Congressional Record, Volume 149 Issue 104 (Tuesday, July 15, 2003)

[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 104 (Tuesday, July 15, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H6790-H6824]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Paul

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

Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Paul:

Page 32, after line 3, insert the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):

Subtitle C--Limitations

SEC. 131. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS AUTHORIZED TO BE
APPROPRIATED BY THIS ACT FOR ANY UNITED STATES
CONTRIBUTION TO THE UNITED NATIONS OR ANY
AFFILIATED AGENCY OF THE UNITED NATIONS.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, none of
the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be
obligated or expended to pay any United States contribution
to the United Nations or any affiliated agency of the United
Nations.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) and a Member opposed (Mr. Hyde) each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).

{time} 1545

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment takes away the funding from the United
Nations as well as any affiliated U.N. agency.
Mr. Chairman, last year we spent $3.25 billion on the U.N. as well as
the other agencies at the U.N. I do not believe that is money
worthwhile. It is not a good investment. I do not think the money is
spent well. The amendment, as I said, defunds the United Nations as
well as its agencies. We pay 21 percent of the budget, and on
peacekeeping missions we pay over 27 percent. I think this is
essentially wasted money.
We also lose our sovereignty when we look to the U.N. for guidance.
When we

[[Page H6791]]

declared war or when we went to war without declaration of war last
fall, we had a resolution on the floor which cited the U.N. 23
different times. I do not believe we should go to war under U.N.
resolutions, and we have essentially been in Iraq under U.N. resolution
because in the early 1990s it was under U.N. resolution that we went to
war. The old-fashioned way of going to war was a declaration of war.
We went into Korea over 50 years ago under a U.N. resolution. We are
still in Korea. We still have serious problems in Korea. There is still
a confrontation that we have with the government of North Korea. I do
not see where it is to our benefit, I do not see where it is a benefit
to world peace to rely on the United Nations. Even though we rely on
the United Nations for authority, when we want the United Nations to go
along with our policy as our President asked earlier this year, it was
refused. So in many ways we have a policy that does not make a whole
lot of sense. We first rely on the United Nations, spend a lot of
money, then they do not do our bidding.
It gets to be almost a joke around the world about some of the things
the U.N. does. When you think about the Commission of Human Rights and
who is appointed as the chairman of the Commission of Human Rights,
nobody else other than Libya. And before the war it was actually Iraq
who was supposed to chair the Disarmament Commission.
So this I think in many ways reflects the ineptness of the United
Nations and its inability to pursue any policy that is in our interest.
So it is for this reason, whether it is rejoining UNESCO and throwing
more money down another on another useless program, we here are
spending a lot of money giving up our sovereignty. Much of this money
should be spent here at home.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos).
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman of the
committee for yielding me time.
I rise, Mr. Chairman, in the strongest possible opposition to the
Paul amendment which would cause great harm to our national interests.
Mr. Chairman, I do not look upon the United Nations through rose-
colored spectacles. It is obvious that for every criticism my good
friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), has of the United Nations,
I could probably cite a half dozen. But the fact remains that many of
the activities of the United Nations are clearly in the U.S. national
interest.
The International Atomic Agency monitors and exposes countries such
as North Korea and Iran attempting to develop nuclear weapons. The
World Health Organization works to prevent infectious diseases
throughout the world, and it was critical recently in putting a stop to
the spread of SARS. UNESCO, which the President wisely decided to
rejoin, will provide us an opportunity to make our voice heard in the
educational, cultural and scientific field of the international
organization. UNICEF, the United Nations International Children's Fund,
is providing invaluable assistance across the globe to millions of
children in desperate need; and the U.N. itself, more often than not,
is helpful in attaining our own foreign policy objectives.
The absurdity of the United States, the one remaining superpower, the
most powerful civilizing force on the face of this planet in the 21st
century, withdrawing from the United Nations is nothing short of
absurd; and I strongly urge all of my colleagues to reject
overwhelmingly this amendment.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, whether you think the U.N. is
an efficacious organization or you think it is a useless organization,
whether you think that we are advantaged as a country of being a member
of the U.N. or you think we ought not be a member of the U.N., you can
vote for the Paul amendment with confidence that you are doing the
right thing. Let me explain.
Both the Department of Defense and the Congressional Research Service
have documented that we have spent over $19 billion of taxpayers' money
on legitimate U.N. peacekeeping activities. Now, the U.N. has
legitimized our claim that this ought to be credited against our dues
because they have credited $1.8 billion of this against our dues.
I am going to vote for this amendment. I will vote for any amendment
that denies funding to the U.N. without any argument whether we ought
to belong, any argument of whether it is good or bad, but the simple
argument that, in all fairness, please do an accounting of the monies
we have spent on legitimate U.N. peacekeeping activities. Please credit
appropriate amounts of that to our U.N. dues. Then, if there are dues
left over, we will pay those dues. But until that accounting is done,
everybody in this Congress, we are in very tough financial times now,
ought to vote yes for the Paul amendment that will demand that the
accounting is done; and then we can debate another day whether or not
we ought to be members of the U.N. or whether or not it is an
efficacious organization.
But, for today, the simple fact that we have not been credited for
almost $17 billion of monies that we have spent on legitimate U.N.
peacekeeping activities is more than a legitimate right to vote for
this amendment. Vote for the Paul amendment.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this is a tempting amendment to the bill, but more
mature thought says no, it is not all that good of an idea. The fact is
we still need the U.N. and its agencies to promote peacekeeping efforts
in some parts of the world, to assist in the global anti-terrorist
campaign to help rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, to promote nuclear non-
proliferation by rogue states such as Iran and North Korea, and help
implement our legislation designed to fight against HIV/AIDS.
Without the World Food Program, there would be more starvation and
suffering in the world. Without the Food and Agricultural Organization,
there would be scant support for global food standards. And without the
International Civil Aviation Organization, there would be no effective
management of civilian airplane traffic around the world.
Finally, to the extent that we decide to commit any U.S. troops as
part of a regional West African peacekeeping force in Liberia, we
certainly should not be cutting off funding for U.N. peacekeeping when
we will need those same peacekeepers to relieve our troops, providing
us with an exit strategy, safeguarding our interests.
With great respect, I urge the defeat of this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Paul) is recognized for 1\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I once again urge a yes vote on this
amendment to limit the funding to the United Nations and to all its
agencies.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) mentioned that there were
some programs under the United Nations which were sort of ``feel-good''
programs, social welfare programs, and I think I would grant that some
of these programs have had some benefit. That in itself is not enough
for me to endorse the concept of international welfare through the
United Nations.
However, too often I think they leave doing these programs that are
designed to help people who are truly suffering versus getting involved
with what we call peacekeeping missions. The United Nations are not
allowed to declare war. They never go to war, and yet too often we get
involved in war. That is why they were called peacekeepers in Korea.
That is why it is a peacekeeping mission when we go to Iraq. But,
still, the armies are raised, and young men are called off, and people
are killed on these peacekeeping missions. Therefore, I say that the
United Nations has tended to take away the responsibilities of this
Congress to make these very, very important decisions.
I believe in many ways that by joining the United Nations we have
allowed our Constitution to be amended merely by U.N. vote. If the U.N.
votes and says something and we go along with that, we do that by
majority vote here in the Congress. Where if we look to the
Constitution for the authorities that we

[[Page H6792]]

are allowed to do and what we are not permitted to do, we look to
article I, section 8; and what the U.N. is doing is not permissible
under the article.

{time} 1600

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question
is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).
The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Paul) will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed in House
Report 108-206.

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, and I am the
designee of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 7 offered by Mr. King of Iowa:
Page 88, after line 17, insert the following new section
(and amend the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 406. LIMITATION ON THE UNITED STATES SHARE OF
ASSESSMENTS FOR UNITED NATIONS REGULAR BUDGET.

Section 11 of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945
(22 U.S.C. 287e-3) is amended by striking ``22 percent of the
total of all assessed contributions for that budget'' and
inserting ``the largest assessed contribution of any other
permanent member country of the United Nations Security
Council''.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
As a cosponsor of H.R. 2303, sponsored by the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Hayworth), I am happy to offer this amendment, which is the first
step in reforming the United Nations.
In the run-up to the war with Iraq, France was able to hold U.S.
policy hostage by virtue of its status as a permanent member of the
Security Council and the veto power that goes with it, but France was
not alone. The other permanent Security Council Members, China, Russia,
United Kingdom, of course, also the United States, they all have a veto
power; and they regularly obstruct our foreign policy goals and vote
the opposite of the United States.
According to the State Department's voting practices in the United
Nations of 2002, on votes important to U.S. interests, France and the
U.K. voted with us just 50 percent of the time, Russia 22 percent of
the time and China, 20 percent.
Even though the U.S. has no more power on the Security Council than
any of the other four permanent members, it pays the lion's share of
the United Nations' budget. The United States pays $341 million a year,
or 22 percent of the overall budget. China pays just $24 million, even
though it has the world's second largest economy. Russia pays a paltry
$19 million, which is less than Canada, Holland, Australia, or
Switzerland.
This amendment would limit the U.S. contribution to the regular U.N.
budget to no more than the highest amount paid by any other member of
the Security Council. Our veto power should cost us no more than what
China, France, Russia, or the U.K. pay for theirs.
This proposal would not affect U.S. payments to the U.N. for
peacekeeping operations, voluntary programs, or membership
organizations. It would only affect the U.N. regular budget. Even at
this reduced amount, the U.S. would still contribute over $1.4 billion
in various U.N. programs, far more than any other country.
So aside from simple equity, enactment of this amendment would
hopefully lead to reconsideration of how U.N. dues are assessed among
permanent members. China and Russia are now essentially getting a free
ride at our expense. The solution would be for all permanent members to
pay equal amounts of the regular budget because of their veto power,
and I say this amendment is a first step in the direction of reforming
the United Nations.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona by way of Arizona
does raise an important issue of how our dues to the U.N. regular
budget are calculated. I would be glad to hold follow-up briefings and
a hearing in the committee on our role at the U.N. and how our
membership should promote our national interests and how our current
assessment should reflect a fair share of all the other member states
of the U.N.
There are, however, serious problems with the way this amendment is
written insofar as it unilaterally alters our existing financial
obligations to the United Nations. It will reduce our assessment from
the current 22 percent to the level of 6.5 percent, thereby generating
close to $250 million in new arrearages to the U.N. It would reduce our
share of the funding of the regular budget of the U.N. far below the
level currently being paid by Japan and Germany and would give those
countries every reason to reduce their contributions accordingly.
The amendment mistakenly makes the assumption that the permanent
members of the U.N. Security Council are assessed their dues on the
basis of their inclusion in this body. The assessments are made instead
on the basis of a member state's share of the world gross domestic
product. In the case of the U.S., however, our share should actually be
well over 22 percent.
In short, the amendment would have the same practical effect as that
of the gentleman from Texas' (Mr. Paul) amendment, undercutting any
role we would have in the U.N. and eventually leading to our withdrawal
from the world body. If my colleagues voted against the Paul amendment,
they should oppose this amendment as well.
In short, it takes a unilateral approach which could potentially harm
U.S. interests and objectives around the world. Our contributions to
the U.N. regular budget and to all other U.N. programs and agencies are
agreed to by mutual consent of all U.N. members. If the U.S. were to
unilaterally cut its assessment, we would start building arrears to the
U.N. again just after completing a 3-year arrearage repayment effort
under the Helms-Biden legislation where we obtained substantial
management and administrative reforms in return for the payment of our
back dues.
Adoption of this amendment would undercut those ongoing reform
efforts, and I urge it be defeated.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, might I inquire as to the amount of
time I have remaining.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) and the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) both have 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
I appreciate the gentleman from Illinois' remarks with regard to the
United Nations and some of the implications of any change that we might
make in how the dues are assessed against the United States, and I
would point out that our gross domestic product is comparable to that
of the balance of the Security Council and all the other priority
members that are there; and even though it is indexed to the gross
domestic product, it is certainly out of proportion.
Additionally, these members of the United Nations Security Council
have exerted far more influence than their economy contributes to the
world economy or to the United Nations dues or any type of forces that
we might have out there, and so I would suggest that the United Nations
has become a

[[Page H6793]]

Third World class envy debating society where the strongest and most
powerful countries' foreign policy is dictated by countries who wish to
undermine the United States. It is entirely inappropriate that the
United States must contribute an inordinate amount to provide a
democratic platform to dictators and tyrants, and that is a broad
fellowship in the approach of the United Nations.
People tend to believe that because each country has a vote in the
United Nations, and we set things up in kind of a proportional method
as far as the dues are concerned in the Security Council, that somehow
or another we have got a democratic debating society there; but we see
dictators and tyrants at the United Nations, who give them full voice
to utter their opinions, their tyrannical opinions, when they would not
let a single one of their citizens do the same within their own
country; and this is the flaw in the United Nations that we have lived
with all of these years.
We have got to move down the path of reforming the United Nations,
and this is the first good step to do so.
U.N. membership, structure, and policy aside, it is preposterous that
the United States continues to pay for 22 percent of the entire U.N.
regular budget. That 22 percent is $341 billion; and in fact, the U.N.
votes against the United States 32 percent of the time on important
issues. The United States contributes currently $115 million more to
the regular budget than France, Germany, Russia, and China combined;
but our veto power should cost no more than what France, Russia, or
China pays for theirs. China only pays $24 million, even though it is
the world's second largest economy. The Russians pay $19 million, which
is less than Canada, Holland, Australia, or Switzerland. It is
ridiculous to have this position. The United States is funding its
political opposition.
I want to make it clear that this amendment would not affect U.S.
payments to the U.N. for peacekeeping operations, voluntary programs,
or membership organizations. If this amendment is adopted, the U.S.
will still contribute more than $1.4 billion to various programs. In
summary, this amendment would simply limit the U.S. contributions to
the U.N. regular budget.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment. A ``yes''
vote is not a vote against the U.S., but rather a vote to make it more
accountable.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I might just say that the gentleman is certainly making common sense,
and the problem is we just cannot do it unilaterally. It might be wise
for us to constantly review our dues and payments to the U.N., but
there is a process that is not unilateral in getting them changed.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield such time as I have remaining to
the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the distinguished chairman
of our committee for yielding me the time, and I want to identify my
views with his and just add a few footnotes.
The United Nations was founded at the end of the Second World War
when the United States was economically not only a superpower but had a
vastly disproportionate share of global gross domestic product. At that
time, our contribution to the U.N. was 40 percent. It is now 22
percent; and I think a legitimate case can be made for multilaterally,
through negotiation, adjusting our contributions to the U.N. as gross
domestic products of the various countries change. But to take
unilateral action at this stage, when the United Nations is so badly
needed, despite all of its flaws, would be a singularly ill-advised
move; and I strongly urge all of my colleagues to reject this
amendment.
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Hayworth/
King Amendment that would limit what the U.S. pays in U.N. dues to an
amount no more than the highest amount paid by any other permanent U.N.
Security Council member.
Let's put this amendment in perspective. In the run-up to the war
against Saddam Hussein, we saw all too clearly the real goal of France
in obstructing and sabotaging U.S. policy--to challenge U.S. global
leadership and set itself up as the leader of a competing coalition.
By itself, however, France is incapable of countering or competing
with the U.S. militarily or economically, and that situation will only
grow worse as France faces a demographically-driven decline. The key to
France's strategic ambition is therefore based solely on its permanent
membership on the UN Security Council, or UNSC, and, most importantly,
the veto power that goes with it. Without its veto, France would lose
its chief claim to geopolitical relevance.
I don't mean to pick on France, Mr. Chairman, but its actions leading
up to the war with Iraq make it an easy target. The truth is, the
entire Security Council regularly obstructs our foreign policy goals
and permanent members--China, France, Russia, and the U.K.--regularly
vote the opposite of the U.S.
According to the State Department's Voting Practices in the United
Nations 2002, on votes important to U.S. interests, France and the U.K.
voted with us just 50 percent of the time, Russia 22 percent, and China
20 percent. Overall, the General Assembly voted the U.S. position only
32 percent of the time on important issues. Areas of specific
disagreement include the Middle East, nuclear disarmament, certain
human rights issues, and the International Criminal Court.
What makes all this even more galling is that even though the U.S.
has no more power on the Security Council than any of the other four
permanent members, it pays the lion's share of the U.N. budget. Indeed,
even though the aggregate GDP of the other permanent members nearly
equals that of the U.S., the U.S. contributes about $115 million more
to the U.N. regular budget than those four countries combined.
What's more, U.N. dues are supposed to be based on ability to pay.
Yet there are a dozen countries that in 2003 will pay more in dues than
China's $24 million even though it now has the world's second largest
economy. The Chinese are clearly getting a lot of bang for their U.N.
buck. So are the Russians. Their 2003 assessment is a paltry $19
million, less than Canada, Holland, Australia, and Switzerland.
The Hayworth/King Amendment would restore some balance to this
picture. It would limit the U.S. contribution to the regular U.N.
budget to no more than the highest amount paid by any other permanent
UNSC member. The rationale is simple. Our veto power should cost us no
more than what China, France, Russia, or the U.K. pay for theirs.
The U.S.'s 2003 assessment for the U.N. regular budget is $341
million. Under this amendment, we would pay no more than France, which
has been assessed the second-highest amount, or $100 million. This
proposal would not effect U.S. payments to the U.N. for peacekeeping
operations, voluntary programs, or membership organizations. It would
only affect the U.N. regular budget. Even at this reduced amount the
U.S. would still contribute over $1.4 billion to various U.N. programs,
far more than any other country.
Aside from simple equity, enactment of my bill would hopefully lead
to a reconsideration of how U.N. dues are assessed among permanent
members. China and Russia are now essentially getting a free ride at
our expense. The solution would be for all permanent members to pay
equal amounts of the regular budget because of their veto power. France
and the U.K. would have to pay a little more, Russia and China a lot
more, the U.S. a lot less.
A debate over dues could also prompt a broader discussion on U.N.
reform. The outrages are not limited to the meltdown over Iraq. Cuba
began its recent crackdown on dissidents as the U.N.'s Human Rights
Commission was holding its annual meeting in Geneva. It promptly
elected Cuba to another three-year term, an act author Carl Hiaasen
wrote was ``a little like naming a necktie after the Boston
Strangler.'' The commission is headed by Libya and includes some of the
worst abusers of human rights in the world, including Vietnam, Syria,
Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe.
If the U.N. does not reform itself, it risks becoming, in the words
of Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez, another ``Red Cross.''
The U.N. can become relevant again, but whether it does so will
ultimately rest on the goodwill and magnanimity of the five permanent
UNSC members who can block any reform with a veto.
As we have learned, U.N. reform takes time. Ronald Reagan pulled the
U.S. out of UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and
Cultural Organization, in 1984. It took 18 years for UNESCO to
implement sufficient reforms for the U.S. to return. More fundamental
reform could take even longer.
By approving this action today we will be sending a message that the
U.S. is serious about reform at the U.N.
Support the Hayworth/King Amendment.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered

[[Page H6794]]

by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr.
King) will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in House
Report 108-206.

Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mrs. Tauscher

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

Amendment No. 8 offered by Mrs. Tauscher:
Add the following at the end:

SEC. 1716. MARKETING INFORMATION FOR COMMERCIAL
COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITES.

(a) In General.--A license shall not be required under
section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778)
for the transfer of marketing information for the purpose of
providing information directly related to the sale of
commercial communications satellites and related parts to a
member country of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) or to Australia, Japan, or New Zealand.
(b) Marketing Information.--In this section, the term
``marketing information''--
(1) means data that a seller must provide to a potential
customer (including a foreign end user) that will enable the
customer to make a purchase decision to award a contract for
goods or services, including system description, functional
information, price and schedule information, information
required for installation, operation, maintenance, and
repair; and
(2) includes that level of data necessary to ensure safe
use of the product, but does not include sensitive encryption
and source code data, detailed design data, engineering
analysis, or manufacturing know-how.
(c) Exception.--Nothing in this section shall exempt
commercial communications satellites from any licensing
requirement under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act
(22 U.S.C. 2778) for defense items and defense services,
except as described in subsection (a).

