
this fumigation program, we have found that farmers do not sign up for
the alternative development programs.
I was down there. Time and again we found this to be the case. Once
you were serious and showed that you were ready, prepared to fumigate,
then the farmers were ready to sign up for the alternative economic
development. Without that, you really do not have much leverage to get
them involved in the program. I think there is a good reason why we
really need to have the fumigation program.
Having said that, let me just say to the gentleman from Michigan that
I am as concerned as he is about the alternative economic assistance
programs down there. When we were there in the Putumayo region in
Puerto Asis, we heard over and over again from farmers that the
fumigation is going on and they are not getting the kind of economic
assistance that had been promised to them.
The message that we left with our USAID people down there and that we
have conveyed to them since we have been back here is that those
programs must go apace, they must go along with this. You cannot have
the fumigation, you cannot have the spraying if you do not give people
some alternative of something they can do. In response to the
fumigation, as an alternative for it, they need to have some kind of
economic livelihood that they can pursue in these regions.
So I would say to the gentleman that I quite agree with him, that it
is absolutely imperative, absolutely important that the money that we
have set aside, which is substantial in this bill, half of the money is
set aside for alternative economic development in this region, that
that money be set aside and that they use that money, they contract
with the contractors they have available down there, they get this
money into the region and that we do the alternative economic
assistance. It is absolutely imperative that we do that. Without that,
our credibility is nil. We may have sprayed the area, but we have not
given the people any basis on which they can rebuild an economic life
for themselves. I quite agree with the gentleman.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a bipartisan
amendment, on behalf of three members of the Helsinki Commission, which
expresses the sense of Congress that all governments should cooperate
fully and unreservedly with the International Criminal Tribunal for the
Former Yugoslavia.
My amendment congratulates the governments of Serbia, the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia, Croatia and Bosnia for their cooperation to
date with the Tribunal. I particularly want to commend those
authorities in Serbia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia that were
responsible for the transfer of Slobodan Milosevic to the Hague.
My amendment also states that much work remains to be done in
cooperation with the Tribunal. At least 30 persons who have been
indicted by the Tribunal remain at large, especially in the Republika
Srpska entity of Bosnia-Herzegovina, including but not limited to
Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic.
The amendment also calls on all governments, entities, and
municipalities in the region to cooperate fully and unreservedly with
the Tribunal, including, but not limited to:
(1) the immediate arrest, surrender, and transfer of all persons who
have been indicted by the Tribunal but remain at large in the territory
which they control; and
(2) full and direct access to Tribunal investigators to requested
documents, archives, witnesses, mass grave sites, and any officials
where necessary for the investigation and prosecution of crimes under
the Tribunal's jurisdiction.
In our deliberation over the years, including here in the House of
Representatives, we have repeatedly focused on war crimes, crimes
against humanity and genocide in the former Yugoslavia, as well as the
need to bring those responsible for these crimes to justice.
The presence of Slobodan Milosevic in The Hague is the most
significant development in this ongoing effort. I want to congratulate
the Prime Minister of Yugoslavia and local Serbian officials for their
courageous leadership in making this possible. We have also recently
seen steps taken by the governments of Croatia and Bosnia to turn over
military indictees. These are all very positive developments. It is,
however, not the end of the story. Trials still need to take place, and
there are still at least 30 persons, perhaps more, who have been
indicted by the international tribunal but remain at large, especially
in the Republika Srpska entity of Bosnia-Herzegovina. These indictees
need to be apprehended and transferred to the Hague. Just as
importantly, access to archives and officials, particularly in
Belgrade, still need to be granted so that the whole story can be told.
We must be relentless in pursuing these objectives, for three basic
reasons.
First, there must be justice for the sake of justice.
Debates in this House and in other capitals around the world too
often focus on the prosecution of these crimes as a foreign policy
tool while the criminal acts themselves become distant memories if not
forgotten events. Let me give you just two examples.

In Croatia during the second half of November 1991--almost ten years
ago--about 260 men were removed from the Vukovar hospital after the
city's surrender, driven to the nearby Ovcara farm, beaten, executed
and buried in a mass grave. These were real people, and this was an
abomination. Six years ago this July, the UN safe haven of Srebrenica
in Bosnia was over-run. Thousands were captured or tracked down, again
real people who were executed in groups and buried in mass graves.
Anybody who argues for greater flexibility on cooperation with the
Tribunal or that enough has been done to sideline the likes of Radovan
Karadzic and Ratko Mladic and other indicated persons need to read the
specifics of cases like these, and many others, and put themselves in
the place of the victims before doing so.
Second, the truth will facilitate democracy.
I am convinced that those in Serbia who have advocated cooperation
with the Tribunal, like their counterparts in Croatia and Bosnia, are
not only doing a right and courageous thing for the victims of crimes
being prosecuted by The Hague; they are also doing the right and
patriotic thing for their own societies. These atrocities were the
product not of history but primarily of a cruel and highly
nationalistic leader named Milosevic and his murderous minions.
When collective guilt is wrongly assumed, therefore, it can be
countered by cooperation with the Tribunal.
Third, these crimes could happen again.
I believe we all need to keep in mind that what has happened in the
Balkans in the 1990s--in our time--is not unique to the Balkans or
Africa, and it is wrong and chauvinistic to think otherwise. Sixty
years ago, other societies found themselves wrapped up in hatred
against others, leading to the Holocaust.
Can we not finally say, as we begin this new century, ``Never
Again''? None of us know with certainty the answer to that question.
But we do know that by supporting the work of the International
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia the United States Congress
has played an important role in protecting the national minorities
around the world from such atrocities. Our voice was not silent--it was
heard--and we have the right to demand ``never again.''
Let me also add that I am very pleased that earlier this month the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe adopted a resolution which calls on all member states to
cooperate fully with the Tribunal. Recently I met with ICTY Chief
Prosecutor Carla Del Ponte, and I am convinced that the U.S. Congress
can play a vital role in encouraging governments in the region to
cooperate with the Tribunal. Indeed, U.S. leadership is seen by
European governments.

CONDITIONALITY

In the Balkans, October 5, 2000 brought the overthrow of Slobodan
Milosevic's illegitimate regime, and a new chance for Serbia and
Yugoslavia to turn away from war and nationanlism and embrace reforms
that would lead them into a European future.

The victorious Democratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS) coalition
further consolidated its gains by decisively defeating Milosevic
loyalists in December's parliamentary elections. But the struggle for
Serbia's reformers continued within the broad DOS coalition, as sizable
and powerful elements of the coalition remained reluctant to abandon
nationalism and expansive territorial aspirations.
Tensions between reformers and nationalists within the new FRY and
Serbian governments have been most evident over the issue

[[Page H4519]]

of compliance with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia (ICTY). FRY President Vojislav Kostunica and other
nationalists have argued vehemently against complying with this
international obligation, claiming the ICTY has an anti-Serb bias,
while reformers within DOS have claimed that compliance is important if
Serbia is to break with its dark past, establish the rule of law, and
lay the groundwork for economic recovery.
U.S. aid conditionality forced a confrontation on this issue through
a threatened March 31, 2001 cutoff of American support tied to
compliance with the ICTY, a severing of FRY military assistance to
Bosnia's Republika Srpska entity, and improvements in human rights.
This conditionality emboldened reformers and sparked a serious debate
within Serbia over the difficult decisions that could determine the
country's fate. Aid conditionality assisted those within the government
who supported the freeing of many, but not all, of the remaining
illegally held Kosovo Albanian prisoners, the issuance of a pledge to
cut off support to the Bosnian Serb army by May 31, and the
transferring of two indictees to The Hague, and finally, the arrest of
Slobodan Milosevic. Milosevic was only transferred to the Hague on the
eve of a decision by the U.S. Government to participate in a regional
Donor's Conference.
I strongly support the Administration's commitment to continuing to
condition U.S. aid. In our view, cooperation means a comprehensive and
predictable process with regard to requests from the Tribunal, whether
that be by transferring any and all indictees on its territory or by
consistently honoring requests for access to witnesses (official and
non), documents, archives, and mass grave sites. For any judicial
institution, ``cooperation'' must be a comprehensive and predictable
process, whereby good faith is consistently demonstrated.
In closing, I urge members to do the right thing on behalf of the
victims, and on behalf of future generations of individuals who are
subject to persecution based on ethnicity and religion, and vote
``yes'' on this amendment.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support amendment offered by
the Gentleman from New Jersey that would provide $30 million to protect
and assist victims of trafficking and to help countries meet minimum
standards for the elimination of such trafficking. This amendment and
this money will demonstrate the United States' commitment to ending one
of the worst human rights abuses.
It is estimated that 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 women are trafficked
annually; half are between the ages of 5 and 15, and 50,000 of those
women are transported into the United States. According to the United
Nations, trafficking in women and girls is expected to surpass
trafficking in drugs and guns as the world's leading illegal industry.
Yet we spend billions to fight the illegal importation of drugs and
almost nothing on these people who are regularly bought and sold for
prostitution, illegal labor, bonded labor, servile marriage, sex
tourism, pornography, and use in criminal activities. We take for
granted that slavery is a terrible relic of the past, but for these
millions of women, they live it every day.
Today, we have the opportunity to do something about this absolutely
unacceptable practice. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting
funding to protect and assist victims of trafficking, and to help
countries meet minimum standard for the elimination of such
trafficking.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw this
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.

