[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.

                          ____________________