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, may I claim time in opposition because I am
reluctantly opposed to the gentlewoman's amendment?
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois may.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering with the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) would provide a small, but vital, fix to the
cumbersome process that governs the export of commercial communication
satellites to our closest allies.
The amendment is identical to language that Senator Enzi offered and
that was passed as part of the Senate foreign relations bill.
Under current law, satellite sellers must obtain a license from the
State Department just to talk to a prospective buyer of a product. When
a foreign buyer calls and asks for basic information, the company
cannot immediately answer any questions. The current process means
American companies have to wait for weeks or months to call back
potential customers. This is undermining an industry we used to
dominate at a time when our economy is in a major slump.
As the COMSAT market continues to shrink, we want to ensure that U.S.
companies are left standing. This amendment levels the playing field
between the U.S. satellite industry and its foreign competitors.
Under exception provided by our amendment, exporters of commercial
communications satellites would be allowed to provide marketing
information only to member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, and Japan, Australia and New Zealand. It would not affect
any of the licensing requirements for countries like China and would
keep in place all of the national security statutes put in place by
Congress.
The amendment also improves the U.S. export control system. It
enables the State Department to focus its resources on the transfer of
truly sensitive data and allows U.S. companies to communicate with our
allies internationally and friends in a timely and cost-effective
manner about basic marketing information.
Our national security is closely linked to our technological
leadership which guarantees the military advantage we have today, but
our national security is being undermined by a sick industry that is
falling behind its competition because of onerous bureaucracies that
are doing nothing to protect our national security.
I urge my colleagues to support the Tauscher-Bereuter amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1615

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding me this
time, and I rise in opposition to this amendment loosening satellite
export controls.
I am profoundly concerned, Mr. Chairman, that the language of the
amendment would result in all satellite marketing information being
exempted from any licensing requirement at all. Even if unclassified,
some of the information transferred might well be sensitive. It is also
possible that companies, without the government review of a license
requirement, may unintentionally transfer more information than they
should under the pressure of making a sale. The Departments of State
and Defense would have no idea whatsoever what information is actually
being transferred.
The Congress needs more time and information to consider the full and
serious ramifications of this change in satellite licensing regime in
order to ensure that our national security is not compromised. I would
urge the sponsors of this amendment, for whom I have a great deal of
respect, to include at a future time a provision making clear that
companies must first obtain a license to transfer marketing
information. Short of that, I reluctantly oppose the amendment and ask
all of my colleagues to vote against it.
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the coauthor of this amendment.
(Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me
this time. The gentlewoman has explained adequately the very limited
number of circumstances under which licensing would not be required. In
fact, they have to require such licensing now. That is the point of
this amendment.
But the U.S. market share in the commercial satellite industry
generally has fallen from around 75 percent of the market now to 50. As
U.S. sales have dropped, European commercial satellites have
dramatically increased. Among the key concerns which commercial
satellite customers cite as a concern when working with U.S. satellite
producers is the delay frequently associated with licensing
requirements. In some cases, a simple license to release unclassified
information takes up to 60 days.
Furthermore, exempting from licensing the sharing of very limited
type of nonclassified marketing information does in no way jeopardize
the security interests of the United States. Amazingly, the
competitiveness of U.S. satellite processors, however, if we damage it
by continuing this unnecessary licensing, does damage the security
interest of the United States.
I was a member of the Cox Commission which generated the concern
about licensing information. I am very concerned about the transfer of
classified information or something that would jeopardize our national
security. This in no way does. There is no good argument why this
nonclassified marketing information should not be shared, and I urge
support for this amendment by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs.
Tauscher).
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's yielding

[[Page H6795]]

me this time to speak on this amendment.
This is an example of why our export control regime is broken and
badly in need of review. The typical high school teenager's bedroom has
more computing power than the United States possessed when it developed
the atomic and hydrogen bombs. Our friends and allies are worthy
partners to deal with us in the satellite industry. As has been pointed
out by my two colleagues in favor of this, what we are doing is we are
forcing people to deal with other entities in Europe and around the
world, so actually we are undermining the United States' long-term
security interests, forcing them to other markets while we undermine
American business.
I almost never disagree with my chairman and ranking member, but I
would respectfully suggest that this is an illustration of why we need
to revise our export control regime. And before and unless we do that,
adopting this amendment is good for business, it is good for technology
development, and it is common sense. I urge its adoption.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the learned chairman of the
Committee on Armed Services.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding me this
time, and let me just rise to oppose what I think is a very dangerous
amendment.
Historically, companies do not have to have a license to transmit
marketing information to foreign customers. A couple of years ago, when
we strengthened export controls on satellite exports, foreign customers
started increasing their demands for what they called technical
information as part of a marketing pitch. The foreign customers were
not looking for the kind of information that the public can get. They
were after proprietary design, integration, and operational information
that could be used for a variety of purposes, including improvements in
their own capabilities.
So while the Tauscher amendment purports to prevent that information
from being sent abroad, it leaves the definition of marketing
information up to the prospective foreign customer.
And let me just say, Mr. Chairman, that this technology, this
technology of separation of a payload from a booster that puts a
satellite up is very much akin to the technology that accompanies a
separation of a MIRV'd nuclear warhead from its booster. This is
dangerous technology, and I would ask everyone to vote against the
Tauscher amendment.
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time to
simply remind my colleagues that, first and foremost, this is marketing
information that is declassified. Second, this is information that
would only be allowed to be transmitted to NATO allies, Australia,
Japan, and New Zealand. I think it is very important that we keep the
controls that we have in place for any kind of technology transfer for
places like China, Russia, and others, but this is for our own allies.
While we have watched this business that we dominated at one time
leave our shores and go to foreign competitors, I think it is very
important that we keep our strict controls, that we keep the State
Department involved in the licensing, but in these declassified
marketing materials that everyone agrees are basically innocent, that
we should allow them to be disseminated so that we can keep the small
part of the business that we have left.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
If there is no export license requirement, it is difficult if not
impossible to prevent information from being retransferred to a third
country. This is important since our European allies do not always have
the same policies as we do in satellite cooperation with China and
other countries. The practical effect would be to deregulate much
information about satellites and satellite technology. Given the
importance of space technology to our national security, I am persuaded
that such a drastic step should be approached with an abundance of
precaution and entertained, if at all, only after detailed analysis.
In sum, if this amendment were written to provide the President with
discretion to not require licensing, that would be one thing. But this
amendment prohibits the President from controlling information about
satellites. I think that is a reach too far, and I respectfully, if
painfully, suggest the gentlewoman's amendment be defeated.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question
is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs.
Tauscher).
The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California
(Mrs. Tauscher) will be postponed.
Amendment No. 9 having not been offered, it is now in order to
consider amendment No. 10 printed in House Report number 108-206.

Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Menendez

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

Amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Menendez:
At the end of the bill, add the following new section (and
conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. ____. ASSISTANCE TO TAMIL NADU.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Several United States businesses invested more than
$800,000,000 in capital in the Indian State of Tamil Nadu to
build and operate state-of-the-art electric generation
facilities to serve local customers.
(2) For nearly 2 years since these power plants went into
service, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board has violated the
principle of contract sanctity by consistently refusing to
pay the contractually-required price for the electricity
produced by these companies.
(3) The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board now owes these United
States companies in excess of $150,000,000 in arrearages
despite repeated assurances by the Government of Tamil Nadu
that the situation would be resolved.
(4) All of the projects are in a technical state of default
on the principal of their loans and none of the United States
companies is making a return on their equity.
(b) Restriction..--No funds authorized by this Act
(including any amendments made by this Act) or authorized
under any other provision of law may be used to directly or
indirectly support any programs, projects, or activities
(other than humanitarian, health, or rule of law programs,
projects, or activities) located in or designed to benefit
the State of Tamil Nadu, India.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and a Member opposed will each
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
My amendment is premised on an unfortunate situation that has arisen
in the state of Tamil Nadu, India, involving several American companies
that are currently attempting to conduct business there.
In seeking to provide additional electrical generating capacity,
several years ago the Tamil Nadu government sought to induce foreign
companies to design and build power plants there. Five American
companies accepted this proposition and constructed four projects that
generate approximately 800 megawatts of electricity in Tamil Nadu at a
combined cost of about $1 billion. Each company entered into a long-
term contract for the purchase of the electricity generated at these
plants at an agreed-upon price.
After getting these plants up and running, the Tamil Nadu government
then began a systematic underpayment of the contract terms, sufficient
to keep them running but providing no return on the initial investment.
Technically, the projects are in a state of default; and, as far as we
know, the Tamil Nadu government owes these American companies
approximately $150 million under the terms of these contracts.
Now, India has been a strategic ally and trading partner of the
United States. Unfortunately, the state of Tamil Nadu has lagged behind
the rest

[[Page H6796]]

of that country in terms of maintaining a strong commitment to the rule
of law and providing for these types of open, transparent transactions.
So we simply, through our amendment, seek to create an opportunity to
ensure that, while we will not certainly affect India as a country,
that the state of Tamil Nadu cannot have the good deal and resources of
this country if it continues to unjustifiably hold American companies
hostage in this way.
We do nothing to affect any foreign assistance that deals with human
rights or nutrition or any of those things, but we do deal with all
other issues that are not humanitarian, health-related, or justice
sector relief initiatives designed to help those citizens of Tamil
Nadu. So this is a way to stand up for U.S. companies who make
legitimate investments and do the right thing and at the end of the day
do not have the transparency and the opportunity to have their
investments honored in a way in which we want to see throughout the
world.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MENENDEZ. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding. I strongly
support his amendment.
Mr. Chairman, it is outrageous that American businesses entering in
good faith into commercial transactions in various countries should be
subjected to provincial governmental abuse. This is not the government
of India which is refusing to meet its obligation but a constituent
state of India, Tamil Nadu.
I think the gentleman is bringing an important matter before us, and
I urge all of my colleagues to support him.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the
distinguished ranking member for his comments.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MENENDEZ. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I have some reservations about this
amendment. This points out a serious problem which is actually ongoing
with not just India but some other countries as well. However, I am
willing to accept this amendment and will do so with pleasure.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Reclaiming my time once again, Mr. Chairman, I thank
the distinguished chairman for his support.
Hopefully, Mr. Chairman, we will have a resolution and will not have
to pursue it much further than this. But I appreciate the opportunity
to at least have these companies have their chance to have an
opportunity for their investments to be upheld under international law.
Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the
amendment and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks.
This amendment sends a signal to the government of the Indian state
of Tamil Nadu that it must abide by its contracts with American and
other foreign investors. Five American energy companies built state-of-
the-art energy plants in Tamil Nadu. These companies negotiated
contracts with the state government to provide energy at a guaranteed
minimum rate. However, the government of Tamil Nadu has paid less than
this guaranteed rate to the tune of over $130 million.
One of the affected companies, CMS Energy, is based in the 7th
district of Michigan. CMS built a state-of-the-art energy plant,
providing jobs and training to the Tamil people. It also provides
steady energy to support economic development and growth in Tamil Nadu.
The government of Tamil Nadu's violation of its contract has cost CMS
over $14 million.
The amendment affects only the state of Tamil Nadu. It is not anti-
India. It will do nothing to affect other Indian states that respect
the sanctity of contracts and provide an excellent environment for the
foreign investment that benefits both India and investors. We should
not be using our aid to reward governments that do not respect
contracts.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does any Member claim time in opposition?
If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania

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

Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. ____. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to provide assistance to the Republic of Moldova
unless the President determines and certifies to Congress
that the Government of Moldova has met its obligations with
respect to investments made by United States citizens in the
``Aroma'' cognac factory located in Moldova.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon).

{time} 1630

Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment concerns the loss of an investment in
Moldova by a constituent of mine due to the actions of the Moldovan
government. I am prepared to withdraw my amendment if the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of the Committee on
International Relations, will enter into a colloquy with me.
Mr. Chairman, a long-time constituent of mine invested $2.5 million
in Moldova for the purpose of purchasing a distillery in that country.
The Moldovan government gave him a promissory note as security for $76
million and also produced a signed deed from the Minister of
Agriculture and the Minister of Privatization together with a legal
opinion from the dean of their law school stating that these documents
were legal and binding in Moldova. The property was never sold by the
government, and my constituent never saw his money again.
I have taken this matter to the President of Moldova on several
occasions. Recently, my constituent met with President Voronin in March
of this year. The President promised this matter would be resolved in 3
to 4 weeks. It is July now, and the matter has still not been resolved.
I have visited Moldova twice. I have led delegations. In fact, I
spoke to their parliament when they convened on a Saturday session. I
enjoyed meeting and want to work with the government leaders of that
country. It is not my intention to alienate Moldova by withholding
foreign aid. However, this type of outright fraud and corruption
frightens many Americans from investing in Moldova and other former
Soviet states. The Moldovan government must remedy this matter and
provide assurances to other investors that Moldova is ready to
safeguard foreign investment.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I agree that foreign investment in countries
of the former Soviet Union, such as Moldova, can carry significant
risks for Americans and others. If the governments of these countries
wish to enhance their economic prospects by encouraging foreign
investment, then ensuring the security of those investments and
honoring contractual agreements must be a top priority. I urge the
government of Moldova to improve the transparency of its actions
regarding foreign investment and to further develop the rule of law in
this and other areas.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, as I have stated before, I
do not want to alienate Moldova. The citizens of Moldova are not at
fault. They are good people. It is their government that is at fault,
and I do not think it is fair that its people suffer. Something must be
done to remedy this matter. I will request to withdraw my amendment
with assurances from the gentleman from Illinois that we will try to
remedy this situation.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, by working together, I believe we will be
able to resolve this matter in a manner that is satisfactory to all
parties concerned.
Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the
Committee on International Relations and the ranking member who do such
a great job for consideration of all issues. I look forward to working
with him on this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

[[Page H6797]]

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). Is there
objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.

Amendments En Bloc Offered by Mr. Hyde

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 2 of House Resolution
316, I offer amendments en bloc consisting of the following amendments
printed in House Report 108-206: amendments numbered 12, 13, 14, 15,
16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36,
38, 39, 40 and 42.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendments en
bloc.
The text of the amendments en bloc is as follows:

Amendments en bloc offered by Mr. Hyde, consisting of the
following:
Amendment No. 12 offered by Mr. Manzullo:
After section 3 of the bill, insert the following new
section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 4. SPECIAL RULES FOR APPLYING BUY AMERICAN ACT.

(a) Acquisitions of Articles, Materials, and Supplies.--
With respect to any acquisition under this Act or any
amendment made by this Act of articles, materials, or
supplies that are subject to section 2 of the Buy American
Act (41 U.S.C. 10a), such section shall be applied to such
acquisition by substituting ``at least 65 percent'' for
``substantially all''; or
(b) Contracts for Construction, Alternation, or Repair.--
With respect to any contract for the construction,
alteration, or repair of any public building or public work
entered into under this Act or any amendment made by this Act
that is subject to section 3 of the Buy American Act (41
U.S.C. 10b), such section shall be applied to such contract
by substituting ``at least 65 percent'' for ``substantially
all''.
____

Amendment No. 13 offered by Mr. Crowley:
Page 111, after line 13, insert the following new section
(and amend the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 507. CONTRACTOR REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that the overriding
national security aspects of the international programs of
the International Broadcasting Bureau require the assurance
of uninterrupted logistic support under all circumstances for
the programs. Therefore, it is in the best interests of the
United States to provide a preference for United States
contractors bidding on these projects.
(b) Preference for United States Contractors.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in any case where
there are two or more qualified bidders on projects of the
International Broadcasting Bureau, including design and
construction projects and projects with respect to
transmitters, antennas, spare parts, and other technical
equipment, all the responsive bids of United States persons
and qualified United States joint venture persons shall be
considered to be reduced by 10 percent.
(c) Exception.--
(1) Subsection (b) shall not apply with respect to any
project of the International Broadcasting Bureau when--
(A) precluded by the terms of an international agreement
with the host foreign country;
(B) a foreign bidder can establish that the foreign bidder
is a national of a country whose government permits United
States contractors and suppliers the opportunity to bid on a
competitive and nondiscriminatory basis with its national
contractors and suppliers, on procurement and projects
related to the construction, modernization, upgrading, or
expansion of--
(i) its national public radio and television sector,
(ii) its private radio and television sector, to the extent
that such procurement or project is, in whole or in part,
funded or otherwise under the control of a government agency
or authority,
(C) the Secretary of Commerce certifies (in advance of the
award of the contract for that project) to the Board of the
International Broadcasting Bureau that the foreign bidder is
not receiving any direct subsidy from any government, the
effect of which would be to disadvantage the competitive
position of United States persons who also bid on the
project, or
(D) the statutes of a host foreign country prohibit the use
of United States contractors on such projects within that
country.
(2) An exception under paragraph (1)(D) shall only become
effective with respect to a foreign country 30 days after the
Secretary of State certifies to the Committee on
International Relations and the Committee on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign
Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate
what specific actions the Secretary has taken to urge the
foreign country to permit the use of United States
contractors on such projects.
(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) The term ``United States person'' means a person that--
(A) is incorporated or otherwise legally organized under
the laws of the United States, including any State (and any
political subdivision thereof) and the District of Columbia;
(B) has its principal place of business in the United
States;
(C) has been incorporated or otherwise legally organized in
the United States for more than 5 years before the issuance
date of the Invitation For Bids or the Request For Proposals
with respect to a project under subsection (b);
(D) has proven, as indicated by prior contracting
experience, to possess the technical, managerial, and
financial capability to successfully complete a project
similar in nature and technical complexity to that being
contracted for;
(E)(i) employs United States citizens in at least 80
percent of its principal management positions in the United
States;
(ii) employs United States citizens in more than half of
its permanent, full-time positions in the United States; and
(iii) will employ United States citizens in at least 80
percent of the supervisory positions on the project site; and
(F) has the existing technical and financial resources in
the United States to perform the contract.
(2) The term ``qualified United States joint venture
person'' means a joint venture in which a United States
person or persons own at least 51 percent of the assets of
the joint venture.
(3) The term ``responsive bid'' includes only a bid where
the bidder can establish that the United States goods and
services content, excluding consulting and management fees,
of the bidder's proposal and the resulting contract will not
be less than 55 percent of the value of the bidder's proposal
and the resulting total contract.
(e) Effective Date.--The provisions of this section shall
apply to any project with respect to which the Request For
Proposals (commonly referred to as ``RFP'') or the Invitation
For Bids (commonly referred to as ``IFB'') was issued after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
____

Amendment No. 14 offered by Mr. Schiff:
At the end of title VII (relating to miscellaneous
provisions) insert the following:

SEC. 735. SENSE OF CONGRESS CONCERNING THE TIMELY ISSUANCE OF
VISAS FOR RUSSIAN WEAPONS SCIENTISTS INVOLVED
IN ARMS CONTROL AND NONPROLIFERATION EXCHANGES
WITH THE UNITED STATES.

(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The United States visa approval system has in the past
lacked proper oversight, coordination, and supervision. A
more systematic, stringent, and rigorous evaluation system
for visa approvals is clearly in the best interests of the
United States.
(2) Many distinguished scholars, professors, researchers,
and foreign associates of United States national academies
have been prevented by visa delays from entering the United
States for engagements at major conferences, meetings, and
teaching invitations at American universities.
(3) Research collaborators for United States laboratories
have also been prevented from entering the United States.
Their absence halts projects and compromises United States
commitments in long-standing international cooperative
agreements aimed at reducing stockpiles of weapons of mass
destruction.
(4) Visa restrictions came within one day of forcing the
cancellation of an important meeting in Washington, D.C. of
the National Academy of Sciences Committee on United States
Russian Cooperation on Nuclear Non-Proliferation.
(5) Russian weapons scientists involved in nuclear non-
proliferation cooperative efforts with the United States are
critical to American efforts to ensure that nuclear weapons-
grade materials remain under control and out of the hands of
terrorists.
(6) In a December 2002 statement, the Presidents of the
National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of
Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine found that a
United States approach to visas that welcomes qualified
foreign scientists, engineers, health professionals, and
students serves national goals in three distinct ways:
(A) It harnesses international cooperation for
counterterrorism.
(B) It builds stronger allies through scientific and
technical cooperation.
(C) It maintains United States global leadership in science
and technology.
(7) The Presidents of the National Academy of Sciences, the
National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of
Medicine have found that current United States policy toward
granting visas, to foreign scientists is harmful to the
United States scientific community and to the longterm well-
being of the United States. They stated on December 13, 2002,
that ``To make our nation safer, it is extremely important
that our visa policy not only keep out foreigners who intend
to do us harm, but also facilitate the acceptance of those
who bring us considerable benefit. Recent efforts by our
government to constrain the flow of international visitors in
the name of national security are having serious unintended
consequences for American science, engineering, and medicine.
The long-term security of the United States depends on
admitting scholars who benefit our nation. In short, the
United States scientific, engineering, and health communities
cannot hope to maintain their present position of
international leadership if they become isolated from the
rest of the world. We view

[[Page H6798]]

this as an urgent matter, one that must be promptly addressed
if the United States is to meet both its national security
and economic development goals.''.
(8) Currently, consular officials send many visa
applications back to the United States for sequential
security clearances by several agencies, which may lead to
long delays in visa processing. Consular officers are subject
to criminal penalties if they grant a visa to a person who
subsequently commits a terrorist act in the United States.
However, there are currently no incentives for consular
officers to facilitate scientific exchanges, which may
advance the national interest of the United States.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that--
(1) to the extent possible and consistent with national
security objectives, the United States should expedite the
processing of granting visas to Russian weapons scientists,
especially those participating in bilateral weapon
disarmament talks, negotiations, and exchanges, to enable
them to participate in cooperative nonproliferation
activities with their counterparts in the United States, and
(2) the Department of State is encouraged to consider
streamlining the process of granting visas for such
scientists as follows:
(A) Reinstate a procedure of pre-security clearance for
scientists and engineers with the proper credentials.
(B) Involve the United States scientific and technical
community in determining areas of particular security
concern.
____

Amendment No. 15 offered by Ms. Schakowsky:
Page 78, after line 23, insert the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 724. ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES FOR EMBASSIES AND
CONSULATES.