Amendment No. 34 Offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 34 offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey:
Page 112, after line 22, insert the following:

funding for trafficking victims protection act of 2000

Sec. __. (a) Of the amounts made available in this Act
under the items ``development assistance'', ``economic
support fund'', ``assistance for eastern europe and the
baltic states'', ``assistance for the independent states of
the former soviet union'', ``international narcotics control
and law enforcement'', and ``migration and refugee
assistance''--
(1) $10,000,000 shall be made available for prevention of
trafficking in persons, as authorized by section 106 of the
Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (division A of
Public Law 106-386);
(2) $10,000,000 shall be made available for the protection
and assistance for victims of trafficking of persons, as
authorized by section 107(a) of such Act; and
(3) $10,000,000 shall be made available to assist foreign
countries to meet minimum standards for the elimination of
trafficking, as authorized by section 134 of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Kolbe) each will control 15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to offer this amendment along with my
cosponsors, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Pitts), to bring this Foreign Operations appropriations bill up to the
funding level authorized by the Victims of Trafficking and Violence
Protection Act, Public Law 106-386.
As the prime sponsor of Public Law 106-386, I just want to say I am
absolutely determined to fully fund each and every provision of this
landmark legislation. If we are serious about ending this modern
slavery and assisting abused women and children, it is the least we can
do.
Last week, Mr. Chairman, under the leadership of the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the Commerce-Justice-State appropriations bill
fully funded the law enforcement provisions of the Victims of
Trafficking and Violence Protection Act, including $10 million for
victims services programs for victims of trafficking; $10 million for
grants to reduce violent crimes against women on campus; $40 million
for legal assistance for victims of violence; $7.5 million for
education and training to end violence and abuse of women with
disabilities; and $15 million for the Safe Havens for Children pilot
program.
Mr. Chairman, as most Members already know, the Victims of
Trafficking and Violence Protection Act represents a comprehensive
effort to address the growing problem of trafficking in human beings,
particularly women and children, into forced prostitution and other
forms of slavery. This brutal form of transnational crime is a growing
problem around the world. The United States is regrettably a
significant receiving country. Indeed, the Central Intelligence Agency
estimates that nearly 50,000 people are trafficked into the United
States each and every year. Victims who have escaped tell us about the
horrible conditions that they were forced to endure.
Just parenthetically, we have had hearings in our subcommittee. We
have heard from the victims themselves and heard their terrible stories
and heard their plea to do something. They tell us about the
unspeakable acts that they often were subjected to.
Our amendment, Mr. Chairman, will help to fulfill the promise of the
Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act by appropriating the
following amounts.
First, section 106 of Public Law 106-386 called for $10 million for
prevention, and that is what this amendment does, prevention of
trafficking through support for education and training programs so that
potential victims will have the moral and material resources to resist
the traffickers. This $10 million could include projects such as
microcredit, which the United States already funds, so long as they are
targeted at potential trafficking victims.
This amendment also provides $10 million for protection of
trafficking victims who have been freed from their terrible bondage,
fulfilling section 107 of Public Law 106-386. This money will help to
pay for shelter care, rehabilitation and similar projects.
And section 108 of the law would be fully funded at $10 million for
assistance to foreign governments who wish to reform their laws and
practices to meet with the minimum standards established in section 108
for the elimination of trafficking set forth in the Act, again to help
these countries punish the perpetrators and protect the victims of
these awful crimes.
I encourage Members, if they have not, to look at the Victims of
Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of

[[Page H4520]]

2000, the report that has just been issued by the State Department,
with its tierage, tier 1, tier 2, and tier 3, where countries are
named. Then there is a narrative about countries that are problems.
Many of the countries are mentioned, but especially the tier 3
countries, those that really need to get their act together about what
they might do in order to reform themselves.
Mr. Chairman, I want to make some observations about where this money
will come from. This amendment does not mandate reductions in any
particular program. It simply identifies six accounts out of which the
State Department and AID is currently funding antitrafficking
initiatives. I am told that the Department's unofficial estimate is
that they currently spend between 13 and $15 million. It mandates that
the total be increased to the levels authorized by the Trafficking
Victims Protection Act. All told, these accounts include billions of
dollars; and the Department and AID would need to find an additional
$15 million to fully fulfill this legislation. This is not only doable,
Mr. Chairman, it is a moral imperative.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like to be very clear about the
reasons for inclusion of the Migration and Refugee Account in this
amendment. The refugee account is woefully underfunded. In real dollars
we spend substantially less on refugee protection than we did 6 or 7
years ago. It also exists for a particular purpose, protection and
assistance to refugees and other persons of similar concern.

The sponsors of this amendment have absolutely no intention that the
State Department or AID should begin funding law enforcement assistance
or development assistance projects out of the refugee account. However,
certain antitrafficking initiatives such as grants to the International
Organization for Migration for the purposes of reintegrating returned
trafficking victims who have voluntarily returned to their home
countries may legitimately be funded out of the Migration and Refugee
Account.
My understanding is that the current amount of such funds is about
$1.5 million, and the intention of this amendment is that
antitrafficking expenditures from the account should remain in that
range until new money is found in the Migration and Refugee Account, so
as not to force further reductions in other urgent refugee protection
projects.
Mr. Chairman, this bill, again which is a work in progress, currently
provides $715 million for refugee protection. I would hope that we
could up that amount of money. Of course, that is something that needs
to be done in conference.
Let me just say, Mr. Chairman, that this amendment is bipartisan. I
think it is needed. When we worked through the Victims of Trafficking
and Violence Protection Act last year, we had many, many meetings with
Members on both sides of the aisle and with our Senate counterparts
working out these amounts. It is doable. It has good support from all
of the NGOs that will provide these services. I ask for its support.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I rise in strong support of this amendment which would increase our
capacity to address one of the most egregious violations of human
rights around the world. The State Department's recent report on
trafficking has confirmed the bleakness of the situation. Each year at
least 700,000 people are trafficked across international borders. The
vast majority of these are women and children, and most victims are
forced into what can reasonably be labeled as modern day slavery.

