Congressional Record, Volume 147 Issue 123 (Thursday, September 20, 2001)

[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 123 (Thursday, September 20, 2001)]
[House]
[Pages H5857-H5859]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE--RETURNING TO SENATE H.R. 2500, DEPARTMENTS OF
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of the privileges of
the House, and I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 240) and ask
for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 240

Resolved, That the amendment of the Senate to the bill H.R.
2500 entitled the ``Departments of Commerce, Justice, and
State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 2002'', in the opinion of this House, contravenes the
first clause of the seventh section of the first article of
the Constitution of the United States and is an infringement
of the privileges of this House and that such bill be
respectfully returned to the Senate with a message
communicating this resolution.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The resolution raises a question of the
privileges of the House.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) and the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Rangel) each will be recognized for 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas).
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
As was indicated by the content of the resolution, the resolution is
necessary to return to the Senate, unfortunately, the Commerce-State-
Justice appropriations bill because there is a provision, section 404
of the Senate amendments, that is an import ban. This, therefore, is a
revenue measure and contravenes the Constitution, article 1, section 7,
clause 1.
Notwithstanding the meritorious nature of the amendment, the idea of
trying to deal with importation bans on diamonds from certain African
countries that are used to finance rebel causes, the underlying
constitutional question of the Constitution's statement that all bills
for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives
transcends any particular issue, no matter the merits of a particular
issue. Therefore, I am asking

[[Page H5858]]

the House that it insist on its constitutional prerogative as the sole
originator of revenue measures, notwithstanding the meritorious aspects
of any particular desired piece of legislation.
In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, I would indicate that this is not
necessarily, unfortunately, a novel or new conflict between the House
and the Senate. As recently as July 14, and then again on August 12,
1994, on the Treasury-Postal, appropriation bill and then on the
Agriculture appropriation bill, just such a blue slip was requested and
granted. This is another indication of the difficulty of wanting to
move legislation but understanding that there is a process
constitutionally required.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the chairman of the Committee on Ways and
Means that this is an important piece of legislation, but there are
constitutional prerogatives that provide that the Committee on Ways and
Means originate this type of legislation.
Mr. Speaker, in view of the merits of the legislation, I yield 5
minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall), one of the original
sponsors in the House of the legislation such as myself and other
Members.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Rangel) for yielding me the time. I do not intend to oppose the
resolution. The reason why the chairman of the committee has opposed
it, as I understand it, is more technical and procedural. It does not
prejudice, I think, the vote of the House on this issue because he does
not oppose the substantive part of it.
The substantive part of the bill which they are sending back to the
Senate has to do with blood diamonds. That is a part that I have been
working on along with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Rangel) and a lot of Members in a bipartisan way, as well as
Senator Feingold, Senator Durbin, Senator Gregg, and Senator DeWine
have been very supportive of this legislation.
Blood diamonds are diamonds that are used to really fund wars in
Africa, particularly in Sierra Leone, in Angola, and in the Congo. For
years they have been using diamonds, either through the smuggled ways,
or through a lot of different ways that they find themselves coming
into America to fund the kind of wars that are going on; particularly
in Sierra Leone, where a group of 500 ragtag rebels were able to
increase their small little army to about 25,000 with very
sophisticated training, drugs, guns, et cetera. They terrorized all of
Sierra Leone. They have done the same thing in Angola. It has been used
in Liberia in many different ways.
Why should we be interested in this as Americans? The reason why we
should be interested in it is that Americans buy 65 percent of all the
diamonds in the world every year. A lot of these blood diamonds are
coming into our country. We essentially are funding wars in Africa. It
is my understanding just in the last couple of days, I have been told
through press accounts and through intelligence services, that even bin
Laden has used the services of conflict diamonds to fund some of his
activities in the world.
We have great bipartisan support on this, both Republicans and
Democrats, in both the House and the Senate. We have 100 of the top
human rights organizations that are firmly behind this legislation.
And, for the first time, the diamond merchants, the diamond industry,
is 100 percent behind this bill.