(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the Secretary of State should provide such resources,
personnel, and training at each United States Embassy and
consulate as are adequate to carry out the duties and
responsibilities of such posts and to meet the needs of those
seeking services at such posts. In particular, given Public
Notice 4393 (Federal Register, July 7, 2003) which restricts
the number of waivers that can be granted for interviews of
nonimmigrant visas, the Secretary of State should provide
sufficient resources, particularly in countries that are
allies of the United States, to ensure that staff can process
visa applications, including conducting personal interviews,
in a manner that is timely, while complying with all the
application requirements, including security concerns.
(b) Report to Congress.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State
shall submit a report concerning the allocation of resources
for embassies and consulates to the appropriate congressional
committees.
____

Amendment No. 16 offered by Mr. Gallegly:
At the end of title VII (relating to miscellaneous
provisions) insert the following:

SEC. 736. DESIGNATION OF FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS.

(a) Period of Designation.--Section 219(a)(4) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189(a)(4)) is
amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)--
(A) by striking ``Subject to paragraphs (5) and (6), a''
and inserting ``A''; and
(B) by striking ``for a period of 2 years beginning on the
effective date of the designation under paragraph (2)(B)''
and inserting ``until revoked under paragraph (5) or (6) or
set aside pursuant to subsection (c)'';
(2) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following:
``(B) Review of designation upon petition.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall review the
designation of a foreign terrorist organization under the
procedures set forth in clauses (iii) and (iv) if the
designated organization files a petition for revocation
within the petition period described in clause (ii).
``(ii) Petition period.--For purposes of clause (i)--

``(I) if the designated organization has not previously
filed a petition for revocation under this subparagraph, the
petition period begins 2 years after the date on which the
designation was made; or
``(II) if the designated organization has previously filed
a petition for revocation under this subparagraph, the
petition period begins 2 years after the date of the
determination made under clause (iv) on that petition.

``(iii) Procedures.--Any foreign terrorist organization
that submits a petition for revocation under this
subparagraph must provide evidence in that petition that the
relevant circumstances described in paragraph (1) have
changed in such a manner as to warrant revocation with
respect to the organization.
``(iv) Determination.--

``(I) In general.--Not later than 180 days after receiving
a petition for revocation submitted under this subparagraph,
the Secretary shall make a determination as to such
revocation.
``(II) Classified information.--The Secretary may consider
classified information in making a determination in response
to a petition for revocation. Classified information shall
not be subject to disclosure for such time as it remains
classified, except that such information may be disclosed to
a court ex parte and in camera for purposes of judicial
review under subsection (c).
``(III) Publication of determination.--A determination made
by the Secretary under this clause shall be published in the
Federal Register.
``(IV) Procedures.--Any revocation by the Secretary shall
be made in accordance with paragraph (6).''; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) Other review of designation.--
``(i) In general.--If in a 4-year period no review has
taken place under subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall
review the designation of the foreign terrorist organization
in order to determine whether such designation should be
revoked pursuant to paragraph (6).
``(ii) Procedures.--If a review does not take place
pursuant to subparagraph (B) in response to a petition for
revocation that is filed in accordance with that
subparagraph, then the review shall be conducted pursuant to
procedures established by the Secretary. The results of such
review and the applicable procedures shall not be reviewable
in any court.
``(iii) Publication of results of review.--The Secretary
shall publish any determination made pursuant to this
subparagraph in the Federal Register.''.
(b) Aliases.--Section 219 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections
(c) and (d), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new
subsection (b):
``(b) Amendments to a Designation.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may amend a designation
under this subsection if the Secretary finds that the
organization has changed its name, adopted a new alias,
dissolved and then reconstituted itself under a different
name or names, or merged with another organization.
``(2) Procedure.--Amendments made to a designation in
accordance with paragraph (1) shall be effective upon
publication in the Federal Register. Subparagraphs (B) and
(C) of subsection (a)(2) shall apply to an amended
designation upon such publication. Paragraphs (2)(A)(i), (4),
(5), (6), (7), and (8) of subsection (a) shall also apply to
an amended designation.
``(3) Administrative record.--The administrative record
shall be corrected to include the amendments as well as any
additional relevant information that supports those
amendments.
``(4) Classified information.--The Secretary may consider
classified information in amending a designation in
accordance with this subsection. Classified information shall
not be subject to disclosure for such time as it remains
classified, except that such information may be disclosed to
a court ex parte and in camera for purposes of judicial
review under subsection (c).''.
(c) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--Section 219 of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking ``subsection (b)'' and
inserting ``subsection (c)'';
(B) in paragraph (6)(A)--
(i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``or a
redesignation made under paragraph (4)(B)'' and inserting
``at any time, and shall revoke a designation upon completion
of a review conducted pursuant to subparagraphs (B) and (C)
of paragraph (4)''; and
(ii) in clause (i), by striking ``or redesignation'';
(C) in paragraph (7), by striking ``, or the revocation of
a redesignation under paragraph (6),''; and
(D) in paragraph (8)--
(i) by striking ``, or if a redesignation under this
subsection has become effective under paragraph (4)(B),'';
and
(ii) by striking ``or redesignation''; and
(2) in subsection (c), as so redesignated--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``of the designation in
the Federal Register,'' and all that follows through ``review
of the designation'' and inserting ``in the Federal Register
of a designation, an amended designation, or a determination
in response to a petition for revocation, the designated
organization may seek judicial review'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, amended designation,
or determination in response to a petition for revocation''
after ``designation'';
(C) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, amended designation,
or determination in response to a petition for revocation''
after ``designation''; and
(D) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``, amended designation,
or determination in response to a petition for revocation''
after ``designation'' each place that term appears.
(d) Savings Provision.--For purposes of applying section
219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act on or after the
date of enactment of this Act, the term ``designation'', as
used in that section, includes all redesignations made
pursuant to section 219(a)(4)(B) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189(a)(4)(B)) prior to the date of
enactment of this Act, and such redesignations shall continue
to be effective until revoked as provided in paragraph (5) or
(6) of section 219(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1189(a)).
____

Amendment No. 18 offered by Mr. Burton of Indiana:

[[Page H6799]]

Page 78, after line 23, insert the following:

SEC. 274. NOTICE TO UNITED STATES EMBASSIES ABROAD REGARDING
CHILDREN WHO ARE THE SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL
CHILD ABDUCTION AND GUIDELINES RELATING TO
ASYLUM FOR SUCH CHILDREN.

(a) Notice of International Child Abduction.--The Secretary
of State shall establish procedures to ensure that
appropriate United States Embassies abroad are notified of
the possible presence in that country of any child who has
been the subject of international child abduction in
violation of the order of a court in the United States.
(b) Guidelines for Asylum.--The Secretary of State shall
promulgate guidelines for the personnel of United States
Embassies abroad concerning procedures relating to asylum at
such facilities for children who are the subject of
international child abduction.

SEC. 275. INADMISSIBILITY OF ALIENS SUPPORTING INTERNATIONAL
CHILD ABDUCTORS AND RELATIVES OF SUCH
ABDUCTORS.

(a) In General.--Section 212(a)(10)(C)(ii) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(10)(C)(ii))
is amended--
(1) in subclause (I), by striking the comma at the end and
inserting a semicolon;
(2) in subclause (II), by striking ``, or'' at the end and
inserting a semicolon;
(3) by amending subclause (III) to read as follows:

``(III) is a spouse (other than the spouse who is the
parent of the abducted child), child (other than the abducted
child), parent, sibling, cousin, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece,
or grandparent of an alien described in clause (i), is an
agent of such an alien, or is a principal employing such an
alien as an agent, if such person has been designated by the
Secretary of State at the Secretary's sole and unreviewable
discretion; or'' and

(4) by adding at the end the following:

``(IV) is a spouse of the abducted child described in
clause (i), if such person has been designated by the
Secretary of State at the Secretary's sole and unreviewable
discretion,

is inadmissible until such child is surrendered to the person
granted custody by the order described in that clause, and
such custodian and child are permitted to return to the
United States or such custodian's place of residence.''.
(b) Identification of Aliens Supporting Abductors and
Relatives of Abductors; Notice to Custodial Parents and
Guardians; Annual Report; Definitions.--Section 212(a)(10)(C)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1182(a)(10)(C)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(iv) Identification of aliens supporting abductors and
relatives of abductors.--In all instances in which an alien
commits an act described in clause (i), the Secretary of
State shall take appropriate action to identify the
individuals who are inadmissible under clause (ii).
``(v) Notice to custodial parents and guardians.--In all
instances in which an alien commits an act described in
clause (i), the Secretary of State shall, upon request of the
person granted custody of the child concerned, inform the
person of whether, and when, any individual who is
inadmissible under clause (ii) by reason of such act has been
issued a visa or otherwise authorized to enter the United
States.
``(vi) Annual report.--The Secretary of State annually
shall submit to the Committee on International Relations, the
Committee on Government Reform, and the Committee on the
Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives, and
the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on
Governmental Affairs, and the Committee on the Judiciary of
the United States Senate, a report that provides, with
respect to the preceding year, an accounting of the number of
cases known to the Secretary of State, disaggregated
according to the nationality of the alien concerned--

``(I) in which an authority under this subparagraph was
exercised (and with respect to each such case, the specific
ground for inadmissibility shall be specified); and
``(II) in which an authority under this subparagraph has
not been exercised but in which an alien, after entry of an
order by a court in the United States granting custody to a
person of a United States citizen child, detained or retained
the child, or withheld custody of the child, outside the
United States from the person granted custody by that order.

``(vii) Definitions.--For purposes of this subparagraph--

``(I) the term `child' means an individual who was a child
at the time the individual was detained or retained, or at
the time custody of the individual was withheld, as described
in clause (i), regardless of the age or marital status of the
individual after such time; and
``(II) the term `sibling' includes a step-sibling or half-
sibling.''.
____

Amendment No. 19 offered by Mr. Ackerman:
Page 14, strike lines 1 through 4, and insert the
following:
(5) Protection of Foreign Missions and Officials.--
(A) For ``Protection of Foreign Missions and Officials'',
$25,000,000 for the fiscal year 2004 and $25,000,000 for the
fiscal year 2005.
(B) In addition to amounts authorized to be appropriated by
subparagraph (A), there is authorized to be appropriated
$30,600,000 for ``Protection of Foreign Missions and
Officials'' only to reimburse the City of New York for
necessary expenses incurred since 1999 for the protection of
foreign missions and officials.
(C) Notwithstanding section 34 of the State Department
Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2706), the Secretary
is authorized to reprogram not more than $5,000,000 of funds
otherwise authorized to be appropriated by this section for
the purposes of this paragraph.
____

Amendment No. 20 offered by Mr. Ackerman:
Page 70, after line 2 insert the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 231. INTERFERENCE WITH PROTECTIVE FUNCTIONS.

(a) Offense.--Chapter 7 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 117. Interference with certain protective functions

``Whoever knowingly and willfully obstructs, resists, or
interferes with a Federal law enforcement agent engaged,
within the United States or the special maritime territorial
jurisdiction of the United States, in the performance of the
protective functions authorized by section 37 of the State
Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2709) or
section 103 of the Diplomatic Security Act (22 U.S.C. 4802)
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
one year, or both.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:
``117. Interference with certain protective functions.''.
____

Amendment No. 21 offered by Mr. Andrews:
At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new
section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. ____. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO REGARDING SECURITY
FOR TAIWAN.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) For over half a century a close relationship has
existed between the United States and Taiwan which has been
of enormous economic, cultural, and strategic advantage to
both countries.
(2) Taiwan today is a full-fledged democracy with a vibrant
economy and a vigorous multi-party political system that
respects human rights and the rule of law.
(3) Taiwan is an ally of the United States, as most
recently evidenced by Taiwan's provision of humanitarian and
financial assistance to Afghanistan at the request of the
United States and its support for Operation Iraqi Freedom.
(4) The security of the 23 million people in Taiwan is
threatened by the deployment by the People's Republic of
China of over 400 short-range ballistic missiles targeted at
Taiwan, and the purchase by the PRC of advanced weaponry
systems, including Su-27 and Su-30 fighter planes, Kilo
submarines, and Sovremenny destroyers.
(5) Taiwan was threatened by missile exercises conducted by
the PRC in August 1995 and again in March 1996 when Taiwan
was conducting its first free and direct presidential
elections.
(6) Section 2(b)(4) of the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C.
3301(b)(4)) considers any effort to determine the future of
Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or
embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western
Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States.
(7) Section 2(b)(6) of the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C.
3301(b)(6)) requires the United States to maintain the
capacity to resist any resort to force or other forms of
coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or
economic system, of the people on Taiwan.
(8) In his January 17, 2001, confirmation hearing as
Secretary of State, General Colin Powell stated that ``We
will stand by Taiwan and will provide for the defense needs
of Taiwan in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act and the
subsequent communiques.''.
(9) President Bush stated on April 24, 2001, that the
United States will do whatever it takes to help Taiwan defend
itself.
(10) In his testimony before the International Relations
Committee of the House of Representatives and the Foreign
Relations Committee of the Senate in February and March of
2002, Admiral Dennis Blair of the United States Pacific
Command testified that ``China continued to build and
exercise its force of short-range ballistic missiles ranging
Taiwan. It still seeks to develop a range of military options
to influence and intimidate Taiwan, and has not abandoned the
option of using force to resolve Taiwan's status.''.
(11) The July 2002 U.S.-China Economic and Security Review
Commission report to Congress stated that ``China is
enhancing its capability to carry out attacks across the
Taiwan Strait with its special operations forces, air forces
and navy and missiles forces with little notice,'' and ``the
Commission recommends that the U.S. along with its allies
should continue to call upon China to renounce the threat of
or the use of force against Taiwan.''.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) grave concerns exist concerning the deployment by the
People's Republic of China

[[Page H6800]]

of hundreds of ballistic missiles directed toward Taiwan,
which threaten the security and stability in the Taiwan
Strait;
(2) the President should direct all appropriate United
States officials to raise these concerns with the appropriate
officials from the People's Republic of China, and should
seek a public, immediate, and unequivocal renunciation from
the leaders of the People's Republic of China of any threat
or use of force against Taiwan;
(3) the President should affirm with the leaders of the
People's Republic of China that there will not be a quid pro
quo between the dismantling of missiles aimed at Taiwan by
the People's Republic of China, and arms sales to Taiwan by
the United States;
(4) China should dismantle the missiles that threaten
Taiwan, otherwise the President should authorize the sale of
the Aegis system to Taiwan, which would enable Taiwan to
defend itself against the threat of a missile attack by
China; and
(5) the future of Taiwan should be determined peacefully
and with the express consent of the people of Taiwan.
____

Amendment No. 22 offered by Mr. Bereuter:
Page 211, after line 11, insert the following section (and
amend the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 736. SENSE OF CONGRESS IN APPRECIATION OF THE ARMED
FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AND REGARDING
RESTORING STABILITY AND SECURITY IN IRAQ.

(a) Findings.--The Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The United States, with the support of forces from
Great Britain and other countries, historically and
courageously liberated Iraq in three weeks.
(2) Conditions on the ground in parts of Iraq continue to
pose a grave threat to American troops, thereby complicating
efforts to restore law and order and essential public
services for Iraqis. Such efforts are further complicated by
the absence of effective communications with the Iraqi
people.
(3) Ultimately, maintaining law and order in Iraq and
preserving its territorial integrity will require the
creation of a professionally trained Iraqi police force and a
reformed Iraqi military; however, that will take a
significant amount of time and in the meantime international
armed forces and police must assume these responsibilities.
(4) Approximately 145,000 United States troops are
currently deployed in Iraq, meaning that American troops
comprise roughly 90 percent of Coalition forces. If, as the
Department of Defense has stated, an additional 10,000
international troops join the Coalition effort in Iraq by
September, Americans will still comprise roughly 85 percent
of Coalition forces.
(5) Maintaining the existing force level in Iraq currently
requires $3,900,000,000 each month.
(6) The Department of Defense has stated that it will
require one year to train a new Iraqi Army of 12,000 soldiers
and three years to train 40,000 soldiers.
(7) The Coalition Provisional Authority has stated that it
will require at least one year to recruit and train a police
force of 40,000 officers capable of assuming minimal policy
functions in Iraq, that it will require five years to recruit
and train a full force of 75,000 officers, and that at least
5500 additional international police are needed to train,
assist, and jointly patrol with the existing Iraqi police
force.
(8) President Bush has noted that ``The rise of Iraq, as an
example of moderation and democracy and prosperity, is a
massive and long-term undertaking,'' and it is clear that
increasing the number of troops and police from countries
other than the United States will reduce risks to American
soldiers and the financial cost to the United States.
(9) Secretary Rumsfeld testified that ``We certainly want
assistance from NATO and from NATO countries'' and it is
clear that involving the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,
as is being done in Afghanistan and has been done in Kosovo
and Bosnia, allows the Coalition to maintain a robust
military presence while decreasing the exposure and risk to
American troops.
(10) Rebuilding Iraq's neglected infrastructure and economy
and administering Iraq--including providing basic services
and paying public sector salaries--is likely to require tens
of billions of dollars over several years and projected Iraqi
oil revenues will be insufficient to meet these costs.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) it is in the national security interests of the United
States to remain engaged in Iraq in order to ensure a
peaceful, stable, unified Iraq with a representative
government;
(2) the President should consider requesting formally and
expeditiously that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) raise a force for deployment in post-war Iraq similar
to what it has done in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Kosovo and
the Congress urges NATO allies and other nations to provide
troops and police to Coalition efforts in Iraq; and
(3) the President should consider calling on the United
Nations to urge its member states to provide military forces
and civilian police to promote stability and security in Iraq
and resources to help rebuild and administer Iraq.
____

Amendment No. 23 offered by Ms. Bordallo:
Page 83, after line 10, insert the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 311. TREATMENT OF TERRITORIES AND POSSESSIONS AS PART OF
THE GEOGRAPHIC UNITED STATES FOR PURPOSES OF
TRANSFER ALLOWANCES.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of
transfer allowances for employees of the Department of State
under section 5924(2)(B) of title 5, United States Code, the
territories and possessions of the United States, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, shall be considered part of the
geographic United States.
____

Amendment No. 24 offered by Mr. Brown of Ohio:
At the end of subtitle A of title VII (relating to
reporting requirements) insert the following:

SEC. 713. REPORT CONCERNING OBSERVER STATUS FOR TAIWAN AT THE
SUMMIT OF THE WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY.

Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, and not later than April 1 of each year thereafter,
the Secretary of State shall submit a report to the Congress,
in unclassified form, describing the United States plan to
endorse and obtain observer status for Taiwan at the annual
week-long summit of the World Health Assembly (WHA) held by
the World Health Organization (WHO) in May of each year in
Geneva, Switzerland. Each report shall include the following:
(1) An account of the efforts the Department of State has
made, following the previous year's meeting of the World
Health Assembly to enourage WHO member states to promote
Taiwan's bid to obtain observer status.
(2) The steps the Department of State will take to endorse
and obtain observer status at the forthcoming annual meeting
of the World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland.
____

Amendment No. 25 offered by Mr. Crane:
At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new
section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. ____. ATTACKS ON UNITED STATES CITIZENS BY PALESTINIAN
TERRORISTS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Since Yasser Arafat renounced violence in the Oslo
Peace Accords on September 13, 1993, at least 42 United
States citizens, including one unborn child, have been
murdered by Palestinian terrorists.
(2) On December 1, 1993, in a drive-by shooting north of
Jerusalem, Hamas killed United States citizen Yitzhak
Weinstock, 19, whose family came from Los Angeles.
(3) On October 9, 1994, Hamas kidnapped and murdered United
States citizen Nachshon Wachsman, 19, whose family came from
New York City.
(4) On April 9, 1995, an Islamic Jihad bomb attack on a bus
near Kfar Darom killed United States citizen Alisa Flatow,
20, from West Orange, New Jersey.
(5) On August 21, 1995, in a Hamas bus bombing in
Jerusalem, United States citizen Joan Davenny, from New
Haven, Connecticut, was killed.
(6) On September 9, 1995, Mara Frey of Chicago was stabbed
in Ma'ale Michmash resulting in her unborn child's death.
(7) On February 25, 1996, three United States citizens,
Sara Duker of Teaneck, New Jersey, Matthew Eisenfeld of West
Hartford, Connecticut, and Ira Weinstein of New York City,
were killed in a Hamas bus bombing in Jerusalem.
(8) On May 13, 1996, United States citizen David Boim, 17,
of New York City, was killed in a drive-by shooting near Beit
El, north of Jerusalem.
(9) On June 9, 1996, United States citizen Yaron Ungar was
killed in a drive by-shooting near Beit Shemesh.
(10) On July 30, 1997, United States citizen Leah Stern of
Passaic, New Jersey, was killed in a Hamas bombing in
Jerusalem's Mahane Yehuda market.
(11) On September 4, 1997, a Hamas bombing on Ben-Yehuda
Street, Jerusalem, killed Yael Botwin, 14, of Los Angeles.
(12) On April 19, 1998, an attack near the Israeli town of
Maon killed United States citizen Dov Dribben, 28.
(13) On October 8, 2000, Rabbi Hillel Lieberman, 36, of New
York City, was stabbed and killed near Nablus.
(14) On October 30, 2000, United States citizen Esh-Kodesh
Gilmore, 25, was shot in Jerusalem.
(15) On December 31, 2000, Rabbi Binyamin Kahane, 34, and
his wife, Talia Hertzlich Kahane, both formerly of New York
City, were killed in a drive-by shooting near Ofra.
(16) On May 9, 2001, Jacob ``Koby'' Mandell, 13, of Silver
Spring, Maryland, was killed in an attack near Tekoah.
(17) On May 29, 2001, Sarah Blaustein, 53, of Lawrence, New
York, was killed in a drive-by shooting near Efrat.
(18) On August 9, 2001, two United States citizens, Judith
L. Greenbaum, 31, and Malka Roth, 15, were killed in the
Jerusalem Sbarro pizzeria bombing.
(19) On November 4, 2001, Shoshana Ben-Yishai, 16, of New
York City, was shot and killed during an attack on a
Jerusalem bus.
(20) On January 15, 2002, Avraham Boaz, 72, of New York
City, was killed in a shooting near Bethlehem.

[[Page H6801]]

(21) On January 18, 2002, United States citizen Aaron Elis,
32, was killed in a shooting in Hadera.
(22) On February 15, 2002, United States citizen Lee
Akunis, was shot and killed near Ramallah.
(23) On February 16, 2002, Keren Shatsky, 14, of New York
City and Maine, and Rachel Thaler, 16, of Baltimore,
Maryland, were killed in a bombing in Karnei Shomron.
(24) On February 25, 2002, United States citizen Moran
Amit, 25, was stabbed and killed in Abu Tor Peace Forest,
Jerusalem.
(25) On March 24, 2002, Esther Kleinman, 23, formerly of
Chicago, was shot and killed near Ofra.
(26) On March 27, 2002, United States citizen Hannah Rogen,
90, was killed in a bombing at a hotel Passover seder in
Netanya.
(27) On June 18, 2002, Moshe Gottlieb, 70, of Los Angeles,
was killed in a bus bombing in Jerusalem.
(28) On June 19, 2002, United States citizen Gila Sara
Kessler, 19, was killed in a bombing at a Jerusalem bus stop.
(29) On July 31, 2002, five United States citizens were
killed in a bombing of a Hebrew University cafeteria: Marla
Bennett, 24, of San Diego, Benjamin Blutstein, 25, of
Susquehanna Township, Pennsylvania, Janis Ruth Coulter, 36,
of Massachusetts, David Gritz, 24, of Peru, Massachusetts
(and of dual French-United States citizenship), and Dina
Carter, 37, of North Carolina.
(30) On March 5, 2003, Abigail Leitel, 14, who was born in
Lebanon, New Hampshire, died in a bus bombing in Haifa.
(31) On March 7, 2003, United States citizens Rabbi Eli
Horowitz, 52, who grew up in Chicago, and Dina Horowitz, 50,
who grew up in Florida, were killed in their home.
(32) On June 11, 2003, United States citizen Alan Beer, 47,
who grew up in Cleveland, was killed in bus bombing in
Jerusalem.
(33) On June 20, 2003, United States citizen Tzvi
Goldstein, 47, originally from New York City, was shot and
killed in an attack while driving through the West Bank.
(34) At least another 79 United States citizens have been
injured in Palestinian terrorist attacks, including United
States citizen Jack Baxter, 50, of New York City, who was
injured on April 30, 2003, in a bombing at a Tel Aviv pub.
(35) The official Palestinian Authority television
broadcast on March 14, 2003, of a live sermon calling for the
destruction of the United States and Israel was a blatant
attempt to incite violence against United States and Israeli
citizens.
(b) Statements of Policy.--Congress--
(1) condemns the attacks on United States citizens by
Palestinian terrorists and demands that the Palestinian
Authority work with Israel to protect all innocent
individuals, regardless of citizenship, from terrorist
atrocities;
(2) offers its condolences to the families and loved ones
of United States citizens who were killed by Palestinian
terrorist attacks; and
(3) calls on the Secretary of State to include a listing of
the killing of every United States citizen by terrorists in
the ``Chronology of Significant Terrorist Incidents'', as
included in the annual Department of State's Patterns of
Global Terrorism Report.
______

Amendment No. 26 offered by Mr. Hunter:
Page 211, after line 11, insert the following:

SEC. 736. SENSE OF CONGRESS AND REPORT CONCERNING WASTEWATER
TREATMENT AND THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND
WATER COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND MEXICO.

(a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
(1) The failure by the International Boundary and Water
Commission, United States and Mexico, to complete
negotiations on a new Treaty Minute with Mexico, as directed
by Congress in Public Law 106-457, has endangered the health
of the residents of San Diego County.
(2) The continued flow of Mexican sewage on San Diego,
California, beaches has caused extensive and persistent beach
closings thereby causing economic hardship to the local
economy.
(3) The International Boundary and Water Commission has
shown insignificant progress in negotiations with Mexico.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the United States Section of the International Boundary
and Water Commission shall make treaty negotiations with
Mexico on the establishment of a public-private partnership
to construct and operate a wastewater treatment facility in
Mexico as outlined in Public Law 106-457 a priority.
(c) Report to Congress.--The United States Section of the
International Boundary and Water Commission, United States
and Mexcio, shall submit monthly reports to the appropriate
congressional committees concerning progress in negotiations
on a new Treaty Minute with Mexico.
____

Amendment No. 27 offered by Mr. Hyde:
At the end of title XVII of division B of the bill, insert
the following:

SEC. ____. TRANSFER OF NAVAL VESSELS TO CERTAIN FOREIGN
COUNTRIES.

(a) Transfers by Grant.--The President is authorized to
transfer vessels to foreign countries on a grant basis under
section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.
2321j), as follows:
(1) Bahrain.--To the Government of Bahrain, the OLIVER
HAZARD PERRY class guided missile frigate GEORGE PHILIP (FFG
12).
(2) Portugal.--To the Government of Portugal, the OLIVER
HAZARD PERRY class guided missile frigate SIDES (FFG 14).
(b) Transfers by Sale.--The President is authorized to
transfer vessels to foreign countries on a sale basis under
section 21 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2761) as
follows:
(1) Brazil.--To the Government of Brazil, the SPRUANCE
class destroyer O'BRIEN (DD 975).
(2) Chile.--To the Government of Chile, the SPRUANCE class
destroyer FLETCHER (DD 992).
(3) Turkey.--To the Government of Turkey, the ANCHORAGE
class dock landing ship ANCHORAGE (LSD 36).
(c) Grants Not Counted in Annual Total of Transferred
Excess Defense Articles.--The value of a vessel transferred
to another country on a grant basis under section 516 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j) pursuant to
authority provided by subsection (a) shall not be counted
against the aggregate value of excess defense articles
transferred to countries in any fiscal year under subsection
(g) of that section.
(d) Costs of Transfers on Grant Basis.--Any expense
incurred by the United States in connection with a transfer
authorized to be made on a grant basis under section 516 of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j) pursuant
to the authority provided by subsection (a) shall be charged
to the recipient (notwithstanding section 516(e)(1) of such
Act).
(e) Repair and Refurbishment in United States Shipyards.--
To the maximum extent practicable, the President shall
require, as a condition of the transfer of a vessel under
this section, that the country to which the vessel is
transferred have such repair or refurbishment of the vessel
as is needed, before the vessel joins the naval forces of
that country, performed at a shipyard located in the United
States, including a United States Navy shipyard.
(f) Expiration of Authority.--The authority to transfer a
vessel under this section shall expire at the end of the two-
year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this
Act.
____

Amendment No. 28 offered by Mr. Hyde:
Strike section 227 (relating to GAO assessment of security
capital cost sharing) and insert the following:

SEC. 227. SECURITY CAPITAL COST SHARING.

(a) Authorization.--The first section of the Foreign
Service Buildings Act, 1926 (22 U.S.C. 292) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Security Capital Cost-Sharing Program.--(1) The
Secretary of State, as the single manager of all buildings
and grounds acquired under this Act or otherwise acquired or
authorized for the use of the diplomatic and consular
establishments in foreign countries, is authorized to
establish and implement a Security Capital Cost-Sharing
Program to collect funds from each agency on the basis of its
total overseas presence in a manner that encourages
rightsizing of its overseas presence, and expend those funds
to accelerate the provision of safe, secure, functional
buildings for United States Government personnel overseas.
``(2) The Secretary is authorized to determine annually and
charge each Federal agency the amount to be collected under
paragraph (1) from the agency. To determine such amount, the
Secretary may prescribe and use a formula that takes into
account the number of authorized positions of each agency,
including contractors and locally hired personnel, who are
assigned to United States diplomatic facilities and are under
the authority of a chief of mission pursuant to section 207
of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3927).
``(3) The head of an agency charged a fee under this
section shall remit the amount of the fee to the Secretary of
State through the Intra-Governmental Payment and Collection
System or other appropriate means.
``(4) There shall be established on the books of the
Treasury an account to be known as the `Security Capital
Cost-Sharing Program Fund', which shall be administered by
the Secretary. There shall be deposited into the account all
amounts collected by the Secretary pursuant to the authority
under paragraph (1), and such funds shall remain available
until expended. Such funds shall be used solely for the
provision of new safe, secure, functional diplomatic
facilities that comply with all applicable legal standards,
including those standards established under the authority of
the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of
1999. The Secretary shall include in the Department of
State's Congressional Presentation Document an accounting of
the sources and uses of the amounts deposited into the
account.
``(5) The Secretary shall not collect a fee for an
authorized position of an agency of the Federal Government
that has been or would be granted a waiver pursuant to
section 606(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Secure Embassy Construction
and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (22 U.S.C.
4865(a)(2)(B)(i)).
``(6) In this subsection--
``(A) the term `agency of the Federal Government'--
``(i) includes the Interagency Cooperative Administrative
Support Service; and
``(ii) does not include the Marine Security Guard; and
``(B) the term `United States diplomatic facility' has the
meaning given that term in

[[Page H6802]]

section 603 of the Secure Embassy Construction and
Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (22 U.S.C. 4865 note).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on October 1, 2004.
____

Amendment No. 29 offered by Mr. Hyde:
In section 226 (relating to validity of United States
passports) strike ``travellers'' both places it appears and
insert ``travelers''.
Strike line 14 on page 43 through line 2 on page 46.
Page 79, line 15, after ``Act'' insert ``of 1956''.
Page 79, lines 16 and 18, strike ``(o)'' and insert
``(n)''.
Page 79, line 20, strike ``(p)'' and insert ``(o)''.
In the first sentence in section 301(b)(1) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, as proposed to be added by section
116(e) of the bill, strike ``For fiscal year fiscal year
2004'' and insert ``For fiscal year 2004''.
In section 1707 of the bill, redesignate the second
paragraph (1) as paragraph (2).
____

Amendment No. 30 offered by Mr. Lantos:
In section 1713 of the bill (relating to enhanced police
training)--
(1) strike ``Section 660(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961'' and insert ``(a) In General.--Section 660(b) of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961''; and
(2) add at the end the following new subsection:
(b) Notification Requirement.--Section 660 of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2420) is amended by adding
at the end the following new subsection:
``(e) Funds may not be obligated for assistance under
subsection (b)(8) unless the Secretary of State notifies the
Committee on International Relations of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate of the amount and nature of the proposed assistance at
least 15 days in advance of the proposed obligation in
accordance with the procedures applicable to reprogramming
notifications pursuant to section 634A of this Act. Such
notification shall include a comprehensive report and, where
practicable, a plan describing the police assistance and rule
of law programs of relevant United States agencies for each
country which is to receive assistance under section
660(b)(8).''.
____

Amendment No. 31 offered by Mrs. Maloney:
In division B of the bill--
(1) redesignate title XVII as title XVIII (and conform all
sections therein accordingly and conform the table of
contents); and
(2) insert after title XVI the following new title (and
conform the table of contents accordingly):

TITLE XVII--ACCESS FOR AFGHAN WOMEN

SEC. 1701. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Access for Afghan Women
Act of 2003''.

SEC. 1702. FINDINGS.

Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Despite the removal of the Taliban from power, women in
Afghanistan continue to experience brutal and frequent
violation of their human rights, generally outside of Kabul
where warlords are reexerting control.
(2) Strong and continued support from the United States and
the international community can ensure that the advances made
by Afghan women since the fall of the Taliban will continue
and grow, rather than recede.
(3) While the United States and the international community
continue to make substantial contributions to emergency
humanitarian and relief operations in Afghanistan, the
establishment of a stable, peaceful, prosperous, and
democratic Afghanistan with a broad-based, multi-ethnic,
gender-sensitive, and fully representative government
requires a significant increase in long-term investments in
development and reconstruction assistance.
(4) The maternal mortality rate in Afghanistan is among the
highest in the world, with recent reports estimating that
every 30 minutes an Afghan woman dies of pregnancy related
causes, or approximately 15,000 women every year. The
estimated maternal mortality rate of 1,600 deaths per 100,000
live births can be significantly reduced through access to
primary health care services, including safe birthing
supplies, emergency obstetric care, prenatal and postnatal
care, contraception, and prevention and treatment for the
effects of sexual coercion and rape.
(5) Women comprise 75 percent or more of the refugees and
internally displaced in camps, urban areas, and villages in
Afghanistan.
(6) 85 percent of Afghanistan's population lives in rural
areas. The women in rural areas perform vital roles in food
production, processing, and preparation. Successful
reconstruction and development assistance must target rural
women as part of any agricultural interventions.
(7) Within Afghanistan and outside of Afghanistan, local
women's organizations are delivering critical services and
have the knowledge and experience to assist the United States
in delivering effective relief aid.
(8) The Afghan Ministry for Women's Affairs is an important
ministry that is essential for re-establishing women's human
rights, ensuring that women are included in all development
efforts, and delivering critical legal, health, education,
and economic services to women throughout Afghanistan's 30
provinces.
(9) Afghan women are taking the initiative to reach across
the conflict divide and foster peace. Women's perspectives
and experiences in seeking solutions to conflicts are
necessary to ensure lasting peace.
(10) The inadequate security situation in Afghanistan
disproportionately impacts women and girls as the lack of
rule of law results in the frequent assault, kidnapping, and
sexual abuse of Afghan women and girls throughout
Afghanistan.
(11) Despite significant improvements in healthcare and
education infrastructure for women and girls in Afghanistan,
the lack of security and rule of law throughout most of
Afghanistan effectively denies access to these facilities and
the critical services they provide.

SEC. 1703. ESTABLISHMENT OF AFGHAN WOMEN'S FUND.

(a) Establishment.--The Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development shall establish a fund
for the purpose of assisting women and girls in Afghanistan
in the areas of political and human rights, health care,
education, training, security, and shelter.
(b) Activities Supported.--The fund established under
subsection (a) shall support the activities described in
section 103(a)(7) of the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act of
2002 and the following activities:
(1) Direct financial and programmatic assistance to the
Ministry of Women's Affairs in Afghanistan (hereafter in this
section referred to as the ``Ministry'') to promote the
strengthening of the Ministry as the Government of
Afghanistan continues its transition to a long-term
government structure and to enable the Ministry to fulfill
its mandate. The Ministry may use such assistance to support
activities such as the following:
(A) Multiyear women-centered economic development programs,
including programs to assist widows, female heads of
household, women in rural areas, and disabled women.
(B) Collaboration with the Ministry of Health to construct
culturally appropriate health infrastructure and delivery of
high-quality comprehensive health care programs, including
primary, maternal, child, reproductive, and mental health
care.
(C) Programs to prevent trafficking in persons, assist
victims, and apprehend and prosecute traffickers in persons.
(2) Direct financial assistance to the National Human
Rights Commission of Afghanistan.
(3) Construction of women's educational facilities in
Afghanistan.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section not less than
$22,500,000 for each of the fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 2005
and such sums as are necessary for each subsequent fiscal
year.

SEC. 1704. ASSISTANCE TO AFGHANISTAN.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, not less than
15 percent of the aggregate amount of economic and
humanitarian assistance authorized to be appropriated under
section 1703(c) to be made available to Afghanistan for each
of the fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 2005 shall be made
available for assistance directly to Afghan-led local
nongovernmental organizations, including Afghan women-led
organizations, with demonstrated experience in delivering
services to Afghan women and children to support their
programmatic activities and organizational development. In
recognition of the appreciating capacity of Afghan-led local
nongovernmental organizations, including Afghan women-led
organizations, an appropriate percentage of the aggregate
amount of economic and humanitarian assistance authorized to
be made available to Afghanistan for fiscal year 2006 and
each subsequent fiscal year shall be made available for
assistance directly to Afghan-led local nongovernmental
organizations, including Afghan women-led organizations.

SEC. 1705. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO UNITED STATES ACTIVITIES
IN AFGHANISTAN.

(a) In General.--Activities described in subsections (b)
through (e) that are carried out by the United States in
Afghanistan should comply with the applicable requirements
contained in such subsections.
(b) Governance of Afghanistan.--With respect to the
governance of Afghanistan, the applicable requirements are
the following:
(1) Include the perspectives and advice of Afghan women's
organizations, networks, and leaders in United States
policymaking related to the governance of Afghanistan.
(2) Promote the inclusion of a significant number of women
in future legislative bodies to ensure that women's full
range of human rights are included and upheld in any
constitution or legal structures of Afghanistan.
(3) Encourage the appointment of women to high level
positions within Afghan Ministries.
(c) Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Development.--With
respect to activities relating to post-conflict stability in
Afghanistan, the applicable requirements are the following:
(1) Encourage United States organizations that receive
funds authorized by this title to partner with or create
Afghan-led counterpart organizations and provide these
organizations with significant financial resources, technical
assistance, and capacity building.
(2) Increase women's access to or ownership of productive
assets such as land, water, agricultural inputs, credit, and
property.

[[Page H6803]]

(3) Provide long-term financial assistance for primary,
secondary, higher, nontraditional, and vocational education
for Afghan girls, women, boys, and men.
(4) Integrate education and training programs for former
combatants with economic development programs to encourage
their reintegration into society and to promote post-conflict
stability.
(5) Provide assistance to rehabilitate children affected by
the conflict, particularly child soldiers.
(6) Support educational efforts to increase awareness with
respect to landmines, facilitate the removal of landmines,
and provide services to individuals with disabilities caused
by landmines.
(d) Afghan Military and Police.--With respect to training
for military and police forces in Afghanistan, the applicable
requirements are the following:
(1) Include training on the protection, rights, and the
particular needs of women and emphasize that violations of
women's rights are intolerable and should be prosecuted.
(2) Encourage such trainers who will carry out the
activities in paragraph (1) to consult with women's
organizations in Afghanistan to ensure that training content
and materials are adequate, appropriate, and comprehensive.
(e) Relief, Resettlement, and Repatriation of Refugees and
Internally Displaced Persons.--With respect to the relief,
resettlement, and repatriation of refugees and internally
displaced persons in Afghanistan, the applicable requirements
are the following:
(1) Take all necessary steps to ensure that women refugees
and internally displaced persons in camps, urban areas, and
villages are directly receiving food aid, shelter, relief
supplies, and other services from United States-sponsored
programs.
(2) Take all necessary steps to ensure that women refugees
in camps, urban areas, and villages are accessing high-
quality health and medical services, including primary,
maternal, child, and mental health services.
(3) Take all necessary steps to ensure that women and
children in refugee camps are protected from sexual
exploitation.
(4) Take all necessary steps to ensure refugees and
internally displaced persons that seek to return to their
place of origin can do so voluntarily, safely, and with the
full protection of their rights. United States-sponsored
efforts shall not coerce refugees or internally displaced
persons to return to their places of origin.