{time} 2030

They work in sweatshops and brothels. They live in squalid quarters,
and they are stripped of their most basic human rights.
Trafficking is not someone else's problem, and it is not a problem
affecting only the developing world or only countries with political
and social instability. Between 45,000 and 50,000 people are trafficked
to our own country each year, and some of our closest friends in the
international community have the most severe problems with trafficking
in the world.
We can attack this problem in many ways. One is through direct
investment in ending the practice of trafficking, apprehending those
responsible, providing support for trafficking victims and assisting
our allies with tackling the problem within their own borders. Any
effective strategy, however, will recognize that the problem runs
deeper than this. Trafficking is a symptom of poverty and instability,
it is a symptom of the devaluation of girls and women in society, and
it is the symptom of hopelessness. We must treat the symptom, but we
must not neglect the disease.
I urge my colleagues to support not only increased funding to fight
trafficking, but also increased funding for all of our development
priorities.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, as has been indicated by the gentleman from New Jersey
and by the gentlewoman from New York, this amendment addresses some
very serious concerns that this body has and that those of us in the
United States have, the issues of trafficking in persons.
It is a problem that is generally dealt with through programs in the
Department of Justice and in the State Department, and some of these
programs are funded in this bill. But others, however, are not funded.
They are funded through the Commerce, Justice, State and the Judiciary
appropriations bill.
This amendment seeks to fully fund several authorization categories
that are established in the Victims of Trafficking and Violence
Protection Act of 2000. The problem is that those categories, which
would become earmarks in our bill, do not coincide with any categories
currently in use by the agencies. They are not used, as far as I can
tell, but any Department or agency.
I am unable to obtain from the State Department any comprehensive
listing of projects involving trafficking, either those now under way
or those proposed for fiscal year 2002. The Agency for International
Development cannot tell us what accounts it is using for what projects
involving trafficking.
So, Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment in its present form on
principle, as well as I think very practical grounds. I would point out
that I think the amendment creates a bureaucratic imbroglio for us. The
$30 million is divided into three categories that are taken from six
appropriation accounts. It will take a year or more to match projects
with categories. To the extent that the fiscal year 2002 budget
includes less than $30 million, someone has to designate the funding
source for whatever additional proposals that can be mobilized.
I think this amendment is seriously flawed, while the intent I would
concur with 100 percent. For that reason, I have serious problems with
the amendment in its present form.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute, just
to make the point to my good friend and colleague, the distinguished
chairman of the subcommittee, that the victims of Trafficking and
Violence Protection Act of 2000 is a new law. It was signed in late
October by the President. It was the result of almost 2 years of work
and working with our Senate colleagues, and it lays out criteria for
the establishment of these programs, for example, prevention of
trafficking, some of those programs to keep children, especially girls,
in elementary and secondary schools, and to educate those persons who
have been victims of trafficking.
We just got, even though it was due on June 1, as prescribed, the
Department was late, but it was late because I think they wanted to do
an adequate job because this is a very, very important piece of
information about trafficking, so they were about a month late, but it
lays out all of the different countries, tier one, tier two and tier
three.
This is a work in progress in terms of what will the programs look
like. We lay out criteria, and we want and we will demand that AID and
the State Department faithfully fulfill this.
Programs are in the process of being created. This is not like
something that came off the shelf. So the money, I believe, will be
well spent. We could

[[Page H4521]]

spend much more in order to try to mitigate this trafficking problem,
but this is at least a good start.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from
Maryland (Mrs. Morella).
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Smith-Morella-
Slaughter-Lantos amendment to streamline the Nation's efforts to combat
the practice of human trafficking, and I associate myself with the
comments that were just made by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Smith) in response to the comments of the great chairman, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe). I also want to thank him for his leadership,
too.
Between 1 and 4 million individuals are trafficked against their will
every year in, and are forced to work in, a form of servitude. The
International Organization for Migration estimates that trafficking in
human beings is a $5 billion to $7 billion a year industry worldwide.
In some countries, such as those in Southeast Asia, between 2 and 14
percent of the gross domestic product is attributed to the trafficking
of women.
Traffickers use deception, coercion, or debt bondage to extract
worker services from these women, which include forced prostitution,
domestic work, servile marriage, begging, or criminal activities.
Trafficking in women and girls, principally for prostitution or other
sexual exploitation, but also for forced labor, is the largest sector
of human trafficking, and it appears to be growing.
The states of the former Soviet Union and Southeast Asia are
principal sources of trafficked women, but women are taken from many
developing countries where their vulnerability is rooted in poverty and
in many cases their low social status. Shockingly, approximately 50,000
women and girls are trafficked into the United States annually, and, in
response, Congress passed the Trafficking Victim Protection Act last
year, with the help of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), and
it was signed into law. This legislation authorized more than $30
million to prevent trafficking by educating at-risk people and giving
them alternatives, aiding victims of trafficking and helping law
enforcement address this problem effectively.
I believe that this amount, coordinated by the Trafficking Task
Force, which the bill also established, is an appropriate level to
minimize the practice of trafficking. My concern, however, is because
this funding is spread out in so many different parts of the budget,
that it will not be effectively coordinated and will not have the
greatest possible impact on the problem. This amendment, which
effectively earmarks $30 million for prevention, protection, and
assistance to foreign countries, passed the House last year with 371
votes.
The huge increase in human trafficking is a product of globalization
and the growing ease with which many things move across borders,
ranging from information to capital to goods. The question over whether
to adopt this amendment is really one of priorities. I believe that
working to end trafficking in humans is a very high priority for the
United States, and I urge the Members to support this amendment.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, from 1861 to 1865, 500,000 American soldiers
died in a war to end slavery. When the war ended, the 13th amendment
was added to the Constitution to ban slavery forever from American
soil. And yet it continues today.
Today's slaves are women and children, brought to America to work in
brothels. They are here against their will, they are beaten into
submission, they are trapped in a country they do not know and whose
language they cannot speak. The Central Intelligence Agency tells us
that 50,000 sex slaves are brought to America every year. Globally, the
number is in the millions trafficked into prostitution.
Last year, Congress passed the Trafficking Victims Protection Act to
do something about this continuation of slavery on American soil, and
this law is being implemented as we speak. Now we need to make sure
that the money is appropriated to implement this law. This amendment
will give direction to the bureaucracy.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Smith) for his leadership on this issue, and I call on my colleagues to
pass this amendment so we can begin the process of eradicating slavery
from American soil once and for all.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, this is a good amendment, and I hope the
entire House adopts it. Trafficking is a huge problem, with some 3
million women and children being trafficked into sexual slavery and
forced labor each year, with as many as 50,000 being trafficked into
the United States each year. Last year, Congress addressed this problem
by passing the landmark Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, but
that act only authorized funding through fiscal year 2002.
Now, we need to carry through with the commitments made in this Act.
We need to fully fund the international programs related to these
critical programs. I understand that in FY2000, more than $14 million
dollars may have been spent to combat trafficking, and that there was
some increase in these programs for FY2001. Fully funding last year's
authorization of $30 million is a modest increase over last year in
dollar terms, to reach out to tens of millions of potential victims, to
help millions of actual victims, and to help prevent trafficking by
increasing the capacity of foreign governments to address this growing
crisis.
The U.S. must do its share on trafficking. But so do foreign
governments. Last year, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2001
provided that if countries did not meet certain minimum standards
regarding trafficking in persons, U.S. non-humanitarian, non-trade
foreign assistance would be cut off. In the Administration's first
annual report on trafficking in persons, the State Department reported
that 23 countries did not meet these standards, including many of our
friends around the world. We have a duty to help those countries reach
their minimum standards, as well as helping the million of victims
around the world.
Some may call this amendment an earmark and argue against it.
However, this amendment gives flexibility to the Administration by
allowing the funding for trafficking to be drawn from a number of
accounts. We do not intend, however that funds be used for purposes
other than those that were appropriated. For example, funds from the
Migration and Refugee Account are to be used for reintegration and
resettlement of trafficking victims into their home countries, as is
being done today. In this connection, I note that I hope the Chairman
and Ranking Member will make efforts to make further increases to the
MRA account as the legislation moves forward.
Mr. Chairman, $30 million is not much money when you look at the
magnitude of this problem, and we have given sufficient flexibility to
allow the Administration to properly administer this provision. I ask
that all members support the amendment.
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I join with my colleague from
New Jersey in support of women and children around the world and rise
in strong support of the Smith Amendment.
This amendment fulfills the promise for the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act.
The exploitation of our world's women and children in trafficking is
a tragic human rights offense.
Without the funds that this amendment provides, it is the victims of
trafficking that will once again suffer.
Forced to work in slave labor conditions in factories, farms, and
even brothels. Once these victims are freed from their prisons they are
in desperate need of rehabilitation, health care, and shelter.
This amendment provides 10 million dollars in funds to pay for these
services so that these women and children can return to having normal
lives.
Traffickers often lure their victims with the promise of better jobs,
increased opportunities, better lives. Instead of making this dream a
reality, the victims are forced into a life of terror, violence, and
fear.
This amendment provides 10 million dollars for education and training
programs so that potential victims have the resources to resist the
lies and schemes of traffickers. Prevention is a key component to
combating this international human rights issue.
Mr. Speaker, this amendment is important to the fight against
trafficking because not only does it provide funds to protect the
victims, it also provides 10 million dollars in assistance to foreign
governments who wish to change their laws and practices to meet with
the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking outlined in
the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. We must work with our allies
and friends to stop these predators from profiting from the
victimization of women and children around the world.
Yes, there is much more we should do to prevent trafficking and
punish the predators that profit from the exploitation of women and
children.