{time} 1600

We were hoping that this would be accepted in this particular way.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), the chairman of the
Committee on Ways and Means, he does not want to deal with it in this
way. He wants to deal with it in another way, as I understand.
I hope that he and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and I can
have a colloquy on it from the standpoint of what they intend to do
with this bill in their committee; and with that, I would urge the
House to take up this issue soon, in a manner which is acceptable to
the Committee on Ways and Means. And I would ask the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thomas), Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means,
what his intentions are with the substance of the bill that he objects
to.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I thank the
gentleman for the question, and the substance of the bill has been
under discussion at the United Nations level on an international
discussion. The United States Trade Representative has indicated that a
unilateral sanction by any particular country is in violation of the
World Trade Organization rules, but an ability to move under the United
Nations' auspices is not.
We would obviously all like to see an international agreement under
which these kinds of diamonds could be banned. If, in fact, observing
that process it does not appear that it is going to reach any
reasonable or positive conclusion in the timeframe within which we
could act legislatively, I will tell the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Hall), and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) as well, that we
would then bring up legislation.
The gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton) already has a bill in the
hopper. We would examine that bill, if necessary, make the appropriate
changes and look forward to moving that bill out of committee in a
timely fashion.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, when the chairman says a timely
fashion, I hope that he is meaning before the end of the year or before
we adjourn.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, definitely a timely fashion means before the
session of Congress ends; and it seems to me that if, in fact, the
committee moves, it should not be difficult to deal with the scheduling
to bring it to the floor, if that is the appropriate thing to do on the
basis of leadership's decision.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's answer. I
think it is a good answer. I look forward to seeing it on the bill
soon. I think the longer that we keep this piece of legislation from
passing in this Congress the more kinds of civil wars we are going to
see in Africa; and it is just horrendous, when you see these people,
how they have had their lives terrorized.
Americans can help Africa, it is very interesting, through a piece of
legislation, by being very careful through the kind of diamonds they
buy in America.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for agreeing to
bring this up.
The reason this is so important is that many of these groups who are
being funded from these diamonds are really connected to all of the
disreputable groups that are around the world.
The passage of this legislation, one, will save the diamond industry,
because if this does not pass the diamond industry, particularly in New
York City and other places, may very well collapse because I think
there may be a boycott against it.
Secondly, the opportunity to bring about a lot of good whereby people
will no longer have their arms cut off or limbs cut off. There are
indications that the RUF in Sierra Leone, Charles Taylor in Liberia,
have been connected with many of the other terrorist groups around the
world and were even together earlier this year meeting and agreeing and
talking, and the resources of this may very well be used by terrorists
and many others around the world.
I called Senator Gregg from New Hampshire, and he was very gracious
and said he would attempt to work this out. He is committed to doing
this. Hopefully we can resolve this issue whereby it will be worked
out, the conferees on Commerce, State, Justice can be appointed, which
has a lot of counterterrorism money, lot of money with regard to the
Justice Department and other areas, INS, money with regard to the State
Department, embassy security, diplomatic security, we can move ahead.
So with the gentleman from Ohio's (Mr. Hall) promise to move it as a
freestanding bill, hopefully the Senate can resolve that issue; and I
want to thank my friend from Ohio (Mr. Hall)

[[Page H5859]]

for his faithfulness on this issue and thank the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thomas) for his commitment.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I just want to give assurances to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Wolf) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall) that I will be working
with Mr. Houghton and the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), the
chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, not only on the
legislation but on our trade ambassador to make certain that he is
giving this a priority.
When it reaches the point that we can meet together, see where we are
and then if we do not get the type of response that we believe is
adequate, then you can depend on me working with the committee and the
chairman to see that this is done.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of the Committee
on Rules.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Bakersfield,
California (Mr. Thomas), for yielding me time; and I would like to
congratulate the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means and the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the ranking minority member.
This concern was first raised to my attention by the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Hall) of the Committee on Rules late one night; and we have
been trying since that time when he, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Wolf), and I discussed this, to move ahead.
I would simply like to congratulate the leadership of the committee
on Ways and Means for addressing this very important human rights
issue, which I believe can see successful resolution, and will look
forward to the progress that is made.
I thank my friends for bringing this to our attention and for the
work they have done on it.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The question is on the
resolution.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________