SEC. 1706. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, and annually thereafter, the President shall
prepare and transmit to Congress a report that contains
documentation of the progress in implementing the
requirements of section 1705. All data in the report shall be
disaggregated by gender.
____

Amendment No. 34 offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey:
Add at the end of the bill the following new division (and
conform the table of contents accordingly):

DIVISION C--ASSISTANCE FOR VIET NAM

TITLE XX--CONDITIONS ON INCREASED NONHUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF VIET NAM

SEC. 2001. BILATERAL NONHUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE.

(a) Assistance.--
(1) In general.--United States nonhumanitarian assistance
may not be provided to the Government of Viet Nam in an
amount exceeding the amount so provided for fiscal year
2003--
(A) for fiscal year 2004 unless not later than 30 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act the President
determines and certifies to Congress that the requirements of
subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (2) have been met
during the 12-month period ending on the date of the
certification; and
(B) for each subsequent fiscal year unless the President
determines and certifies to Congress in the most recent
annual report submitted pursuant to section 501 that the
requirements of subparagraphs (A) through (E) of paragraph
(2) have been met during the 12-month period covered by the
report.
(2) Requirements.--The requirements of this paragraph are
that--
(A) the Government of Viet Nam has made substantial
progress toward releasing all political and religious
prisoners from imprisonment, house arrest, and other forms of
detention;
(B)(i) the Government of Viet Nam has made substantial
progress toward respecting the right to freedom of religion,
including the right to participate in religious activities
and institutions without interference by or involvement of
the Government; and
(ii) has made substantial progress toward returning estates
and properties confiscated from the churches;
(C) the Government of Viet Nam has made substantial
progress toward allowing Vietnamese nationals free and open
access to United States refugee programs;
(D) the Government of Viet Nam has made substantial
progress toward respecting the human rights of members of
ethnic minority groups in the Central Highlands and elsewhere
in Viet Nam; and
(E)(i) neither any official of the Government of Viet Nam
nor any agency or entity wholly or partly owned by the
Government of Viet Nam was complicit in a severe form of
trafficking in persons; or
(ii) the Government of Viet Nam took all appropriate steps
to end any such complicity and hold such official, agency, or
entity fully accountable for its conduct.
(b) Exception.--
(1) Continuation of assistance in the national interest.--
Notwithstanding the failure of the Government of Viet Nam to
meet the requirements of subsection (a)(2), the President may
waive the application of subsection (a) for any fiscal year
if the President determines that the provision to the
Government of Viet Nam of increased United States
nonhumanitarian assistance would promote the purposes of this
Act or is otherwise in the national interest of the United
States.
(2) Exercise of waiver authority.--The President may
exercise the authority under paragraph (2) with respect to--
(A) all United States nonhumanitarian assistance to Viet
Nam; or
(B) one or more programs, projects, or activities of such
assistance.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Severe form of trafficking in persons.--The term
``severe form of trafficking in persons'' means any activity
described in section 103(8) of the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-386 (114 Stat. 1470);
22 U.S.C. 7102(8)).
(2) United states nonhumanitarian assistance.--The term
``United States nonhumanitarian assistance'' means--
(A) any assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(including programs under title IV of chapter 2 of part I of
that Act, relating to the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation), other than--
(i) disaster relief assistance, including any assistance
under chapter 9 of part I of that Act;
(ii) assistance which involves the provision of food
(including monetization of food) or medicine; and
(iii) assistance for refugees; and
(B) sales, or financing on any terms, under the Arms Export
Control Act.

TITLE XXI--ASSISTANCE TO SUPPORT HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY IN VIET NAM

SEC. 2101. ASSISTANCE.

(a) In General.--The President is authorized to provide
assistance, through appropriate nongovernmental
organizations, for the support of individuals and
organizations to promote democracy and internationally
recognized human rights in Viet Nam.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the President to carry out subsection
(a) $2,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

TITLE XXII--UNITED STATES PUBLIC DIPLOMACY

SEC. 2201. RADIO FREE ASIA TRANSMISSIONS TO VIET NAM.

(a) Policy of the United States.--It is the policy of the
United States to take such measures as are necessary to
overcome the jamming of Radio Free Asia by the Government of
Viet Nam, including the active pursuit of broadcast
facilities in close geographic proximity to Viet Nam.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to such
amounts as are otherwise authorized to be appropriated for
the Broadcasting Board of Governors, there are authorized to
be appropriated to carry out the policy under subsection (a)
$9,100,000 for the fiscal year 2004 and $1,100,000 for the
fiscal year 2005.

SEC. 2202. UNITED STATES EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE
PROGRAMS WITH VIET NAM.

It is the policy of the United States that programs of
educational and cultural exchange with Viet Nam should
actively promote progress toward freedom and democracy in
Viet Nam by providing opportunities to Vietnamese nationals
from a wide range of occupations and perspectives to see
freedom and democracy in action and, also, by ensuring that
Vietnamese nationals who have already demonstrated a
commitment to these values are included in such programs.

TITLE XXIII--UNITED STATES REFUGEE POLICY

SEC. 2301. REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT FOR NATIONALS OF VIET NAM.

(a) Policy of the United States.--It is the policy of the
United States to offer refugee resettlement to nationals of
Viet Nam (including members of the Montagnard ethnic minority
groups) who were eligible for the Orderly Departure Program
(ODP), Resettlement Opportunities for Vietnamese Returnees
(ROVR) or any other United States refugee program and who
were deemed ineligible due to administrative error or who for
reasons beyond the control of such individuals (including
insufficient or contradictory information or the inability to
pay bribes demanded by officials of the Government of Viet
Nam) were unable or failed to apply for such programs in
compliance with deadlines imposed by the Department of State.
(b) Authorized Activity.--Of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated to the Department of State for Migration and
Refugee Assistance for each of the fiscal years 2004, 2005,
and 2006, such sums as may be necessary are authorized to be
made available for the protection (including resettlement in
appropriate cases) of Vietnamese refugees and asylum seekers,
including Montagnards in Cambodia.

[[Page H6804]]

TITLE XIV--ANNUAL REPORT ON PROGRESS TOWARD FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY IN
VIET NAM

SEC. 2401. ANNUAL REPORT.

(a) In General.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
the enactment of this Act and every 12 months thereafter, the
Secretary of State shall submit to the Congress a report on
the following:
(1)(A) The determination and certification of the President
that the requirements of section 2001(a)(2) have been met, if
applicable.
(B) The determination of the President under section
2001(b)(2), if applicable.
(2) Efforts by the United States Government to secure
transmission sites for Radio Free Asia in countries in close
geographical proximity to Viet Nam in accordance with section
2201(a).
(3) Efforts to ensure that programs with Viet Nam promote
the policy set forth in section 302 and with section 102 of
the Human Rights, Refugee, and Other Foreign Policy
Provisions Act of 1996 regarding participation in programs of
educational and cultural exchange.
(4) Steps taken to carry out the policy under section
2301(a).
(5) Lists of persons believed to be imprisoned, detained,
or placed under house arrest, tortured, or otherwise
persecuted by the Government of Viet Nam due to their pursuit
of internationally recognized human rights. In compiling such
lists, the Secretary shall exercise appropriate discretion,
including concerns regarding the safety and security of, and
benefit to, the persons who may be included on the lists and
their families. In addition, the Secretary shall include a
list of such persons and their families who may qualify for
protection under United States refugee programs.
(6) A description of the development of the rule of law in
Viet Nam, including, but not limited to--
(A) progress toward the development of institutions of
democratic governance;
(B) processes by which statutes, regulations, rules, and
other legal acts of the Government of Viet Nam are developed
and become binding within Viet Nam;
(C) the extent to which statutes, regulations, rules,
administrative and judicial decisions, and other legal acts
of the Government of Viet Nam are published and are made
accessible to the public;
(D) the extent to which administrative and judicial
decisions are supported by statements of reasons that are
based upon written statutes, regulations, rules and other
legal acts of the Government of Viet Nam;
(E) the extent to which individuals are treated equally
under the laws of Viet Nam without regard to citizenship,
race, religion, political opinion, or current or former
associations;
(F) the extent to which administrative and judicial
decisions are independent of political pressure or
governmental interference and are reviewed by entities of
appellate jurisdiction; and
(G) the extent to which laws in Viet Nam are written and
administered in ways that are consistent with international
human rights standards, including the requirements of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
(b) Contacts With Other Organizations.-- In preparing the
report under subsection (a), the Secretary shall, as
appropriate, consult with and seek input from nongovernmental
organizations, human rights advocates (including Vietnamese-
Americans and human rights advocates in Viet Nam), and the
United States Commission on Religious Freedom.
____

Amendment No. 35 offered by Mr. Souder:
Page 78, after line 23, insert the following section (and
amend the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 274. ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY OF UNITED STATES EMBASSIES,
CONSULATES, AND OTHER DIPLOMATIC BUILDINGS.

It is the sense of the Congress that, to the greatest
extent possible, in the construction and renovation of United
States embassies, consulates, and other diplomatic buildings,
the Secretary of State shall consider and seek to preserve
the architectural integrity and cohesiveness of the
neighborhood and environs and minimize any disruption due to
the presence of the embassy, consulate, or other diplomatic
building.
____

Amendment No. 36 offered by Mr. Stearns:
Page 211, after line 11, insert the following:

SEC. 736. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AS THE CENTRAL
AUTHORITY FOR THE UNITED STATES UNDER THE HAGUE
CONVENTION ON INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION.

It is the sense of the Congress that the Department of
State should direct significant resources to their new role
as the central authority for the United States under the
Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption.
____

Amendment No. 38 offered by Mr. Dreier:
Strike section 731 (page 199, line 22 through page 204,
line 10) and insert the following:

SEC. 731. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING MIGRATION ISSUES
BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO.

(a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
(1) During President Bush's first meeting with President
Fox in Guanajuato, Mexico, the Presidents stated in the Joint
Communique of February 16, 2001 that ``we are instructing our
Governments to engage, at the earliest opportunity, in formal
high level negotiations aimed at achieving short and long-
term agreements that will allow us to constructively address
migration and labor issues between our two countries.''.
(2) During President Fox's official visit to Washington,
D.C., the Joint Statement of September 6, 2001, summarized
the meeting as follows: ``The Presidents reviewed the
progress made by our joint working group on migration chaired
by Secretaries Powell, CastaZeda, and Creel and Attorney
General Ashcroft and noted this represented the most fruitful
and frank dialogue we have ever had on a subject so important
to both nations. They praised implementation of the border
safety initiative, and recognized that migration-related
issues are deeply felt by our publics and vital to our
prosperity, well-being, and the kind of societies we want to
build. They renewed their commitment to forging new and
realistic approaches to migration to ensure it is safe,
orderly, legal and dignified, and agreed on the framework
within which this ongoing effort is based. This includes:
matching willing workers with willing employers; serving the
social and economic needs of both countries; respecting the
human dignity of all migrants, regardless of their status;
recognizing the contribution migrants make to enriching both
societies; shared responsibility for ensuring migration takes
place through safe and legal channels. Both stressed their
commitment to continue our discussions, instructing the high-
level working group to reach mutually satisfactory results on
border safety, a temporary worker program and the status of
undocumented Mexicans in the United States. They requested
that the working group provide them proposals with respect to
these issues as soon as possible. The Presidents recognized
that this is an extraordinarily challenging area of public
policy, and that it is critical to address the issue in a
timely manner and with appropriate thoroughness and depth.''.
(3) On September 7, 2001, during President Fox's historic
State Visit to Washington, the United States and Mexico
issued a joint statement instructing our cabinet-level
working group to provide us with specific proposals to forge
a new and realistic framework that will ensure a safe, legal,
orderly, and dignified migration flow between our countries.
We have today agreed that our Cabinet level migration group
should continue the work we charged it with in Guanajuato and
Washington.
(4) When the Presidents met in Monterrey, Mexico, the
Presidents stated in a Joint Statement on March 22, 2002, as
follows: ``Slightly more than one year ago, in Guanajuato, we
talked about migration as one of the major ties that join our
societies. We launched then the frankest and most productive
dialogue our countries have ever had on this important and
challenging subject. Those talks have continued over the past
year, and have yielded a clearer assessment of the scope and
nature of this issue. This bond between our nations can
render countless benefits to our respective economies and
families.
(5) Over the past year, important progress has been made to
enhance migrant safety and particularly in saving lives by
discouraging and reducing illegal crossings in dangerous
terrain.
(6) At the conclusion of the Mexico-United States
Binational Commission (BNC) meeting in Mexico City in
November 2002, Secretary of State Powell's press conference
was summarized by the State Department as follows: The BNC's
migration working group ``affirmed our strong commitment to
advancing our bilateral migration agenda,'' he stressed,
adding that ``there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that
this is a priority for President Bush, just as it is a
priority for [Mexican] President [Vicente] Fox.''
(7) Secretary Powell said no schedule had been established
for a migration accord, but he confirmed that the United
States and Mexico want to come up with a series of migration
initiatives over the course of the next six months to a year.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that--
(1) that the United States and Mexico should as soon as is
practicable commence negotiations in an attempt to reach a
migration accord that is as comprehensive as possible and
which addresses the key issues of concern for both nations;
and
(2) that as part of any migration agreement between the
United States and Mexico, the issues of the extradition of
violent criminals and law enforcement cooperation between the
two nations be addressed.
____

Amendment No. 39 offered by Mr. Walsh:
Page 77, after line 3, insert the following new section and
(amend the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 258. AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION OF IRISH PEACE PROCESS
CULTURAL AND TRAINING PROGRAM.

(a) Amendment of Program.--
(1) Section 2(a)(2)(A) of such the Irish Peace Process
Cultural and Training Program Act of 1998 (8 U.S.C. 1101
note) is amended by adding at the end ``No participant in the
program may have a degree from an institution of higher
education.''.
(2) Section 101(a)(15)(Q)(ii)(I) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(Q)(ii)(I)) is amended--

[[Page H6805]]

(A) by striking ``35 years of age or younger having a
residence'' and inserting ``21 to 35 years of age, unemployed
for not less than 6 months, having resided for not less 6
months in the Republic of Ireland or the United Kingdom,'';
and
(B) by striking ``36 months'' and inserting ``24 months''.
(3) Section 212(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1182(e)) is amended by inserting after subsection
(p) the following:
``(q)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), no person
admitted under section 101(a)(15)(Q)(ii)(I) or acquiring such
status after admission shall be eligible to apply for an
immigrant visa, or for permanent residence, or for
nonimmigrant visa status under this Act until it is
established that such person has resided and been physically
present in the country of nationality or last residence for
an aggregate of a least two years following departure from
the United States.
``(2) The Secretary of Homeland Security may waive the
requirement of such one-year foreign residence abroad if the
Secretary determines that--
``(A) departure from the United States would impose
exceptional hardship upon the alien's spouse or child (if
such spouse or child is a citizen of the United States or an
alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence); or
``(B) the admission of the alien is in the public interest
or the national interest of the United States.''.
(b) Extension of Program.--Section 2 of the Irish Peace
Process Cultural and Training Program Act of 1998 (8 U.S.C.
1101 note) is amended--
(1) in subsection (d)(1) by striking ``2006,'' and
inserting ``2008,'';
(2) in subsection (d)(2) by striking ``2005,'' and
inserting ``2011,'';
(3) in subsection (a)(3) by striking ``the third program
year and for the 3 subsequent years,'' and inserting ``each
program year''.
(c) Technical and Conforming Changes.--The Irish Peace
Process Cultural and Training Program Act of 1998 (8 U.S.C.
1101 note; Public Law 105-319) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Attorney General'' each place it appears
and inserting ``Secretary of Homeland Security''; and
(2) by striking ``Immigration and Naturalization Service''
each place it appears and inserting ``Department of Homeland
Security''.
____

Amendment No. 40 offered by Mr. Collins:
At the end of subtitle B of title VII, add the following
new section:

SEC. ____. TRANSFER OF VIETNAM-ERA CESSNA L-19D BIRD DOG
AIRCRAFT TO ARMY AVIATION HERITAGE FOUNDATION.

(a) Authority To Convey.--The Secretary of State may
convey, without consideration, to the Army Aviation Heritage
Foundation, a nonprofit organization incorporated in the
State of Georgia, all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to a Vietnam-era Cessna L-19D Bird Dog
aircraft (serial No. 24020, National registration number
N32FL)(in this section referred to as the ``aircraft'') that
is excess to the needs of the Department of State. The
conveyance shall be made by means of a conditional deed of
gift
(b) Condition of Aircraft.--The aircraft shall be conveyed
in its current ``as is'' condition. The Secretary is not
required to repair or alter the condition of the aircraft
before conveying ownership of the aircraft.
(c) Condition on Conveyance.--The Secretary shall include
in the instrument of conveyance of the aircraft the following
conditions:
(1) The Army Aviation Heritage Foundation may not convey
any ownership interest in, or transfer possession of, the
aircraft to any other party without the prior approval of the
Secretary.
(2) The Army Aviation Heritage Foundation shall operate and
maintain the aircraft in compliance with all applicable
limitations and maintenance requirements imposed by the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
(d) Reverter Upon Breach of Conditions.--If the Secretary
determines at any time that the Army Aviation Heritage
Foundation has conveyed an ownership interest in, or
transferred possession of, the aircraft to any other party
without the prior approval of the Secretary, all right,
title, and interest in and to the aircraft, including any
repair or alteration of the aircraft, shall revert to the
United States, and the United States shall have the right of
immediate possession of the aircraft.
(e) Conveyance at No Cost to the United States.--The
conveyance of the aircraft shall be made at no cost to the
United States. Any costs associated with the conveyance and
costs of operation and maintenance of the aircraft conveyed
shall be borne by the Army Aviation Heritage Foundation.
(f) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may
require such additional terms and conditions in connection
with a conveyance under this section as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United
States.
(g) Clarification of Liability.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, upon the conveyance of ownership of the
aircraft to the Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, the United
States shall not be liable for any death, injury, loss, or
damage that results from any use of that aircraft by any
person other than the United States.
____

Amendment No. 42 offered by Mr. Hefley:
After section 1312 of the bill, insert the following new
section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 1313. CONDITION ON THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN FUNDS TO
INDONESIA.