[[Page H4522]]

This amendment is important because it provides continued support to
trafficked victims. Making a significant difference in the lives of
millions of women and children around the world.
Once again I commend my colleague for introducing this amendment. Let
us continue to support the victims of trafficking, I urge a YES vote on
the Smith Amendment.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith)
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Brown of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 7 offered by Mr. Brown of Ohio:
At the end of the bill, insert after the last section
(preceding the short title) the following new section:

Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used by the Export-Import Bank of the United States to
guarantee, insure, extend credit, or participate in an
extension of credit in connection with the export of any good
or service by a company that is under investigation for trade
dumping by the International Trade Commission, or is subject
to an anti-dumping duty order issued by the Department of
Commerce.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
For what purpose does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) arise?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I seek the time in opposition to the
amendment, and I reserve a point of order against the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) reserves a point
of order against the amendment.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) for 5
minutes.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, on December 19, 2000, the Export-Import Bank approved
an $18 million loan guarantee to modernize and improve production at
Benxi Iron and Steel, China.
The Department of Commerce has found Benxi's dumping margin on hot
rolled carbon steel products to be 67 percent. So if it costs $100 to
make and sell steel in China, they are selling it in the U.S. for $59.
The Ex-Im Bank was urged against making this loan by former Secretary
of Commerce Minetta and a bipartisan congressional coalition, but the
Export-Import Bank still offered the loan guarantee to the Chinese
company. The bank's action will increase the production of more steel
in a world market which already has an excess raw steel production
capacity of 270 million metric tons excess.
The last few years have been disastrous for the steel industry.
Bankruptcy at, for instance, Ohio CSC, Republic Technologies and LTV
were not caused by a crisis in the economy, but in fact demand for
steel has been at record levels in recent years.
These problems were caused primarily by unfairly traded imports that
have led the Department of Commerce to approve a number of anti-dumping
orders on a variety of steel products. The issue of dumping has also
been acknowledged by the administration's actions regarding the 201
investigation on steel.
Yet while we enforce laws against dumping, the Ex-Im Bank actually
offers assistance to foreign manufacturers that threaten our companies.
The ITC is also investigating cases concerning a wide range of
industries from crude oil to textiles to agriculture.
The U.S. Government should prevent foreign producers from sending
their dumped, illegal products into this market. Organizations such as
the Ex-Im Bank should refrain from providing financial support to
foreign companies that break the rules.
The Ex-Im Bank should not rush to offer U.S. funds to a foreign
company that is cheating the U.S. economy. These companies that achieve
assistance from the Nation's programs should not undermine the
livelihood and future of our workers.
Today I have the privilege to be joined by the chairman of the
Committee on Financial Services Subcommittee on International Monetary
Policy and Trade, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
I would ask the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), his bill, if
I could engage in a colloquy, H.R. 2517, reauthorizes the Ex-Im Bank.
Does this legislation identify the concerns of the steel industry and
address the issue of trade dumping?
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. BEREUTER. Yes, it does, Mr. Chairman. Section 16 of H.R. 2507
requires the Export-Import Bank to reassess its adverse economic impact
test as a result of the $18 million Ex-Im Bank loan guarantee to the
Benxi Iron & Steel Company and specifically references this bank
transaction.
Currently the Ex-Im Bank has economic impact procedures which
consider the potential negative impact on the U.S. economy of goods
manufactured by the purchasers of the U.S. exports. However, it does
not adequately consider indirect impacts.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, to whom will the
Export-Import Bank be responsible in offering its findings?
Mr. BEREUTER. Again, if the gentleman will yield further, within 1
year after the date of enactment, the Export-Import Bank will have to
submit a report on this reassessment to the Committee on Financial
Services of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Banking,
Housing and Urban Affairs of the Senate.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, can we expect
this bill to be addressed in the near future?
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, the
Export-Import Bank's authorization expires on September 30 of this
year. The Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade and
the Committee on Financial Services expect to mark up the bill and
consider it on the floor before then.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would like to
thank my colleague from Nebraska for offering his time. I join him in
recognizing the importance that the U.S. cannot afford to promote the
interests of companies that choose to break the rules on trade.
I especially appreciate the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe)
for giving us this time.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, if I
may say, I commend the gentleman. It was a bad decision that needs to
be reassessed. I appreciate his effort.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw
my amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is withdrawn.
There was no objection.

{time} 2045

Amendment No. 23 Offered by Mr. Kucinich

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 23 offered by Mr. Kucinich:
Page 112, after line 22, insert the following:

ban on export-import bank assistance for certain transactions relating
to fossil fuels

Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used for the provision by the Export-Import Bank of the
United States of any kind of assistance for a limited
recourse project or a long-term program involving oil and gas
field development, a thermal powerplant, or a petrochemical
plant or refinery.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) and a Member opposed each will
control 15 minutes.

[[Page H4523]]

Does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) seek to control the time
in opposition?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to seek the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Kucinich) for 15 minutes.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, throughout the world, people are celebrating the
leadership of many nations in coming to an understanding yesterday that
global climate change is something that indeed must be dealt with and
that the protocols which were worked out years ago in Kyoto are
something that many nations want to move ahead with in order to meet
the challenge of global warming. And, like many of my colleagues, I
believe that the United States should take a leading role in fighting
global warming.
Our country, with only 4 percent of the world's population,
contributes one-quarter of the world's carbon dioxide emissions.
The administration has acknowledged that global warming is indeed
occurring and that carbon dioxide emissions are a culprit. However, the
administration refuses to support the Kyoto Treaty. It reasons that
since the protocol does not apply to developing countries, then it
should not apply to the U.S.
I do not agree with that logic. It is not logical, because the
administration is financing fossil fuel projects in developing
countries that actually contribute to complicating and worsening global
warming. Not only does the administration oppose the global warming
agreement because it does not require that developing countries make
the same reductions as industrialized nations, but the administration
is funding global warming and pollution projects in those same
developing countries.
Through the Export-Import Bank, the United States provides subsidies
to U.S. companies to create coal-fired power plants, oil refineries,
oil pipelines, diesel generators, and a host of other projects that
pour millions of tons of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In the last
few years, these projects were created in developing countries like
Angola, Algeria, India, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, China, Venezuela, and
Chad. Some of these projects include an $88 million oil project in
Angola by Halliburton Energy; a $134 million oil pipeline in Algeria;
an $81 million coal-fired power plant in India; and several diesel
generator sets for $19 million in Bahrain.
Last year, the Export-Import Bank spent $2 billion on fossil fuel
projects. This amount represents 28 percent of the bank's entire
budget. This is not an appropriate use for a significant chunk of the
budget and, historically, the Export-Import Bank has not devoted such
sizable resources to fossil fuel projects. The bank's spending on
global warming projects skyrocketed last year from only 3 percent in
1999.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Inslee).
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I really appreciate the gentleman's
leadership in bringing this to the House's attention.
I just want to share with my colleagues why I think this is so
important. Two weeks ago I was on the shores of the Arctic Ocean, the
Arctic Wildlife Refuge where I was told that the ice under the Arctic
has lost 50 percent of its depth due to global climate change; global
warming, in the last several decades, 10 percent of the extent of the
Arctic ice. I was told by the Denali rangers that the tree line on the
tundra in the Denali National Park has moved north several miles just
while they have been working there in the last decade and a half. The
fact of the matter is, we are causing significant changes in the global
climate system.
What have we received from the current administration in our ability
to deal with this? Nothing. The leader of the Free World, the most
technologically advanced society on Earth, the contributor of 25
percent of all of the carbon dioxide in the world, even though we have
4 percent of the population, and our administration, do we know what
they offered us as leadership? Nothing in Bonn. As a result of that, we
need, in Congress, to start showing some leadership on this subject.
The gentleman from Ohio has brought an amendment that will, for one of
the few times, one of the first times, ask us to consider one of our
policy directives on how it contributes to global climate change.
Now, given the fact that global climate change is on us already, does
it not make sense to have a better mix of funding, of financing of
other energy programs, to have an increase in our research budget and
financing for renewable energies for solar, for hydro, for wind, for
geothermal and less for fossil-based fuels? That is the nature of this
amendment.
I would suggest to my colleagues that in the next several years in
this Chamber, because we are not getting leadership from the White
House, it is up to us to do our job to scrub these budgets, to scrub
our policy statements, and find a way to encourage the United States to
be a leader in climate change.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's efforts.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment,
and I think the record probably should be set straight on what the
Export-Import Bank does with respect to fossil fuel plants. They are
the only export credit agency in the world that calculates and records
the carbon dioxide emissions for fossil fuel power plants. Of the major
export credit agencies, Ex-Im Bank is the only one that has World Bank-
equivalent environmental standards which includes or covers all of the
emissions out of a power plant.
Beginning in 1997, the Ex-Im Bank assumed a leadership role among
international export credit agencies on environmental issues. Ex-Im
Bank stands as the only major export credit agency of the G-7 willing
to decline support for a foreign project whose environmental effects
cannot be adequately mitigated.
Ex-Im Bank is recognized internationally for its progressive
environmental policy. Ex-Im Bank spearheaded U.S. Government efforts at
recent G-8 summits to encourage leaders of other nations to require
that their export credit agencies adopt effective environmental
guidelines. The Ex-Im Bank offers enhanced financial support with its
environmental export credit insurance and under its loan guarantee and
medium-term insurance programs. Since 1995, the Export-Import Bank has
supported $3 billion for environmentally beneficial U.S. exports and
environmentally beneficial projects.
In addition to proactively encouraging U.S. companies to export
environmentally friendly goods, Export-Import Bank has environmental
review procedures to ensure that the projects that it supports are
environmentally responsible. The Export-Import Bank provides
environmental guidelines for industries ranging from logging to mining
to hydropower to oil and gas development. If a project does not meet
all Ex-Im environmental measures, the bank will work with the exporter
to implement mitigation efforts.
Projects proposed are evaluated on the basis of air quality, water
use and quality, waste management, natural hazards, ecology,
socioeconomic and sociocultural framework, and noise. In short, the
Export-Import Bank's environmental guidelines add significant value to
the projects it finances. Emissions of project pollutants and effluents
have been reduced, and ecological effects of the Bank-supported
projects have been mitigated extensively.
Mr. Chairman, this agency is doing its job; it is setting the
standard for the world. Therefore, I think this amendment is not
needed. I urge its opposition.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
The Export-Import Bank does have the authority to fund clean,
efficient, renewable energy technology in order to make such projects
affordable to developing countries. The amendment, I would like to
point out, does not reduce funding to the Export-Import Bank, nor does
it prohibit certain companies from asking for the Bank's support. The
purpose of this amendment is merely to ensure that if the United States
is going to underwrite energy projects, we are not aggravating the
global warming problem.
Now, I would like to ask, for the purposes of a colloquy, the
gentleman

[[Page H4524]]

from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) to kindly engage here a moment.
I think what we have been able to do on our side is to try to
identify what is, unfortunately, a contribution of global climate
change, not that that is the intention of the Export-Import Bank. I
would agree with the gentleman that the Export-Import Bank does try to
make contributions to these developing countries that would improve the
quality of life. But is there anything that we can do that the
gentleman would suggest as we move towards another year of relationship
with the Export-Import Bank in the House of Representatives, would the
gentleman suggest anything that we might be able to do that might serve
to implement in a more finer way the guidelines which the Export-Import
Bank does have which could encourage it to fund clean, efficient, and
renewable energy technology?
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. KUCINICH. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's question,
and I would say this, and I would make this commitment as the
subcommittee chairman during this Congress.
If we find that what the Export-Import Bank is doing is not giving
proper assessment to fossil fuel power plants, then we could seek a
legislative alternative, and we would examine the record on this in
this respect. I would say as a way of trying to do that, this gentleman
would certainly entertain as I think about it the possibility of a GAO
study to see if, in fact, as an outside source, if the Export-Import
Bank is exercising proper environmental procedures and review of fossil
fuel plants.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the
gentleman, and I would appreciate the gentleman's assistance in making
this kind of an inquiry, because I think it would be helpful in terms
of a policy direction that would, in fact, go towards sustainability
and clean and renewable energy, and, in some ways, be of help to the
United States in our dilemma to be able to meet the requirements of
Kyoto.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strike the last word.
I stand today in strong support of the Kucinich-Lee amendment that
seeks to limit the Export-Import Bank's support of fossil fuel
projects.
Global warming is happening.
In response to the President's request, the National Academy of
Science has completed its latest study on the subject.
They concluded: ``Greenhouse gases are accumulating in earth's
atmosphere as a result of human activities . . . . Temperatures are, in
fact, rising.''
Their report goes on to say that ``national policy decisions made now
and in the longer-term future will influence the extent of any damage
suffered by vulnerable human populations and ecosystems later in this
century.''
The impact of these rising temperatures will be felt first and
hardest in the developing world.
The Sahara is expanding. Pacific islands are disappearing beneath
rising waters.
One of the criticisms of the Kyoto Protocol raised by President Bush
and others is that the developing world is left out of the effort to
reduce emissions.
At the same time, the Export-Import Bank is the largest public
financier of fossil fuel projects, the leading culprit behind global
warming.
We are bankrolling global climate change.
Instead, we should be investing at home and abroad in cleaner energy
technologies.
Wind energy, for example, is a proven commercial success and a great
candidate for further investment.
This last week the leading industrial nations of the world--except
the United States--met at Bonn and agreed to take up the challenge of
global climate change.
Because the U.S. has abandoned the Kyoto process, we did not have a
seat at that table.
We must be leaders on climate change and we must begin by passing
this amendment.
I urge you to support this amendment and to vote in favor of cleaner
technologies and more consistent policies.
Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this
amendment.
What this amendment attempts to do is equate the valuable work of the
Export-Import Bank with a fatally flawed provision of the Kyoto
Protocol. This attempt is misleading at best, and at worst damaging to
the developing world.
The production of energy is a fundamental element of economic
development. The countries of the developing world need energy in order
to raise the standard of living for their people and make progress in
essential areas such as education and healthcare. Without energy, this
progress is not possible. Unfortunately, this amendment would prohibit
the Export-Import Bank from helping developing countries to address
these important needs.
Mr. Chairman, fossil fuels remain essential to the production of
energy and no amendment is going to change that reality. The fact of
the matter is fossil fuels are the dominant source of energy in the
world--and particularly in developing countries. According to the
Energy Information Administration, in 1999, 85 percent of the world's
energy production came from fossil fuels. If you exclude OECD
countries, those which essentially exclude the industrialized world,
that number increases to 92 percent. In essence, 92 percent of the
energy produced in the developing world comes from fossil fuels.
Without fossil fuels, the majority of the world, and particularly the
developing world, simply would not have energy. Without energy,
mortality rates remain high, education remains low, and economic growth
doesn't exist. Developing countries need energy and Ex-Im has an
important role to play in meeting that need.
Unfortunately the sponsors of this amendment are misinformed. The
Kyoto Protocol is fatally flawed because, among other reasons, it does
not include rapidly industrializing nations like Mexico, Brazil, China,
and India. These countries account for over 40 percent of the world's
population. This has nothing to do with the Export-Import Bank.
Furthermore, the Kyoto Protocol is not based on sound science. The
recently released National Academy of Sciences report on climate change
has wrongly been characterized as proving the earth will continue to
warm and that human-induced greenhouse gases are a significant culprit.
The reality is, it does no such thing. In fact it uses the words
``uncertain'' and ``uncertainty'' 43 times in a 28-page report. On the
very first page it states ``current estimates of the magnitude of
future warming should be regarded as tentative and subject to future
adjustments, either upward or downward.''
When it comes to climate change, the only thing we know for sure is
that there are too many gaps in our knowledge of global warming to
commit to the Kyoto Protocol.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is ill-advised and misleading. It would
do nothing more than prevent the Export-Import Bank from helping to
make progress in the developing world.
I urge all members of the House to oppose this amendment.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, given the gentleman's gracious
willingness to assist in this, I yield back the balance of my time, and
I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Ohio?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The amendment of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich)
is withdrawn.