(a) Condition on Assistance.--Subject to subsection (c), no
funds made available under section 23 of the Arms Export
Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2763) or chapter 5 of part II of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2347 et seq.) in
fiscal year 2004, other than funds made available for
expanded military education and training under such chapter,
may be available for a program that involves the Government
of Indonesia or the Indonesian Armed Forces until the
President makes the certification described in subsection
(b).
(b) Certification.--The certification referred to in
subsection (a) is a certification submitted by the President
to the appropriate congressional committees that the
Government of Indonesia and the Indonesian Armed Forces are
taking effective measures, including cooperating with the
Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation--
(1) to conduct a full investigation of the attack on United
States citizens in West Papua, Indonesia on August 31, 2002;
and
(2) to criminally prosecute the individuals responsible for
such attack.
(c) Limitation.--Nothing in this section shall prohibit the
United States Government from continuing to conduct programs
or training with the Indonesian Armed Forces, including
counterterrorism training, officer visits, port visits, or
educational exchanges that are being conducted on the date of
the enactment of this Act.
____

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that Crane amendment
No. 25, Burton of Indiana amendment No. 18 and Dreier amendment No. 38
be modified in the form I have caused to be placed at the desk.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendments, as
modified.
The Clerk read as follows:
The amendment as modified is as follows:
At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new
section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. ____. ATTACKS ON UNITED STATES CITIZENS BY PALESTINIAN
TERRORISTS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Since Yasser Arafat renounced violence in the Oslo
Peace Accords on September 13, 1993, at least 41 United
States citizens have been murdered by Palestinian terrorists
and one United States citizen miscarried after being stabbed
in a Palestinian terrorist attack.
(2) On December 1, 1993, in a drive-by shooting north of
Jerusalem, Hamas killed United States citizen Yitzhak
Weinstock, 19, whose family came from Los Angeles.
(3) On October 9, 1994, Hamas kidnapped and murdered United
States citizen Nachshon Wachsman, 19, whose family came from
New York City.
(4) On April 9, 1995, an Islamic Jihad bomb attack on a bus
near Kfar Darom killed United States citizen Alisa Flatow,
20, from West Orange, New Jersey.
(5) On August 21, 1995, in a Hamas bus bombing in
Jerusalem, United States citizen Joan Davenny, from New
Haven, Connecticut, was killed.
(6) On September 9, 1995, Mara Frey of Chicago was stabbed
in Ma'ale Michmash resulting in her unborn child's death.
(7) On February 25, 1996, three United States citizens,
Sara Duker of Teaneck, New Jersey, Matthew Eisenfeld of West
Hartford, Connecticut, and Ira Weinstein of New York City,
were killed in a Hamas bus bombing in Jerusalem.
(8) On May 13, 1996, United States citizen David Boim, 17,
of New York City, was killed in a drive-by shooting near Beit
El, north of Jerusalem.
(9) On June 9, 1996, United States citizen Yaron Ungar was
killed in a drive by-shooting near Beit Shemesh.
(10) On July 30, 1997, United States citizen Leah Stern of
Passaic, New Jersey, was killed in a Hamas bombing in
Jerusalem's Mahane Yehuda market.
(11) On September 4, 1997, a Hamas bombing on Ben-Yehuda
Street, Jerusalem, killed Yael Botwin, 14, of Los Angeles.
(12) On April 19, 1998, an attack near the Israeli town of
Maon killed United States citizen Dov Dribben, 28.
(13) On October 8, 2000, Rabbi Hillel Lieberman, 36, of New
York City, was stabbed and killed near Nablus.
(14) On October 30, 2000, United States citizen Esh-Kodesh
Gilmore, 25, was shot in Jerusalem.
(15) On December 31, 2000, Rabbi Binyamin Kahane, 34, and
his wife, Talia Hertzlich Kahane, both formerly of New York
City, were killed in a drive-by shooting near Ofra.
(16) On May 9, 2001, Jacob ``Koby'' Mandell, 13, of Silver
Spring, Maryland, was killed in an attack near Tekoah.
(17) On May 29, 2001, Sarah Blaustein, 53, of Lawrence, New
York, was killed in a drive-by shooting near Efrat.
(18) On August 9, 2001, two United States citizens, Judith
L. Greenbaum, 31, and Malka Roth, 15, were killed in the
Jerusalem Sbarro pizzeria bombing.

[[Page H6806]]

(19) On November 4, 2001, Shoshana Ben-Yishai, 16, of New
York City, was shot and killed during an attack on a
Jerusalem bus.
(20) On January 15, 2002, Avraham Boaz, 72, of New York
City, was killed in a shooting near Bethlehem.
(21) On January 18, 2002, United States citizen Aaron Elis,
32, was killed in a shooting in Hadera.
(22) On February 15, 2002, United States citizen Lee
Akunis, was shot and killed near Ramallah.
(23) On February 16, 2002, Keren Shatsky, 14, of New York
City and Maine, and Rachel Thaler, 16, of Baltimore,
Maryland, were killed in a bombing in Karnei Shomron.
(24) On February 25, 2002, United States citizen Moran
Amit, 25, was stabbed and killed in Abu Tor Peace Forest,
Jerusalem.
(25) On March 24, 2002, Esther Kleinman, 23, formerly of
Chicago, was shot and killed near Ofra.
(26) On March 27, 2002, United States citizen Hannah Rogen,
90, was killed in a bombing at a hotel Passover seder in
Netanya.
(27) On June 18, 2002, Moshe Gottlieb, 70, of Los Angeles,
was killed in a bus bombing in Jerusalem.
(28) On June 19, 2002, United States citizen Gila Sara
Kessler, 19, was killed in a bombing at a Jerusalem bus stop.
(29) On July 31, 2002, five United States citizens were
killed in a bombing of a Hebrew University cafeteria: Marla
Bennett, 24, of San Diego, Benjamin Blutstein, 25, of
Susquehanna Township, Pennsylvania, Janis Ruth Coulter, 36,
of Massachusetts, David Gritz, 24, of Peru, Massachusetts
(and of dual French-United States citizenship), and Dina
Carter, 37, of North Carolina.
(30) On March 5, 2003, Abigail Leitel, 14, who was born in
Lebanon, New Hampshire, died in a bus bombing in Haifa.
(31) On March 7, 2003, United States citizens Rabbi Eli
Horowitz, 52, who grew up in Chicago, and Dina Horowitz, 50,
who grew up in Florida, were killed in their home.
(32) On June 11, 2003, United States citizen Alan Beer, 47,
who grew up in Cleveland, was killed in bus bombing in
Jerusalem.
(33) On June 20, 2003, United States citizen Tzvi
Goldstein, 47, originally from New York City, was shot and
killed in an attack while driving through the West Bank.
(34) At least another 79 United States citizens have been
injured in Palestinian terrorist attacks.
(b) Statements of Policy.--Congress--
(1) condemns the attacks on United States citizens by
Palestinian terrorists;
(2) calls on the Palestinian Authority to work with Israel
to protect all innocent individuals, regardless of
citizenship, from terrorist atrocities;
(3) offers its condolences to the families and loved ones
of United States citizens who were killed by Palestinian
terrorist attacks; and
(4) calls on the Secretary of State to include a listing of
the killing of every United States citizen by terrorists in
the ``Chronology of Significant Terrorist Incidents'', as
included in the Department of State's Patterns of Global
Terrorism Report issued after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
____

Modification to the Amendment Offered by Mr. Burton of Indiana,

The amendment as modified is as follows:
Page 78, after line 23, insert the following:

SEC. 274. NOTICE TO UNITED STATES EMBASSIES ABROAD REGARDING
CHILDREN WHO ARE THE SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL
CHILD ABDUCTION AND GUIDELINES RELATING TO
SANCTUARY FOR SUCH CHILDREN.

(a) Notice of International Child Abduction.--The Secretary
of State shall establish procedures to ensure that
appropriate United States Embassies abroad are notified of
the possible presence in that country of any child who has
been the subject of international child abduction in
violation of the order of a court in the United States.
(b) Guidelines for Sanctuary.--The Secretary of State shall
promulgate guidelines for the personnel of United States
Embassies abroad concerning procedures relating to sanctuary
at such facilities for children who are the subject of
international child abduction.

SEC. 275. INADMISSIBILITY OF ALIENS SUPPORTING INTERNATIONAL
CHILD ABDUCTORS AND RELATIVES OF SUCH
ABDUCTORS.

(4) by adding at the end the following:

``(IV) is a spouse of the abducted child described in
clause (i), if such person has been designated by the
Secretary of State at the Secretary's sole and unreviewable
discretion,

``(vii) Definitions.--For purposes of this subparagraph--

Modification to the Amendment Offered by Mr. Dreier

The amendment, as modified is as follows:
Strike section 731 (page 199, line 22 through page 204,
line 10) and insert the following:

SEC. 731. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING MIGRATION ISSUES
BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO.

[[Page H6807]]

United States and Mexico issued a joint statement instructing
our cabinet-level working group to provide us with specific
proposals to forge a new and realistic framework that will
ensure a safe, legal, orderly, and dignified migration flow
between our countries. We have today agreed that our Cabinet
level migration group should continue the work we charged it
with in Guanajuato and Washington.
(4) When the Presidents met in Monterrey, Mexico, the
Presidents stated in a Joint Statement on March 22, 2002, as
follows: ``Slightly more than one year ago, in Guanajuato, we
talked about migration as one of the major ties that join our
societies. We launched then the frankest and most productive
dialogue our countries have ever had on this important and
challenging subject. Those talks have continued over the past
year, and have yielded a clearer assessment of the scope and
nature of this issue. This bond between our nations can
render countless benefits to our respective economies and
families.
(5) Over the past year, important progress has been made to
enhance migrant safety and particularly in saving lives by
discouraging and reducing illegal crossings in dangerous
terrain.
(6) At the conclusion of the Mexico-United States
Binational Commission (BNC) meeting in Mexico City in
November 2002, Secretary of State Powell's press conference
was summarized by the State Department as follows: The BNC's
migration working group ``affirmed our strong commitment to
advancing our bilateral migration agenda,'' he stressed,
adding that ``there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that
this is a priority for President Bush, just as it is a
priority for [Mexican] President [Vicente] Fox.''
(7) Secretary Powell said no schedule had been established
for a migration accord, but he confirmed that the United
States and Mexico want to come up with a series of migration
initiatives over the course of the next six months to a year.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that--
(1) that the United States and Mexico should as soon as is
practicable conclude negotiations in an attempt to reach a
migration accord that is as comprehensive as possible and
which addresses the key issues of concern for both nations;
and
(2) that as part of any migration agreement between the
United States and Mexico, the issues of the extradition of
violent criminals and law enforcement cooperation between the
two nations be addressed.
Mr. HYDE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the modifications be considered as read and printed in the Record.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Without objection, the amendments are
modified.
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California
(Mr. Lantos) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in strong support of the Hyde en bloc amendments. This measure
includes a number of critical amendments that were ruled in order by
the Committee on Rules. They include initiatives in support of U.S.
companies and U.S. workers obtaining procurement contracts from our
foreign policy agencies, improvements in our visa processing system,
tools to fight international child abduction, an important measure
encouraging a greater role for the United Nations and for NATO in
maintaining peace in Iraq, support for the women of Afghanistan, and an
important plan to compel the agencies that use our diplomatic
facilities to share the costs of building and protecting them.
A number of our colleagues contributed to this important package, and
I would like to recognize them. I commend the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Crowley), the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Ackerman), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), the
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo), and the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Mrs. Maloney) for their important work; and I urge all of
my colleagues to support the Hyde en bloc amendments.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).
Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Hyde) for an opportunity to talk about what has happened to
manufacturing in our country and to thank the gentleman for including
this amendment in the en bloc amendments.
In the latest report put out by the National Association for
Manufacturing, the executive summary ends with this startling
statement. ``If the U.S. manufacturing base continues to shrink at its
present rate and its critical mass is lost, the manufacturing
innovation process will shift to other global centers. Once that
happens, a decline in U.S. living standards in the future is virtually
assured.''
What this amendment does, it requires the State Department to
increase the content of the articles, materials and supplies for
construction, alteration or repair, to increase it from the 50 percent
threshold to 65 percent. It is a modest amendment, but it takes the
acquisitions that our government has and uses them to level the playing
field so as to assure contracts to help out our precious manufacturing
base.
We have lost nearly 3 million manufacturing jobs in the past 2 and a
half years. Fifty-four thousand manufacturing jobs are lost every
month, and that has been continuous for the past 34 months.
So we come to the United States Congress and the House of
Representatives and we say something has to be done to stop the
destruction of manufacturing in this country. This amendment helps out
because it increases the content, which assures more manufacturing jobs
for the manufacturers of America.

Securing America's Future: The Case for a Strong Manufacturing Base

U.S. manufacturing is the heart of a significant process
that generates economic growth and has produced the highest
living standards in history. But today this complex process
faces serious domestic and international challenges which, if
not overcome, will lead to reduced economic growth and
ultimately a decline in living standards for future
generations of Americans.
Manufacturing's innovation process is the key to past,
present and future prosperity and higher living standards.
The intricate process starts with an idea for a new product
or process, prompting investments in research and
development. R&D successes lead to investments in capital
equipment and workers, and to ``spillovers'' that benefit
manufacturing and other economic sectors. This process not
only generates new products and processes, but also leads to
well-paying jobs, increased productivity, and competitive
pricing. Yet while this process produces wealth and higher
living standards, most of it is hidden from view and poorly
understood.
Manufacturing's innovation process provides enormous
benefits for the entire U.S. economy:
Grows the Economy--Manufacturing growth spawns more
additional economic activities and jobs than any other
economic sector. Every $1 of final demand for manufactured
goods generates an additional $0.67 in other manufactured
products and $0.76 in products and services from
nonmanufacturing sectors.
Invents the Future--Manufacturers are responsible for
almost two-thirds of all private sector R&D--$127 billion in
2002. Spillovers from this R&D benefit other manufacturing
and nonmanufacturing firms. R&D spillovers are enhanced by
geographic proximity.
Generates Productivity Increases--Manufacturing
productivity gains are historically higher than those of any
other economic sector--over the past two decades,
manufacturing averaged twice the annual productivity gains of
the rest of the private sector. These gains enable Americans
to do more with less, increase our ability to compete, and
facilitates higher wages for all employees.
Provides More Rewarding Employment--Manufacturing salaries
and benefits average $54,000, higher than the average for the
total private sector. Two factors in particular attract
workers to manufacturing: higher pay and benefits, and
opportunities for advanced education and training.
Pays the Taxes--Manufacturing has been an important
contributor to regional economic growth and tax receipts at
all levels of government. During the 1990s, manufacturing
corporations paid 30-34 percent of all corporate taxes
collected by state and local governments, Social Security and
payroll taxes, excise taxes, import and tariff duties,
environmental taxes and license taxes.
Meanwhile, other nations, recognizing that a strong
manufacturing base is the proven path to a world-class
economy, have been learning from the American example and are
forging their own innovation processes to compete with ours.
America's manufacturing innovation process requires a
critical mass to generate wealth and higher standards of
living. If the U.S. manufacturing base continues to diminish
at its present rate that process may deteriorate beyond
repair and with it the seedbed

[[Page H6808]]

of our industrial strength and competitive edge.
The most serious challenges to the long-term viability of
the U.S. manufacturing base and the innovation process that
underlie it are:
Loss of Jobs--U.S. manufacturers historically lead the way
in an economic expansion, but are still struggling to recover
from the recent recession. Since July 2000, manufacturing has
lost 2.3 million jobs, many of which have been outsourced or
relocated overseas. Manufacturing output has shown no growth
since December 2001--the official end of the recession--in
the weakest manufacturing recovery since 1919.
Loss of Export Potential--Manufacturing exports as a share
of GDP have contracted since 1997, reflecting the strong
dollar overseas, the impact of the recession on our trading
partners, the terrorist attacks in the United States in
September 2001, and increased global competition. The U.S.
trade deficit has ballooned to historic highs--reflecting an
increase in purchases of foreign-made goods, especially from
countries which do not freely float their currencies.
Investments are Going Elsewhere--U.S. manufacturing's share
of capital investment and R&D expenditures, once a dominant
feature of our nation's commitment to progress, is
diminishing. While U.S. manufacturers conduct two-thirds of
private R&D, their R&D spending between 2000 and 2002 grew at
only half the pace of the previous decade.
Needs More Skilled Workers--Despite the loss of 2.3 million
jobs, manufacturing is facing a potential shortfall of highly
qualified employees with specific educational backgrounds and
skills, especially those specific skills needed to produce
manufactured goods. If the skills and knowledge of the
American workforce do not improve it will be detrimental to
manufacturing's competitive edge and to the prospect for
economic growth.
Facing Dramatically Rising Costs--The cost of doing
business in the United States is rising dramatically, in
large measure because of significant costs related to
healthcare, litigation, and regulation. As a result, many
U.S. manufacturers shut down or move production overseas to
countries where they do not face, to the same extent, those
kinds of impediments to reducing productions.
U.S. manufacturing's innovation process leads to
investments in equipment and people, to productivity gains,
to beneficial spillovers, and to new and improved products
and processes. This intricate process generates economic
growth and higher living standards superior to any other
economic sector. But serious challenges threaten to undermine
the critical mass of manufacturing necessary to maintain a
dynamic innovation process. If the U.S. manufacturing base
continues to shrink at its present rate and the critical mass
is lost, the manufacturing innovation process will shift to
other global centers. Once that happens, a decline in U.S.
living standards in the future is virtually assured.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Hunter).
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
I wanted to speak in support of the amendment which expresses a sense
of the Congress that the International Boundary and Water Commission
should move forward with a program that is intended to eliminate the
flow of Mexican sewage across the international border in the Pacific
region into waters that end up polluting the Southern California
coastline and requiring a quarantine of that coastline.
Mr. Chairman, we have been urging the International Boundary and
Water Commission to make treaty negotiations with Mexico on
establishing a public-private partnership to construct and operate a
wastewater treatment facility in Mexico as outlined in existing Public
Law 106-457. To date, they have shown insignificant progress. They have
shown no inclination to move forward on this important mandate which is
in law, and this is a sense of Congress to urge them to get moving.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Guam (Ms. Bordallo).
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support the en bloc
amendment, which includes a provision to bring equity between the State
Department employees from Guam and other insular areas with those from
the mainland United States.
Current law allows the reimbursement of travel expenses for employees
and their dependents in a foreign posting to return home. However,
because of a flawed definition, the State Department is prohibited from
providing this benefit if the home location is a U.S. territory. My
amendment would correct this problem. My amendment would include Guam,
American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and the Northern
Mariana Islands within the geographic definition of the United States
for the purposes of educational travel from a foreign area posting. I
hope that in conference this might be perfected to include all of the
State Department allowances in Title V. Congress would then eliminate
the need to revisit this issue for every allowance.
Let me close by giving an example of the problem that the current
language imposes. A constituent of mine who is proudly serving our
Nation as a State Department employee in Beijing wanted to send his son
home to the University of Guam. His request was denied only to be told
that Guam and the University of Guam is not in the United States.
Today, the House will right this wrong; and I would like to thank the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California
(Mr. Lantos), the ranking member, and the State Department for
supporting this change.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
(Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the en bloc
amendments and appreciate the fact that it includes amendment No. 22,
so I thank the chairman and the ranking member.
This amendment offered by this Member begins with a set of findings
concerning the liberation of Iraq by U.S. coalition forces, the current
situation on the ground and the challenges and demands facing American
military forces and American taxpayers in bringing stability to Iraq.
Included in the findings is a statement by President Bush that, ``The
rise of Iraq as an example of moderation and democracy and prosperity
is a massive and long-term undertaking,'' and testimony by Defense
Secretary Rumsfeld that, ``We certainly want assistance from NATO and
from NATO countries.''
This amendment exactly parallels the amendment offered by Senator
Biden, endorsed by Senator Lugar which passed the Senate recently by a
97-0 vote. In the operative section, the amendment expresses the sense
of Congress that it is in the national security interest of the United
States to remain engaged in Iraq in order to ensure a peaceful, stable,
unified Iraq with a representative government.

{time} 1645

The amendment goes on to suggest that the President should consider a
formal request for NATO to assume a greater role in Iraq and that other
NATO allies and other nations should provide troops and police to
coalition efforts in Iraq. Finally, the amendment again, a sense of
Congress amendment, asks the President to consider calling on the
United Nations to urge its member states to provide personnel and
resources to stabilize and rebuild Iraq.
Let me emphasize that the amendment text makes clear that sovereign
member states should provide military forces and civilian police to
promote security, not the U.N. itself. The situation in Iraq is far too
dangerous for a U.N. peacekeeping operation. It deserves to have the
first-rate one, NATO.
Mr. Chairman, this Member believes we have no option but to remain
engaged in Iraq, but this Member believes that we should seek as much
assistance in this effort as possible.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).
(Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I want to rise in support of the en bloc
amendment and certainly recognize the wisdom that has now been included
in the en bloc amendment of my original amendment in the Committee on
International Relations calling for a conclusion of a migratory
agreement between the United States and Mexico in the national
interests of both countries. It certainly is in the national interest
of the United States to regularize the border between Mexico and the
United States, to make sure that the human capital that helps fuel our
economy here at home can be had but in a way that is dignified on both
sides.