Amendment No. 55 Offered by Mr. Ose

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 55 offered by Mr. Ose:
Page 112, after line 22, insert the following:

prohibition on united states contribution to the united nations
international narcotics control board

Sec. __. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
used for a United States contribution to the United Nations
International Narcotics Control Board.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Ose) and a Member opposed each will
control 10 minutes.
Does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) seek to control the time
in opposition?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr.
Ose) for 10 minutes.
Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise today to draw attention to an action taken by the United
Nations this past May. While most of us are aware that the United
States was not reelected to the United Nations Human Rights Commission,
little attention has been paid to the fact that we were also removed
from the International Narcotics Control Board. In fact, despite
assurances from our allies that they would support the reelection of
our ambassador to the board, he received just 2153 votes. This was a
direct slap in the face from our so-called allies and friends at the
U.N., especially

[[Page H4525]]

considering our long history on the board and in support of the U.N.'s
drug interdiction efforts.
The United States has been a founding member of the International
Narcotics Control Board and now no longer serves there. The ambassador,
our ambassador, was serving as vice-chair of the board and was
considered a likely candidate to serve as its next chairman.
In addition to our long history, the U.S. is the single largest
contributor to the U.N. drug control program, contributing $20 million
in year 2000, which is more than the next three largest contributors
combined.

{time} 2100

The United States also contributes another $20 million to
international organizations for drug programs. This does not even count
our efforts in Colombia, the Andean region, or Mexico. When we total
all of our international drug program spending, the United States
spends over $1.2 billion on international drug efforts, on top of the
$19.2 billion we spend on domestic drug control efforts.
In another slap, just as we were replaced on the Human Rights
Commission by nations with horrid human rights records such as the
Sudan, Syria and Cuba, the U.S. was removed from the International
Narcotics Board and replaced by the Netherlands and Peru.
Let us look at this decision a little closer. On the actual website
of the Embassy of the Netherlands, which is WWW.Netherlands-
embassy.org, they have a statement regarding their commitment to
keeping drug laws. Keep in mind, this was a country elected to the
International Narcotics Control Board in our stead.
This is their statement. I am quoting directly here:
``The sale of small quantities of soft drugs in coffee shops (which
are not allowed to sell alcohol) is therefore technically an offense,
but prosecution proceedings are only instituted if the operator or
owner of the shop does not meet [certain] criteria.'' The gentleman is
correct, and our thinking is correct. Their own government web page
clearly states they are not going to enforce their own drug laws.
The other country that was elected to take our spot, or elected to
the International Narcotics Control Board, that is, Peru, has top
officials, including their president, a top general, and a top diplomat
who are all facing charges of conspiring with the very drug lords they
had promised the United States they would fight against.
It is clear that both the Netherlands and Peru are our friend and
allies. However, in this case I cannot believe that either is more
qualified to serve on a board aimed at controlling illegal
international narcotics than our country, the United States.
My amendment demonstrates that we do not take the fight against drugs
lightly. It compounds the message we have sent here all day. Nor will
we be deterred from our rightful goal of destroying the illegal
international drug cartels.
When an organization such as the Narcotics Control Board denies the
contribution that America has made to this fight by virtue of refusing
to elect them to the Board, they are rejecting the knowledge and
resources that the U.S. brings to the battle, and it is frankly only
right that we take our resources and focus them elsewhere.
The purpose of my amendment is very straightforward. In addition to
the dues that we pay, which come under a different appropriations bill
for the U.N., in addition to the dues that we pay, the United States
makes many voluntary contributions to United Nations organizations. My
amendment would prohibit such voluntary contributions from being made
to the International Narcotics Control Board.
This is not a unique request. There are limitations throughout this
bill of a similar nature. On page 7, line 19; page 17, line 8; page 25,
line 14; page 30, line 19; page 31, line 2; page 32, line 8. I could go
on.
That section of the bill dealing with international organizations on
page 40, line 1, places limitations on discretionary or voluntary
contributions to international organizations similar in nature to the
International Narcotics Control Board.
Frankly, it is my hope that our allies will hear our message, see the
light, and again elect an American representative to the International
Narcotics Control Board. In the meantime, if they do not want our
participation, they surely would not want our money.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise a little bit in bewilderment about this
amendment, and certainly not because I am against the spirit of it. The
amendment, as the gentleman from California, my good friend, has
pointed out, would prohibit the U.S. contribution to the United Nations
International Narcotics Control Board.
Given what has happened to us there, I certainly do not think any of
us would be opposed to that. After what happened last May when the
United Nations Economic and Social Commission voted the United States
off the U.N. International Narcotics Control Board, I think we would
see good reason not to make any further contributions to it.
It is a deplorable event and one that I think has disappointed me,
certainly as a representative of a border State where we have
significant drug problems. We suffer along the border from the drug war
and the trafficking that comes through our area.
But, having said that, Mr. Chairman, the U.N. International Narcotics
Control Board is not funded in the foreign operations bill. Let me say
that again. There are no monies in this bill for the United Nations
International Narcotics Control Board. It is funded as a line item in
the United Nations regular budget, which is funded under the Commerce-
Justice-State appropriation bill in the amount of approximately
$700,000.
So it has no effect whatever. The amendment has no effect whatever on
the U.N. International Narcotics Control Board. It is a little bit like
saying or bringing this amendment up in the D.C. appropriations bill
and saying, but it is not funded here, and saying, well, that is okay,
but if it were funded, we just want to make the point.
If that is what the gentleman is trying to do, if only it were funded
here, we just want to make the point that we do not like it, all right.
But let me make it very clear that this amendment I will not resist for
the very simple reason that it does not have any impact whatever on the
bill, but I just think that all the Members need to know this is not
going to in any way impact the contributions we make to the
International Narcotics Control Board.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time
to me. I support the amendment of the gentleman from California. I
think it is a great amendment.
I am astonished and disgusted by the way our country has been treated
by the other member countries of the United Nations. In 1964, the
United States played a key role in establishing the U.N. International
Narcotics Board. This board plays a crucial role in monitoring
compliance with U.N. drug conventions on substance abuse and illegal
trafficking.
This May we lost our seat. We were voted off the very board we helped
to establish. We were voted off by the 54-member U.N. Economic and
Social Council. Only 29 of these member countries thought the United
States should maintain its rightful place on this important board.
Instead, our former seat will be held by the Netherlands.
I have been told by those in the international community that this is
just international politics as usual. I disagree. That is because
anyone who reads the newspapers knows that Holland is to the drug
Ecstacy what Colombia is to cocaine. Let us put our cards on the table.
Eighty percent of the Ecstacy that makes its way to the United States
is produced in the Netherlands, which is taking our place on the board
that we created, or at least helped to create.
In fact, the United States government is considering adding Holland
to the short list of decertified countries that are considered drug-
producing or transit countries, joining the ranks of Afghanistan and
Burma. These are the

[[Page H4526]]

truths about Ecstacy. This summer, more than 750,000 Ecstacy tablets
are being consumed each week in the New York-New Jersey area. The Star-
Ledger in New Jersey just had a big article about it. The vast majority
of these tablets come from, guess, Holland.
Newark International Airport, which borders my district in northern
New Jersey, is the number one port of entry for this drug. Customs
inspectors seize over 1 million Ecstacy pills and tablets smuggled into
Newark International Airport. That is why it is personal to me as a
parent and a grandparent from New Jersey. Those are our kids out there
in clubs being introduced to this drug, and a country that is
considered by our government to be the principal source of Ecstacy
worldwide is not doing enough to stop it from coming to our shores.
Now this very same country sits on the international board that we
helped create to put an end to illegal drug trafficking.
This is not a harmless drug. Long-term use causes severe brain
damage. Even occasional use can result in heart rate and blood pressure
problems as well as liver damage. The general perceptions of drugs
coming out of this jungle or that mountain are washed away, our general
perceptions. It is only what we know so far. God only knows what other
studies will conclude in the years ahead about this recreational drug.
Holland, with its government's lax attitude towards illegal drugs,
does little to stop the manufacture and the export of Ecstacy. That
should not be a surprise, coming from the country that has needle parks
and legal red light districts. Nevertheless, Holland will now sit on
the International Narcotics Control Board in our former seat.
In this vote, the politics is personal. Please join me in supporting
the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Ose) to
send a strong message to the U.N. and all of its member countries.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the very distinguished
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), a member of the subcommittee.
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank my beloved chairman for yielding
this time to me in support of this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I think that the gentleman from New Jersey has raised
some very valid points about Ecstacy. I think that the gentleman from
California has raised some very valid points about the U.N.
I think if we go back to last week we can see that on the Commerce-
State-Justice bill the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), when he offered
an amendment that said we do not wish to participate in the U.N.
funding anymore, he got a lot of votes. I would love to say that at the
U.N. people would have been watching the Paul amendment last week as
many Members of Congress, and I think it was 50 to 60, voted to get out
of the U.N. by not funding it anymore.
I say that I love the U.N., but the fact is that there is no adult
supervision at the U.N. these days. They go off on their own tear, and
bureaucrat A from country A talks to bureaucrat B from country B, and
then they go to a committee and then they go to a subcommittee, and
then they pass a resolution. Then they do an amendment, and then they
add to their agenda. Then they go to lunch.
That is why the U.N. is not as effective as it should be. It is not
as respected as it should be, because of silly and foolish actions. Can
Members imagine in a room full of mature, responsible adults kicking
the United States of America off an antidrug commission? Here we are,
global leaders. Here we are, and we have been debating for 6 hours on
our drug initiative in South America. We are all over the globe. It is
our children that are at risk.
But to folks at the U.N., it is their children at risk, as well. The
drug problem is all over the globe. That is why the United States is
leading the international efforts. We are going to continue to do so
with or without the U.N. It is just that it is the desire of this
Member that there was somebody down there paying attention, somebody
who says, ``Okay, guys, you have made your point. You hate America. But
this issue is too important to play silly games on.''
That is why I support the Ose amendment.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Ose).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 38 Offered by Mr. Traficant

Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 38 offered by Mr. Traficant:
Page 112, after line 22, insert the following:

prohibition on assistance for the russian federation

Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to provide assistance to the Russian Federation.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
Does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) seek to control time in
opposition?
Mr. KOLBE. I do, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) will be
recognized.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment would stop all money from going to
Russia, who spies on us every day, had Robert Hansen and who knows how
many more FBI agents on the payroll.
In my opinion, they are stabbing us in the back. I know that this
amendment will not pass, but I just wanted to get my little 2 cents
worth and warn the Congress that they had better take a good look at
the nation that Ronald Reagan dismantled, because their intentions are
anything but honorable.
Giving them money in my opinion is very stupid, and I think Congress
should hire a proctologist to analyze the behavior of this.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the
amendment offered by Mr. Traficant.
I believe that this ill-conceived amendment will cause irreparable
damage to U.S.-Russian relations at time when we must intensify our
engagement with Russian civil society. Cutting all aid to Russia, as
the Traficant amendment requires, would undercut our efforts to
strengthen the forces of democracy in Russia and would therefore
undermine U.S. national security interests.
I am just as concerned as my colleagues about the Russian
government's proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to Iran, its
cozy relations with Iraq, and its mistreatment of American citizens who
have been falsely accused of spying.
And I am equally concerned about the Russian leadership's recent
crackdown on independent media outlets, its human rights violations in
Chechnya, its failure to curb rampant corruption, and its lack of a
transparent judicial system.
However, I strongly believe that the only way the United States can
effectively address these issues is to stay engaged with Russian civil
society. Make no mistake--promoting a democratic Russia is in our
national security interests.
I believe that the appropriators did a commendable job in addressing
the authoritarian actions of the Russian government without damaging
the core programs which benefit the Russian people and advance our
national security interests.
This bill already withholds U.S. assistance to the Russian government
if its proliferation to Iran continues. I strongly support this
provision. Rightfully, the bill does not put the same restriction on
U.S. assistance to Russia grassroots civil society, including non-
governmental organizations and independent media. The bill also
specifically exempts assistance to combat infectious diseases; to
promote child survival; to strengthen non-proliferation activities; to
support progressive regional and municipal governments; to expand
exchanges and partnerships; and to provide judicial training. These
initiatives--critical to the development of Russian civil society--
deserve our continued support.
Without a viable civil society, Russia cannot achieve true economic
prosperity--nor will it cease to be a potential security threat to the
United States. This is why earlier this year I introduced the Russia
Democracy Act to enhance our democracy, good governance and anti-
corruption efforts. Enhancing our effort with non governmental
organizations is the right path, not this misguided amendment. The

[[Page H4527]]

bill under consideration is consistent with the Russia Democracy Act;
the Traficant amendment clearly is not.
Millions of Russian citizens desire to become part of the West
culturally, policitally, and in many other senses. These forces need to
be strengthened. In the final analysis, a democratic Russia, respecting
human rights and observing international norms of peaceful behavior, is
squarely in U.S. national security interests. Ceasing all aid to
Russia, as the Traficant amendment requires, would delay the
realization of this vision for Russia. I strongly urge my colleagues to
defeat the amendment.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Having given my 2 cents, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that that amendment, which would not be passed by this
Congress, be withdrawn.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Ohio?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The amendment is withdrawn.

Amendment No. 59 Offered by Mr. Traficant

Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 59 offered by Mr. Traficant:
At the appropriate place, insert:
Sec. . None of the funds made available by this Act may be
used to award a contract to a person or entity whose bid or
proposal reflects that the person or entity has violated the
Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, popularly known as
the ``Buy American Act'').

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).

{time} 2115

Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
We have just gone through a period in our history where America's
procurement by bureaucrats has become so convoluted that even the
Pentagon bought black berets made in China. The excuse was they could
not have made them in a timely fashion in America.
Our constituents that go to Quantico to visit the Marines are given
complimentary gifts that are pocket calculators made in China. The
Marines stamp on one side, made in China on the other.
This body is stupid, and as a Member of this body I can attest to
that. Having said that, this amendment says that anyone who has a
conviction of having violated the Buy American law is not entitled to
any money under the bill.
I would hope it would be accepted without controversy.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), the
distinguished chairman, if he is in the affirmative.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I would simply say that the amendment the gentleman described
earlier was not in order. This amendment that he has refiled is simply
a Buy America provision and does not refer to anything about people who
are convicted.
So with that understanding, that the refiled amendment is the one
that we are considering here, I have no intention of objecting to it.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time and
ask for an ``aye'' vote.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments?

Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will
now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were
postponed in the following order: Amendment No. 5 offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and amendment No. 34 offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.

Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Brown of Ohio

The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on amendment No. 5 offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 268,
noes 159, not voting 6, as follows:

[Roll No. 264]

AYES--268

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barcia
Barrett
Bartlett
Becerra
Bentsen
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Burton
Buyer
Calvert
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Chabot
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Duncan
Edwards
Ehlers
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Foley
Ford
Fossella
Frank
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gephardt
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hefley
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kerns
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kirk
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Largent
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Mascara
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McInnis
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller, George
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Norwood
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Phelps
Pitts
Platts
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rohrabacher
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sherman
Shimkus
Shows
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wamp
Waters
Watkins (OK)
Watson (CA)
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Wexler
Wilson
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn

NOES--159

Aderholt
Akin
Armey
Baker
Ballenger
Barr
Barton
Bass
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilirakis
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Callahan
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Castle
Chambliss
Coble
Collins
Combest
Cooksey
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Tom
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart
Dreier
Dunn
Ehrlich
Emerson
Everett
Ferguson
Fletcher
Forbes
Frelinghuysen
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutknecht
Hansen
Hart
Hayes
Hayworth
Herger
Hobson
Houghton
Hutchinson
Hyde
Istook
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Keller
Kennedy (MN)
King (NY)
Kingston
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaFalce
LaHood

[[Page H4528]]

Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McCrery
McHugh
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Myrick
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Nussle
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Riley
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roukema
Ryun (KS)
Schrock
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stenholm
Stump
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Traficant
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Watts (OK)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wolf
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--6

Hastings (WA)
Lipinski
Reyes
Scarborough
Spence
Young (AK)

{time} 2142

Mr. GILMAN changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. DOOLITTLE, JONES of North Carolina, GANSKE, CALVERT, ISSA,
KERNS, and Mrs. BONO changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment 34 Offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey

The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith)
on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 427,
noes 0, not voting 6, as follows:

[Roll No. 265]

AYES--427

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Andrews
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Frank
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kerns
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Largent
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Mascara
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reyes
Reynolds
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins (OK)
Watson (CA)
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--6

Hastings (WA)
Lipinski
Radanovich
Scarborough
Spence
Young (AK)

{time} 2150

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The CHAIRMAN. If there are no further amendments, the Clerk will read
the last two lines of the bill.
The Clerk read as follows:

This Act may be cited as the ``Foreign Operations, Export
Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2002''.
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, last January, instead of
celebrating one of the most important dates on the calendar for the
people of India--the 51st anniversary of the Republic of India, we
unfortunately mourned the death of hundreds of people who died in the
tragic earthquake.
At that time, many of us stood on the House floor to offer our
sincere condolences and deepest sympathies.
Today, we stand on the floor to offer disaster relief funding for
India in order to cope with that earthquake.
The rebuilding of the state of Gujarat is an enormous challenge, with
economic damage possibly topping $5 billion.
This amendment demonstrates our support for our friends in India and
proves that we are here to help in their time of need.
US-India relations are warmer than they have been in years.
We have seen a dramatic increase in economic and family ties.
As the largest democracy in the world, India has shown a genuine
commitment to improving its economic ties to the United States and the
U.S. and India have formally committed to work together to build peace
and security in South Asia, increase bilateral trade and investment,
meet global environmental challenges, fight disease, and eradicate
poverty.
This is an important time in US-India relations and this is an
important amendment that deserves our support.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this bill. I
want to commend chairman Kolbe an our ranking member, Congresswoman
Lowey for crafting a fair and comprehensive bill that addresses the
needs of many nations throughout the world.
As conflict continues around the globe, from Northern Ireland to the
Middle East, this bill has taken the appropriate steps to provide the
tools for future prosperity and the potential for reconciliation.
As the cycle of violence continues in the Middle East, it is
essential that we take the

[[Page H4529]]

appropriate steps to facilitate an atmosphere of peace. The Middle East
package in this appropriations bill takes important steps toward that
end by including balanced funding for Israel and Egypt, as well as
essential funding for Jordan and Lebanon.
Specifically, this bill provides economic funding in the amount of
$720 million for Israel and $655 million for Egypt. Additionally, it
provides $2.04 billion in military financing for Israel and $1.3
billion for Egypt. I would like to make a special note to commend
Israel for voluntarily requesting a reduction in its economic
assistance. It is my sincere hope that this funding will foster an
atmosphere for reconciliation. I would also like to thank the committee
for recognizing the work of the Galilee Society. The Galilee Society
works with Israeli-Arabs and Israeli-Jews on projects that are in the
mutual interest of both communities. From water purification to child
immunizations, Galilee has looked beyond the religious and cultural
differences that are often divisive in this part of the world for the
betterment of the society as a whole.
Furthermore, the funding provided for the International Fund for
Ireland in the amount of $25 million is a crucial element in
facilitating an environment in Northern Ireland in which all sides can
live together and prosper for the common good. With the peace process
on tenuous ground, programs such as the International Fund for Ireland
are essential for Irish youth from the North and from the Republic to
work together to improve the future of their respective homelands. It
gives me great pleasure to report that the committee has also
recognized the International Women's Democracy Center for its
contribution to the Northern Ireland Peace Process and other quests for
peace throughout the world. I had the honor of hosting several women
from Northern Ireland during their visit to Washington. I was impressed
by the manner in which these women worked together irrespective of
faith to achieve a common objective. It is my hope that the experience
that these women had in Washington stays with them upon returning to
Northern Ireland. The prospects for peace depend on it.
While it is not nearly enough to successfully battle the HIV/AIDS
pandemic in African countries, Asia and elsewhere, I am pleased that
the bill includes $434,000,000 for HIV/AIDS as part of the $1,387,000
for Child Survival and Health Programs Fund. It is $396,000,000 above
the request for FY2001. I hope we can continue to do more to help this
dire situation in so many developing countries.
I am also pleased that there is some sorely needed help for Heavily
Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC). By directing that half of the $6
million being provided to the Treasury Department's Office of Technical
Assistance, and the Treasury International Affairs Technical Assistance
program, be provided to eight or more of the HIPC countries, Congress
is helping these countries get out of their financial morass. While
debt relief is a key to recovery for many of these countries, with
these funds, Treasury could provide fiscal and monetary advisors to
HIPC countries to help develop strong indigenous capabilities to manage
financial matters more effectively.
Continued assistance to Armenia is critical to regional stability in
the Caucasus. Armenia has been a participant in good standing to the
Minsk Group process and is working constructively to help create an
equitable solution to the conflict over Nagorno Karabakh. Until that
occurs, and thereafter, Armenia needs our help. Its economy is
struggling to survive embargoes on two of its borders and the
government is taking key steps to combat corruption and move towards a
democratic society and prosperous economy. The $82 million in funding
will continue to help move Armenia towards those ultimate goals.
Though I am leased overall with the funding levels included in this
bills, I have many concerns regarding the Andean Initiative.
Despite the fact that this funding is a vast improvement over Plan
Colombia, I believe that it fails to address the needs of countries,
such as Ecuador, to effectively combat the spillover effect from the
drug war in Colombia. Furthermore, this initiative continues to provide
financial and military assistance to the Colombian military. With an
abysmal human rights record, the Colombian military should receive no
support from the United States.
It is my hope that these funding deficiencies will be addressed and
rectified in conference.
I congratulate Mr. Kolbe and Mrs. Lowey for their diligent work on
this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support its passage.
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this
bill. I thank Chairman Kolbe and Ranking Member Lowey for succeeding in
developing such a bipartisan bill.
I think that it addresses many of our global concerns and adequately
funds many important programs.
But, there is one glaring omission that I think must be addressed.
The bill does nothing to remove the anti-democratic, anti-woman
global gag rule from imposing its harsh standards on our poorest, and
most vulnerable women and children around the world.
You've heard it so many times before--the gag rule isn't about
abortion. It's about women dying, to the tune of 600,000 a year.
That is equal to one or two jumbo jets crashing every single day.
And, it's about saving women's lives.
The fact remains that since 1973, no U.S. federal funds have been or
are used around the world for abortions.
During the time we are debating this bill, 65 women will die form
pregnancy related complications.
They are dying because they don't have access to the most basic
health care. Let me be clear, the global gag rule restricts foreign
NGO's from using their own funds. In America, this language is
unconstitutional. Around the world, it's unconscionable.
The gag rule is enough to make you gag.
It cripples foreign NGO's ability to practice democracy in their own
countries. The United States has always been dedicated to exporting the
very best of our country, from our ideas of freedom and democracy to
products that help make life better. Unfortunately, the global gag rule
exports one of the worst, if not the worst, of our country's internal
politics.
Politics surrounding a policy that is unconstitutional in our own
country and forcing it on the poorest women and nations of the world.
And with dire effects.
We can't afford to stifle the international debate on family planning
by tying the hands of NGO's with an anti-woman gag rule.
The gag rule forces NGO's to choose between their democratic rights
to organize and determine what is best in their own countries and
desperately needed resources of U.S. family planning dollars.
We know that family planning reduces the need for abortions. We know
that it saves lives. The gag rule reduces the effectiveness of family
planning organizations and should be eliminated.
This is a good bill, but we can't forget that it does nothing to
remove a very dangerous policy, the anti-women, anti-democratic global
gag rule. I hope that in conference that this harmful language is
removed once and for all.
The CHAIRMAN. No further amendments being in order, under the rule,
the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Isakson) having assumed the chair, Mr. Thornberry, Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2506)
making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, and
related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for
other purposes, pursuant to House Resolution 199, he reported the bill,
as amended pursuant to that rule, back to the House with sundry further
amendments adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment? If not, the Chair will
put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 381,
nays 46, not voting 6, as follows:

[Roll No. 266]

YEAS--381

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Andrews
Armey
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barrett
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Conyers
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal

[[Page H4530]]

DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Frank
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grucci
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Harman
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Hill
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Horn
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Largent
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Mascara
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mink
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pomeroy
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reyes
Reynolds
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Sweeney
Tauscher
Tauzin
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watson (CA)
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (FL)

NAYS--46

Barr
Berry
Collins
Combest
Condit
Cubin
Cunningham
Duncan
Everett
Flake
Goode
Goodlatte
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hayes
Hefley
Herger
Hilleary
Hostettler
Jenkins
Jones (NC)
Kaptur
Kerns
Lucas (OK)
McInnis
Otter
Paul
Petri
Phelps
Pombo
Rahall
Roemer
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryun (KS)
Schaffer
Sensenbrenner
Stark
Stearns
Tancredo
Tanner
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Toomey
Watkins (OK)
Weldon (FL)

NOT VOTING--6

Hastings (WA)
Johnson, Sam
Lipinski
Scarborough
Spence
Young (AK)

{time} 2209

So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________