[[Page H6809]]

And certainly I am happy to see the removal of the Mexican oil from
the migration agreement that was not only offensive but outright wrong
as far as our foreign policy is concerned. As the ranking Democrat on
the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, I am pleased to see that we
are headed now in the right direction. I am very pleased that Democrats
have led on this issue and that our Republican colleagues have joined
us on it in this en bloc amendment.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
Mrs. MALONEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding time and for his
extraordinary leadership on international affairs and so many issues
that are important to this country.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to support the en bloc amendment and to
note that the amendment which the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos) and I put forward to help women and girls in Afghanistan was
included. I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).
The amendment creates the Afghan Women's Fund of not less than $22
million per year for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005. The Afghan Women's
Fund will support the efforts of the Afghan Ministry of Women's
Affairs, other government ministries, and independent commissions to
increase women and girls' access to health care, education, and income-
earning opportunities, as well as to programs to prevent trafficking in
girls and women. This amendment also ensures that not less than 15
percent of the Afghan Women's Fund will reach organizations run by
Afghans, especially Afghan women.
These organizations and civil society leaders are ideal partners, as
they offer extensive development experience, knowledge of the local
culture, and deep connections with the people they serve. Their success
is also very closely tied to the success of efforts in Afghanistan for
democracy because democracies cannot stabilize without a strong civil
society. The Afghan women's amendment will support Afghan women and
girls as they endeavor to make their country a more stable, safer, and
better place.
I thank the leadership on the Democrat and Republican side for
including this important amendment.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Filner).
Mr. FILNER. I thank my colleague for yielding me this time. I want to
thank the managers of the bill, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde),
for including in the en bloc amendment the so-called Hunter-Cunningham-
Davis-Filner amendment, which deals with a rather amazing situation on
the Mexico-California border in my district. Three years ago, this
House passed by unanimous vote a bill that was authored by then-
Congressman Bilbray and myself which set up a process and a plan for
solving the sewage problem at the border.
Mr. Chairman, there are 50 million gallons of raw sewage that flow
throughout my district every day. Because the Tijuana River flows
north, Mexico simply does not have the technical ability to treat its
sewage, we get it, and the health of our citizens is threatened. Mr.
Bilbray and I, sanctioned by this House, came up with a public-private
partnership to solve this issue. Three years ago, we voted unanimously
to instruct the International Boundary and Water Commission to carry
out this plan. Three years and nothing has happened. Absolutely nothing
has occurred to carry out the wishes of this Congress and to protect
the health of the citizens of the United States. That is absolutely
incredible. It is absolutely threatening to, really, the authority of
the United States Congress.
What we have in the en bloc amendment is a sense of Congress saying
to the IBWC, the International Boundary and Water Commission, to get to
it, do something. I think they should be held in contempt of Congress
myself because the Chair of that commission, in testimony to the United
States Congress, to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
said they were going to carry this out. He has not done so. That
commission, Mr. Chairman, is in disarray. This Congress should carry
out an investigation of that commission, but this is a first step in
the sense of Congress resolution. I thank the managers for it.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak on the
State Department Authorization Bill. The bill contains key provisions
that will improve international relations. I commend Chairman Hyde and
Ranking Member Lantos on their hard work and dedication to
international affairs.
The citizens of the United States have benefitted greatly from the
strides made by medical science, but despite these advances, the health
status of people living in developing countries lags far behind the
rest of our citizens. Funding for the United Nations Population Fund is
needed to ensure that future generations in other countries prosper.
The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) is the largest
internationally funded source of population assistance to developing
countries. Over the past 33 years, UNFPA has provided more than $6
billion in assistance to more than 160 countries for voluntary family
planning and maternal and child health care.
The UNFPA provides great assistance to a number of African countries.
UNFPA's priorities include working to increase access to reproductive
health services, improve approaches to adolescent reproductive health;
promote safe pregnancy and delivery, reduce maternal mortality, provide
emergency assistance in refugee situations, and prevent and treat HIV/
AIDS. I am especially concerned about the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa.
The HIV/AIDS virus infected approximately 3.5 million Africans. HR 1950
calls for $1,000,000 for the fiscal year 2004 to be available for HIV/
AIDS research and mitigation strategies internationally.
In addition to health assistance, we need to do more to help
countries in the continent of Africa with peacekeeping solutions. The
diplomatic capacity at the UN needs to be enhanced to end the suffering
of the people of Africa. In the country of Liberia, the people have
endured and suffered bloody civil war and unrest for the past 13 years.
This war is destroying the future of many Liberian children who are
forced to become brutal soldiers at such young ages. We as a nation
must assist the people of Liberia. We must help them reverse the
deterioration of their country. This bill will provide $40,000,000 to
implement peackeeping activities in Africa.
Heightened awareness of what we can do to improve international
affairs is very important. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I would urge all
people throughout America and, quite frankly, throughout the world to
pay more attention to our developing countries so that not only can we
all maintain better health, but also so that we can have peace. Peace
is the only way to gain prosperity.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I speak to
you today regarding a pressing matter that deserves attention as we
balance out the debate on H.R. 1950. While the stringent nature of the
Rules governing the amendment process for this bill preclude my input
by way of amendment, I submit that the issue of famine in Ethiopia is
worthy of inclusion with the report language on this bill.
Unfortunately, even as we speak now, some 11-14 million people will
go hungry in the coming months.

Effect of Famine on the Agriculture Industry

Severe drought conditions destroyed over 15 percent of the October-
November 2002 harvest in Ethiopia. The resultant failure of root
vegetables and green crops to grow has caused families that depend on
subsistence farming to not only lack food, but also seeds for
replanting next year. This situation makes the availability of
genetically modified organism (GMO) seeds dangerously attractive to the
hungry, inuring them to the host of side affects and ailments that have
yet to be confirmed or denied by the Food and Drug Administration.
As a result of the poor arability of the land and other adverse
conditions, not only are the people's crops suffering, but their
livestock as well. With the mortality rate steadily rising, those
remaining are experiencing a lowered body weight, which results in
reduced traction, power and milk production, which again will lead to
insecure food sources. Unless veterinary services improve, the death
toll will continue to increase as the livestock's immune system grows
weaker resulting from poor conditions and common diseases.

The combined effect of plummeting livestock prices and skyrocketing
cereal prices, the poorer households face an even worse predicament in
obtaining food. Their wage rate is reported to be 3 times lower in the
current year than in the same period last year.
According to recent studies, there were 35,000 people in Ziquala,
34,920 people in Ambassel, 16,300 in Wadla, 17,455 in Kewet and 156,200
in the three words of South Gondar who were in need of external
assistance through the upcoming months.

[[Page H6810]]

Ethiopian Economy in the Face of Famine

Ethiopia's poverty-stricken economy is based on agriculture, which
accounts for half of GDP, 85% of exports, and 80% of total employment.
The agricultural sector suffers from frequent drought and poor
cultivation practices, and as many as 4.6 million people need food
assistance annually. Coffee is critical to the Ethiopian economy with
exports of some $260 million in 2000. Other important exports include
live animals, hides, and gold.
The war with Eritrea in 1999-2000 and recurrent drought have buffeted
the economy, in particular coffee production. In November 2001,
Ethiopia qualified for debt relief from the Highly Indebted Poor
Countries (HIPC) initiative. Under Ethiopia's land tenure system, the
government owns all land and provides long-term leases to the tenants;
the system continues to hamper growth in the industrial sector as
entrepreneurs are unable to use land as collateral for loans. Despite
this limitation, strong growth is expected to continue in the near term
as good rainfall, the cessation of hostilities, and renewed foreign aid
and debt relief push the economy forward.

short-term consequences of inaction or lack of timely remedial measures

An estimated six children die of drought-related conditions daily in
Ethiopia, according to one estimate. Many of them have collapsed from
disease or dehydration after walking for days with their families in
search of nourishment. Thousands are fleeing remote villages where
wells have dried up and agencies have yet to establish food stations.

who is at risk?

The U.N. warns that as many as 16 million people are at risk of
starvation in 10 countries across East and central Africa, from Burundi
to Eritrea on the Red Sea. The crisis is most severe in Ethiopia's
perpetually dry Ogaden region, where wells have gone dry, crops have
withered and the skeletons of cattle and sheep lay in barren fields.
Camels in Ogaden have stopped lactating, leaving children without milk,
a staple in the impoverished nation.
Some Ethiopians are fortunate enough to have access to feeding
centers, which supply rehydration treatments and high protein biscuits.
Relief agencies are struggling to set up more centers in remote regions
before residents migrate elsewhere for food. Sometimes, lack of clean
drinking water, which is needed to mix the children's food into gruel,
makes it impossible for centers to be stationed in some areas.

a rich history of fighting hunger in the 18th congressional district

The late Honorable Mickey Leland established the House Select
Committee on Hunger in 1984 and served as its chairman until his tragic
death in 1989. The Select Committee was instrumental in drawing
attention to the problem of hunger internationally and within the
United States. On a humanitarian mission to Africa, Mickey experienced
the death of a starving child in his arms. This eye-opening experience
led him to redouble his efforts to fight hunger, resulting in 350,000
tons of food to aid famine victims in Ethiopia. Congressman Leland lost
his life in Ethiopia trying to save more lives. I would like to work
with this committee to include report language in this bill that
encourages a greater emphasis on the ongoing famine and a solution to
this deadly problem.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I speak to
you today regarding a pressing matter that deserves attention as we
balance out the debate on H.R. 1950. I appreciate the opportunity to
discuss with you an issue, the relevance of which, will potentially
merit inclusion into the House Reports on H.R. 1950, the State
Department Authorization bill. The issue concerns the initiative of
achieving international peace by way of the leadership of women.

women leaders as the universal Hub in the peace process

Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I propose that women play any and
all roles that will give them an opportunity to use their leadership
skills in the peace process. Therefore, this request would include
diplomatic as well as formal organizational leadership roles. I support
the International Leadership Act of 2003, co-authored by you and
Representative David Dreier, Chairman of the House Committee on Rules
and included in the bill provisions.

women's role in the international leadership act of 2003

I see women leading and adding important skills to the ``Democracy
Caucus'' proposed in the Act. The Democracy Caucus would work as a very
timely vehicle for women to lead the way, especially in the area of
rebuilding democratic government in post-war Iraq. With the help of the
United Nations, we can prevent rogue regimes from assuming dangerous
amounts of influence and taking advantage of the vulnerabilities of
rebuilding nations such as Iraq and even Liberia. I would posit that
fashioning the proposed diplomacy program under the Act to give women
particular attention will greatly enhance the multilateral character of
our ambassador fleet.

The Oslo Summit: Women's Partnership for Peace

Mr. Chairman, I took advantage of a unique experience when I served
as an Honorary Chair for the Women's Partnership for Peace in the
Middle East in Oslo, Norway in June of this year. I shared a panel with
an unprecedented group of more than 70 women from Israel, Palestine,
the United States, Europe and Asia who met in Oslo, Norway at the Nobel
Peace Institute to launch the Women's Partnership for Peace in the
Middle East.
The objective of the Oslo Summit was to set clear goals and devise a
plan of action for achieving a greater role for women in peace
negotiations in the region and in the overall effort to achieve peace,
a movement largely devoid of women's perspectives and participations. I
would like to see women play a more pronounced role not only in the
establishment of business opportunity but also in the peace process,
and this kind of forum offers a platform that is both transnational as
well as international. In training our diplomats to act as more
efficient international ``joints,'' it is critical that we deputize our
strong women leaders.

her excellency dr. inonge mbikusita-lewanika: an icon of peace

As a final remark and by way of example, I would like to highlight
the experience and achievement of Her Excellency Dr. Inonge Mbikusita-
Lewanika, Ambassador to Zambia. This woman, whom I had the honor and
pleasure of presenting the Freedom Magazine Award for Human Rights
Leadership on July 9, 2003 is an example of the impact a woman can have
on international peace negotiations and efforts.
If I may chronicle a few of her accomplishments, she was appointed as
a special envoy to the African Union and allowed to advance the
movement of women in her nation in the effort for peace. Her various
posts have decorated her career with great international breadth and
astute conflict-resolution skill: UNICEF Regional Advisor for Families
and Children in 19 countries; as stated above, a Peace Envoy convening
numerous peace missions such as the Organization for African Unity; and
the United Nations-sponsored peace mission to Rwanda amidst the period
of human rights atrocity and genocide. In fact, Her Excellency Lewanika
is one of the few prominent African women to serve in United Nations
missions for war-torn African nations. Moreover, she understands the
importance and the benefits of structuring and maintaining an organized
democratic government and an effective electoral process. These
initiatives are evidenced by her audacious efforts to lead a 1,000-
member observe team from the Electoral Institute of Southern Africa to
Zimbabwe's parliamentary elections and to spearhead the nine-member
resignation from the Ruling Party in Zambia due to findings of
corruption and lack of vision in 1993, whereupon she was elected
Founding President of the Opposition National Party. Furthermore, her
positions of leadership in organizations such as the Forum for
Parliamentarians for Peace in Eastern and Southern Africa; the African
Women Committee for Peace and Development; the Women Development
Association; and the Federation of African Women's Peace Networks,
heading the first delegation of women for peace to Ethiopia and Eritrea
during the bloody and tumultuous border war Zambia's Opposition Party,
Agenda for Zambia as President, exemplifies her tenacity and
willingness to commit the time and effort that is required to follow
through on organization mission statements rather than spewing forth
rhetoric and flowery speeches absent any real action.
For the reasons stated above, I would hope that these concerns
regarding women involved in international peace efforts can be included
in report language during conference.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I speak to
you today regarding a pressing matter that deserves attention as we
balance out the debate on H.R. 1950. I appreciate the opportunity to
discuss with you an issue, the relevance of which, will potentially
merit inclusion into the House Reports on H.R. 1950, the State
Department Authorization bill. The issue concerns a nation that was
founded during the nineteenth century by freed American slaves. Once a
nation founded on the premises of freedom and opportunity, the Liberia
of today is wrought with political upheaval and social unrest.
Within the last twenty years, Liberia has been the site of intense
devastation and profound loss due to almost two decades of civil war.
The latest war has lasted for approximately three years and has caused
immense disruption to the social and political fabric of the region.
The health infrastructure in Liberia has crumbled, schools have
become refugee camps, and the people have taken the law into their own
hands. Nearly half of the Liberian population has been forced to flee
to neighboring countries or to internationally assisted camps in
Liberia. Large numbers of innocent, young children are being made into

[[Page H6811]]

child soldiers. Those children that are fortunate enough to escape the
life of forced military service are often left with little to no
options aside from living on the streets. This conflict has brought
about political destablization on a mass scale, increased economic
disparity, and what can only be described as societal chaos. And
although a ceasefire was recently agreed upon, fighting and civil
disobedience within the country has yet to subside.

Charles Taylor has exacerbated the civil war in Liberia since 1989
when he led the armed military faction that initiated a seven-year
civil war in Monrovia. Of the emerging military factions in Liberia
during this unsettling time, the group led by Charles Taylor was
arguably the most dangerous and recalcitrant. An attempted peace
process in mid-1996 resulted in the unexpected election of Charles
Taylor as president. Although Liberia appeared to have entered into a
time of normalcy, the killing and harassment of notable opposition
leaders and the censure of Liberia's print and radio media raised
doubts among many observers and prompted immediate concern from the
U.S. as well as the rest of the international community. In 1999,
President Taylor was charged with aiding the Revolutionary Front (RUF)
rebels fighting the Sierra Leonean government. The U.S. has
subsequently pursued unilateral policies that directly target the
Taylor government.
The U.S. has had a long historical relationship with Liberia dating
back to its original founding. Views diverge on whether the U.S. should
provide Liberia with any assistance and if so what type of how much.
The extensive historical involvement between U.S. and Liberia
obligates, in my opinion, our government to take special responsibility
to answer Liberia's humanitarian and developmental needs, promote an
effective democracy, and work diligently to stop human rights abuses.
Liberia has served as an important ally for the U.S. particularly
during the Cold War era; it is in recognition of this long-standing
relationship that the U.S. should serve as a vigilant presence in the
efforts to bring calm and civility to this war-ravaged country.
Of course this is not the first time that U.S. presence has been
requested to aid in the restoration of civility in a nation.
Our involvement with conflicts and civil strife in Haiti, Bosnia, and
Kosovo are a few of the more recent examples of successful humanitarian
interventions. We were certainly more than willing to involve ourselves
in Iraq under the auspices of terrorism and global peace; if peace be
our aim, then we should have no qualms about coming to the aid of
Liberian citizens. The question we should ask is why there is any
hesitation to become involved with Liberia when there are well-
established historical ties to this country. It is vital that the U.S.
send in U.S. peacekeeping and humanitarian aid to support the Economic
Community of West African States.

We know that Charles Taylor needs to go. He has been negating the
peace process for years and it is therefore high time that he make his
exit, once and for all.
The rhetoric put forth by those on the other side of the table, on
the surface, speak to the dangers and long-term global implications of
external intervention. However, we are quite selective about the
dangers we are willing to face and the implications we are willing to
make in the name of peace. What determines this difference? I think
that those on the other side simply view Liberia as a region of non-
strategic importance for U.S. foreign policy interests. This type of
biased selectivity is unproductive and ineffective in the global
community in which we live.
A consistent supply of humanitarian aid in the form of shelter, food,
water, and medical care should be supplied to the region as well. In
essence, we must do all we can to ensure that peace and stability
return to Liberia once and for all. I hope to monitor the debate on
this need and would hope that report language could be included in the
report of the bill on helping Liberia now!
Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered
by the four co-chairs of the Congressional Taiwan Caucus endorsing
Taiwan's entrance into the World Health Organization.
It is unconscionable that 23 million Taiwanese are precluded from
receiving the benefits of membership in the WHO. This politicized
exclusion has deprived the people of Taiwan from a number of
progressive health care developments, impaired its crisis response
teams and created a wall of separation between Taiwan's medical field
and that of the rest of the world. Moreover, Taiwan's exclusion from
the WHO has deprived the international community from the invaluable
contributions of Taiwan has made to promote medical research and global
health.
Never were the affects of Taiwan's exclusion from the WHO more
pronounced than this past year, when Taiwan was denied assistance from
the WHO to diagnose and treat suspected cases of SARS--a disease which
caused over 800 deaths, 84 of which occurred in Taiwan. Despite the
extraordinary grave health conditions posed by SARS, the WHO repeatedly
rejected Taiwan's requests for help, and consequently endangered the
lives of its entire population.
Unconscionably, the WHO's decisions were based--not upon its concern
for the people of Taiwan--but rather, on short-sided political
considerations and China's rejection of Taiwan's membership in the WHO.
Mr. Chairman, health is an issue that transcends borders and
politics. As the pace of globalization quickens, so too does the spread
of infectious disease. In this post-SARS world, it clear that all
nations--including Taiwan--must work together to promote global health,
combat disease and ensure the safety of their citizens in organizations
like the WHO.
This amendment makes a clear and uncompromising declaration of U.S.
support for Taiwan's candidacy for observer status in the WHO and
secures an even stronger commitment from President Bush and the State
Department in this regard. I urge the Bush Administration, which has
taken bold steps to assist Taiwan in the past, to bring this issue to a
vote at the World Health Assembly in May 2004.
Mr. Chairman, the SARS crisis further highlights the urgency of
combating disease on a global scale. It is apparent that until Taiwan's
23 million citizens become members of the WHO, they will continue to be
deprived of the critical assistance needed to fight infectious disease
and safeguard its people from harm.
Today, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this amendment, which
protects the health interests of the people of Taiwan and ensures that
they will not fall victim to the next global health crisis.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of an
amendment to support human rights in Vietnam. This important amendment
will impose a significant penalty on the dictators in Hanoi for their
ongoing and egregious persecution of their own people.
During the 107th Congress, I introduced H.R. 2833, legislation
designed to address the human rights situation in Vietnam. It passed
the House by an overwhelming 410-1 margin, but stalled in the Senate.
This year, I introduced nearly identical legislation, H.R. 1587, with
30 original cosponsors.
Many felt that the ratification of the Bilateral Trade Agreement with
Vietnam in 2001 would lead to an improvement in human rights.
Unfortunately, the human rights situation in Vietnam has deteriorated
dramatically since this agreement, especially for Montagnard Christians
in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. Legislation to address the serious
human rights situation is needed now more than ever.
In late 2002 the Government of Vietnam launched a fresh wave of
arrests and crackdowns against peaceful critics of the Vietnamese
government, its policy of repression, and its corrupt practices.
Unfortunately, Dr. Nguyen Dan Que, one of the country's greatest human
rights leaders who has already endured two lengthy prison sentences,
was arrested on March 17. This is a government that consistently
pursues a policy of harassment, discrimination, and intimidation, and,
increasingly in the last three years, imprisonment and other forms of
detention, against those who peacefully express dissent from
government's extreme policies against religion and freedom. This is a
government that punishes not just individuals who oppose them, but also
often their family members.
At its Seventh Plenum in January 2003, the Communist Party's Central
Committee issued a resolution calling for the establishment of cells of
Communist Party members within each of Vietnam's six approved religions
in order to foil ``hostile forces.'' All religious groups in Vietnam
face great restrictions and suffer some form of persecution.
To address these and other abuses, my amendment, based on the text of
H.R. 1587: requires the President to issue a certification each year on
the progress of the regime towards respecting human rights; prohibits
an increase in nonhumanitarian U.S. assistance unless the regime shows
improvement; seeks to fund the efforts of NGOs who promote democracy in
Vietnam and help to overcome the jamming of Radio Free Asia; helps
ensure continued access of refugees to our refugee resettlement
programs; and requires the State Department to give detailed reports
about the status of human rights in Vietnam that include victims lists.
Unfortunately, the list of human rights abuses carried out by the
regime goes on and on. Buddhists, Protestants, Catholics and members of
indigenous Vietnamese religions are subject to persecutions that
include detention and imprisonment of both religious leaders and
believers, church closings, and confiscation of religious and personal
property. One of the most courageous religious leaders imprisoned is
Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Catholic priest.
Tens of thousands of children suffer exploitation as workers and many
Vietnamese suffer

[[Page H6812]]

under the government's official export labor program, in which the
government forces its own people to endure involuntary servitude and
debt bondage.
As Chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, I am
particularly concerned about the continued persecution of the
Montagnards, who were some of our greatest allies during the war. Many
of our pilots are alive today and have families because they were
rescued by Montagnards after bailing out of downed aircraft. We receive
numerous and credible reports that allege that Montagnards are being
imprisoned, tortured and systematically relocated to infertile lands by
the Communist Party leaders in retaliation for their past loyalty to
America. This past December, Vietnamese soldiers reportedly threatened
to shoot Montagnard Christians if they celebrated Christmas, and
several were arrested and tortured.
I would like to submit the findings of H.R. 1587, which lay out a
more complete case of Human Rights in Vietnam, to the Congressional
Record. They were kept out of this amendment because of their length,
but they speak loudly with respect to the regime and the world about
the egregious human rights abuses occurring in Vietnam.
Vietnam's continued policy of harassment, discrimination,
intimidation, and persecution of religious and human rights leaders is
shameful. The Vietnam Human Rights amendment in the State Department
Authorization Bill sends as strong a message that this persecution and
tyranny will not be tolerated.

Findings From H.R. 1587, ``The Vietnam Human Rights Act''

Congress finds the following:
(1) Viet Nam is a one-party state, ruled and controlled by
the Vietnamese Communist Party.
(2)(A) The Government of Viet Nam denies the people of Viet
Nam the right to change their government and prohibits
independent political, social, and labor organizations.
(B) The Government of Viet Nam prohibits and hinders the
formation of civil society in Viet Nam.
(3)(A) The Government of Viet Nam consistently pursues a
policy of harassment, discrimination, and intimidation, and
sometimes of imprisonment and other forms of detention,
against those who peacefully express dissent from government
or party policy. This policy includes collectively punishing
family members of individuals targeted for persecution. A
government decree allows detention without trial for 6 months
to 2 years.
(B) Following the United States ratification of the
Bilateral Trade Agreement with Viet Nam in 2001, the human
rights situation in Viet Nam has remained extremely poor. For
certain groups, such as the Montagnards, and other ethnic
minorities in Central and North Vietnam, conditions have
deteriorated dramatically. In late 2002, the Government of
Viet Nam launched a fresh wave of arrests and crackdowns
against peaceful critics of the Vietnamese Government, its
policy of repression, and its corrupt practices.
(C) Recent victims of such mistreatment, which violates the
rights to freedom of expression and association recognized in
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, include Dr. Nguyen
Dan Que, a leading human rights activist who was arrested on
March 17, 2003, and has already served two lengthy prison
sentences, Dr. Nguyen Thanh Giang, Most Venerable Thich Huyen
Quang, Most Venerable Thich Quang Do, linguist Tran Khue,
businessman Nguyen Khac Toan, journalist Nguyen Vu Binh,
publicist Le Chi Quang, writer Hoang Tien, military historian
Pham Que Duong, Hoang Minh Chinh, Tran Dung Tien, Hoang Trong
Dung, Nguyen Vu Viet, Nguyen Truc Cuong, Nguyen Thi Hoa, Vu
Cao Quan, Nguyen The Dam, Nguyen Thi Thanh Xuan, Father Chan
Tin, author Duong Thu Huong, poet Bui Minh Quoc, Dr. Nguyen
Xuan Tu (Ha Si Phu), Dr. Pham Hong Son, Mai Thai Linh, Most
Venerable Thich Huyen Quang, Most Venerable Thich Quang Do,
Father Nguyen Van Ly, Pastor Nguyen Lap Ma, Father Phan Van
Loi, numerous leaders of the Hoa Hao Buddhist Church and of
independent Protestant churches, and an undetermined number
of members of the Montagnard ethnic minority groups who
participated in peaceful demonstrations in the Central
Highlands of Viet Nam during February 2001.
(4) The Government of Viet Nam systematically deprives its
citizens of the fundamental right or organized religious
activities outside the state's control. Although some freedom
of worship is permitted, believers are forbidden to
participate in religious activities except under
circumstances rigidly defined and controlled by the
Government:
(A)(i) In April, 1999 the Government issued a Decree
Concerning Religious Activities, which declared in pertinent
part that ``[a]ll activities using religious belief in order
to oppose the State of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, to
prevent the believers from carrying out civic
responsibilities, to sabotage the union of all the people,
and against the health culture of our nation, as well as
superstitious activities, will be punished in conformity with
the law''.
(ii) All public religious activities must be approved by
the Government in advance. The United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom in October 2002 recommended
that Viet Nam be classified as a country of particular
concern. At its Seventh Plenum in January 2003, the Communist
Party's Central Committee issued a resolution calling for the
establishment of cells of Communist Party members within each
of Vietnam's 6 approved religions in order to foil ``hostile
forces''.
(B)(i) The Unified Buddhist Church of Viet Nam (UBCV), the
largest religious denomination in the country, has been
declared illegal by the Government, and over the last 27
years its clergy have often been imprisoned and subjected to
other forms of persecution. The Patriarch of the Unified
Buddhist Church, 85-year-old Most Venerable Thich Huyen
Quang, has been detained for 25 years in a ruined temple in
an isolated area of central Viet Nam.
(ii) Most Venerable Thich Quang Do, the Executive President
of the Unified Buddhist Church, has also been in various
forms of detention since 1977, and was recently rearrested
and placed under house arrest after he had proposed to bring
Most Venerable Thich Huyen Quang to Saigon for medical
treatment.
(iii) Many other leading Buddhist figures, including Thich
Hai Tang, Thich Khong Tanh, Thich Thai Hoa, Thich Tue Si,
Thich Quang Hue, Thich Tam An, Thich Nguyen Ly, Thich Thanh
Huyen, Thich Thong Dat, Thich Chi Mau, Thich Chi Thang, Thich
Chon Niem, Thich Thanh Quang are under tight surveillance.
Several members of the UBCV have fled to Cambodia
(C)(i) The Hao Hoa Buddhist Church was also declared to be
illegal until 1999, when the Government established an
organization which purports to govern the Hao Hoa. According
to the United States Commission on International Religious
Freedom, ``[t]his organization is made up almost entirely of
Communist Party members and apparently is not recognized as
legitimate by the vast majority of Hao Hoas . . .
[n]evertheless, [this government-sponsored organization] has
sought to control all Hao Hoa religious activity,
particularly at the Hao Hoa village, which is the center of
Hao Hoa religious life''.
(ii)(I) Hao Hoa believers who do not recognize the
legitimacy of the government organization are denied the
right to visit the Hao Hoa village, to conduct traditional
religious celebrations, or to display Hao Hoa symbols. Many
have been arrested and subjected to administrative detention,
and several Hao Hoa have been sentenced to prison terms for
protesting these denials of religious freedom.
(II) The Government interferes with Hao Hoa efforts to
conduct charitable works, and prohibits public celebration to
commemorate the founder's disappearance as well as the
distribution of the founder's teachings. The Government
controls greatly the leadership selection process of the
Cao Dais, another indigenous Vietnamese religion.
(III) At least the following Hao Hoa believers are known to
be in prison or house detention: Ha Hai, Tran Van Be Cao,
Tran Nguyen Huon, Phan Thi Tiem, Le Quang Liem, Nguyen Van
Dien, Le Minh Triet, and Vo Van Thanh Liem.
(D)(i) Independent Protestants, most of whom are members of
ethnic minority groups, are subjected to particularly harsh
treatment by the Government of Viet Nam. According to the
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom,
such treatment includes ``police raids on homes and house
churches, detention, imprisonment, confiscation of religious
and personal property, physical and psychological abuse, and
fines for engaging in unapproved religious activities (such
as collective worship, public religious expression and
distribution of religious literature, and performing
baptisms, marriages, or funeral services) . . . [i]n
addition, it is reported that ethnic Hmong Protestants have
been forced by local officials to agree to abandon their
faith''.
(ii)(I) According to human rights activists in Viet Nam, 2
secret central plans--Plan 184A and 184B--issued in 1999 by
the Communist Party to combat Protestant believers were fully
implemented throughout the country, and led to a crackdown on
the Protestant movement, especially in the Central and
Northern Highland areas.
(II) An estimated 14,000 Christians fled from the North to
the Central Highlands in the past 5 years. According to the
Southern Evangelical Church of Viet Nam, the Government of
Viet Nam forcibly closed 354 of the 412 churches in Dak Lak
province, 56 pastors from the Central Highlands have
disappeared, and at least 43 evangelical Montagnards have
been sentenced to prison. Freedom House has reported on the
beating death of Hmong Christian Mua Bua Senh by police
authorities.
(E)(i) Other religious organizations, such as the Catholic
Church, are formally recognized by the Government but are
subjected to pervasive regulation which violates the right to
freedom of religion. For instance, the Catholic Church is
forbidden to appoint its own bishops without Government
consent, which is frequently denied, to accept seminarians
without specific official permission, and to profess Catholic
doctrines which are inconsistent with Government policy.
Government restrictions on the seminary process have caused a
severe shortage of priests.
(ii) A Catholic priest, Father Nguyen Van Ly, was arrested
in March 2001 and remains in detention after submitting
written testimony to the United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom. On October 19, 2001, he was
sentenced to a total of 20 years of imprisonment and house
arrest; the

[[Page H6813]]

trial in Hue took place closed to the public and without a
defense lawyer.
(iii) In October 2002, the Vietnamese Bishops Conference
took an unprecedented step when they protested to the
National Assembly about the persecutions endured by Catholic
ethnic minorities.
(F) The Government has also confiscated numerous churches,
temples, and other properties belonging to religious
organizations. The vast majority of these properties--even
those belonging to religious organizations formally
recognized by the Government--have never been returned.
(5)(A) Since 1975 the Government of Viet Nam has persecuted
veterans of the Army of the Republic of Viet Nam and other
Vietnamese who had opposed the Viet Cong insurgency and the
North Vietnamese invasion of South Viet Nam. Such persecution
typically included substantial terms in ``re-education
camps'', where detainees were often subjected to torture and
other forms of physical abuse, and in which many died.
(B) Re-education camp survivors and their families were
often forced into internal exile in ``New Economic Zones''.
Many of these former allies of the United States, as well as
members of their families, continue until the present day to
suffer various forms of harassment and discrimination,
including denial of basic social benefits and exclusion from
higher education and employment.
(6)(A) The Government of Viet Nam has been particularly
harsh in its treatment of members of the Montagnard ethnic
minority groups of the central Highlands of Viet Nam, who
were the first line in the defense of South Viet Nam against
invasion from the North and who fought courageously beside
members of the Special Forces of the United States, suffering
disproportionately heavy casualties, and saving the lives of
many of their American and Vietnamese comrades-in-arms.
(B) Since 1975 the Montagnard peoples have been singled out
for severe repression, in part because of their past
association with the United States and in part because their
strong commitment to their traditional way of life and to
their Christian religion is regarded as inconsistent with the
absolute loyalty and control demanded by the Communist
system. The Government employs a policy of assimilation and
oppression against the Montagnards, forcibly displacing them
from their ancestral lands to make way for North Vietnamese
settlers, coffee plantations, and logging operations.
(C) Between February and March 2001, several thousand
members of the mountain tribes Djarai, Bahnar, and Rhade from
the provinces of Pleiku, Gialai, and Daklak took part in a
series of peaceful demonstrations to demand the release of 2
Montagnard Christians, religious freedom and restoration of
their confiscated lands. The Government responded by closing
off the Central Highlands and sending in military forces,
tanks and helicopter gunships. Hundreds of demonstrators were
injured. Altogether, more than 200 people, among them 60
evangelical priests and tribal chieftains, were arrested.
Some regions of the Central Highlands remain closed to
journalists and foreign diplomats.
(D) Credible reports by refugees who have escaped to
Cambodia indicate that the Government has executed some
participants in the demonstrations and has subjected others
to imprisonment, torture, and other forms of physical abuse.
(E) The Government of Viet Nam has also taken steps to
prevent further Montagnards from escaping, and there are
credible reports that Vietnamese security forces in Cambodia
are offering bounties for the surrender of Montagnard asylum
seekers.
(F) According to Human Rights Watch, in December 2002 `[The
Government] arrested or detained dozens of highlanders and
banned Christmas church services in order to prevent minority
Christians from gathering. Six highlanders were detained
during the third week in December in Krong Ana and Cu Jut
districts, Dak Lak, during Christmas prayer services, while
another eight were taken into custody as they are attempting
to cross the border to Cambodia. Villagers throughout the
Central Highlands were warned they would face fines and even
imprisonment if they organized Christmas services. In many
areas authorities banned gatherings of four or more people'.
(7) The Government of Viet Nam has also persecuted members
of other ethnic minority groups, including the Khmer Kron
from the Mekong Delta, many of whom fought alongside United
States military personnel during the Viet Nam war and whose
Hinayana Buddhist religion is not among those recognized by
the Government.
(8) The Government of Viet Nam also engages in or condones
serious violations of the rights of workers. In August 1997,
the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) reported that
child labor exploitation is on the rise in Viet Nam with tens
of thousands of children under 15 years of age being subject
to such exploitation. The government's official labor export
program also has subject workers, many of whom are women, to
involuntary servitude, debt bondage, and other forms of
abuse, and the reaction of government officials to worker
complaints of such abuse has been to threaten the workers
with punishment if they do not desist in their complaints.
The government of Viet Nam has made some minor efforts to
improve this situation, but enforcement of child labor laws
remains weak, and the child exploitation still persists.
(9)(A) United States refugee resettlement programs for
Vietnamese nationals, including the Orderly Departure Program
(ODR), the Resettlement Opportunities for Returning
Vietnamese (ROVR) program, and resettlement of boat people
from refugee camps throughout Southeast Asia, were authorized
by law in order to rescue Vietnamese nationals who have
suffered persecution on account of their wartime associations
with the United States, as well as those who currently have a
well-founded fear of persecution on account of race,
religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a
particular social group.
(B) In general, these programs have served their purposes
well. However, many refugees who were eligible for these
programs were unfairly denied or excluded, in some cases by
vindictive or corrupt Communist officials who controlled
access to the programs, and in others by United States
personnel who imposed unduly restrictive interpretations of
program criteria. These unfairly excluded refugees include
some of those with the most compelling cases, including many
Montagnard combat veterans and their families.
(C) The Department of State has agreed to extend the
September 30, 1994, registration deadline for former United
States employees, ``re-reduction'', survivors, and surviving
spouses spouses of those who did not survive ``re-education''
camps to sign for United States refugee programs.
(D) The Department of State has agreed to resume the
Vietnamese In-Country Priority One Program in Viet Nam to
provide protection to victims of persecution on account of
race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership
in a particular social group who otherwise have no access to
the Orderly Departure Program.
(E) The Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Service in
the Department of Homeland Security has agreed to resume the
processing of former United States employees under the U11
program, which had been unilaterally suspended by the United
States Government.
(F) The Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Service has
agreed to review the applications of Americans, children of
America servicemen left behind in Viet Nam after the war
ended in April 1975, for resettlement to the United States
under the Amerasian Homecoming Act of 1988..
(10) The Government of Viet Name systematically jams
broadcasts by Radio Free Asia, and indepdent broadcast
service funded by the United States in orderly to provide
news and entertainment to the people of countries in Asia
whose government deny the right to freedom of expression and
of the press.
(11) In 1995 the Governments of the United States and Viet
Nam announced the ``normalization'' of diplomatic relations.
In 1998 then-President Clinton waived the application of
section 402 of the Trade Act of 1974 (commonly) known as the
``Jackson-Vanik Amendments'', which restircts economic
assistance to countries with non-market economies whose
government also restrict freedom of emigration. In 1999 the
Governments of the United States and Viet Nam announced ``an
agreement in principle,'' on a bilateral trade agreement.
This agreement was signed in 2000 and came into effect on
December 10, 2001.
(12) The Congress and the American People are united in
their determination that the extension or expansion of trade
relations with a country whose Government engaged in serious
and systematic violations of fundamental human rights must be
considered as a statement of approval or complacency about
such practices. The promotion of freedom and democracy around
the world--and particularly for people who have suffered in
large part because of their past association with the United
States and because they share our values--is and must
continue to be a central objective of United States foreign
policy.
Mr. ISSA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Hunter
amendment. This amendment is critically important in both its timing
and substance. The beaches of San Diego County are suffering from a
massive pollution problem that has crippled the tourism industry and
disrupted the lives of thousands of beach enthusiasts. For the past few
years, pollution has forced San Diego County beaches to close for as
many as 200 days of the year. This problem originates from an estimated
60 million gallons of raw sewage that is pumped into the Tijuana River
in Mexico on a daily basis. The problem has grown from a minor
annoyance to a major health crisis.
I find it frustrating that this problem was to have been addressed by
the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) in 2000, yet
little has been done since then. On September 12, 2000, the House
passed the Tijuana River Valle Estuary and Beach Sewage Cleanup Act,
which required the IBWC to negotiate a resolution to this problem with
the government of Mexico. So what has been happening these past three
years? A review of the progress on this project is a frustrating lesson
in the damage that an ineffective and slow-moving bureaucracy can do to
a good idea.
The IBWC opposed the idea of building a wastewater treatment plant in
Mexico because they insisted on maintaining total control over the
project. They demanded the authority and the extra money they felt they
needed to build it on the U.S. side of the border. In their effort

[[Page H6814]]

to develop this plant, the IBWC completely lost financial control of
the project, forcing Congress to cap it at $239 million--over $100
million more than had been authorized for the project. Despite the
massive cost overrun, the plant still did not meet U.S. Clean Water Act
standards and may soon be forced to close as a result of numerous Clean
Water Act violations.
In an attempt to find an innovative solution to this problem, the
House authorized a public-private partnership that will keep the cost
for a new plant low, while meeting the need to provide water treatment
for the City of Tijuana. Furthermore, an estimated 56 percent of
Tijuana's water needs will be met by reclaimed water from this proposed
plant. More importantly, this project will be built in Mexico, at the
source of the problem and it will be built quicker and cheaper than any
public-only alternative.
This amendment requires the IBWC to make this project a priority and
finally, after 70 years of misery for San Diego beach communities, end
the pollution problem that has damaged our coastline. This project is
critical for the future of San Diego County, and it is critical for
California. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I am grateful to the Rules Committee for
making this amendment in order that I might take this opportunity to
lend the support of Congress to the Office of Children's Issues who
will now act as the central authority on the Hague Convention on
intercountry adoption. This office will act in the best interest of the
child and the families by facilitating the placement of children in
permanent homes while making certain that the strictest protection
guidelines are in place throughout the process.
There are too many children in this country and abroad who are
growing up without a family. Tonight, around the world, no one knows
how many children will go to bed in orphanages. There is no United
State agency or international organization that counts the number of
children who are warehoused in institutions. The U.S. has proven that
it has an interest in and the ability to adopt children that would
otherwise grow up without a family in their own country. This year the
State Department expects that 21-25 thousand children will be brought
to this country and placed in permanent, loving homes. That number
speaks of a huge victory in the fight for abandoned children throughout
the world. The numbers prove that the office of Children's Issues could
be a powerful ally in the fight against the harmful
institutionalization of children worldwide. Unfortunately, some
powerful international organizations believe that, with respect to the
child, even institutionalization is better than adoption outside a
child's home country. While everyone would hope that a child could find
a loving, permanent family within their home country, we recognize that
intercountry adoption may offer the advantage of a permanent family to
a child for whom a suitable family cannot be found in his or her
country of origin.
The office of Children's Issues will soon assume their new
responsibility as the central authority for the Hague Convention. In
this capacity, they will act to assist in the placement of children
into families of this country while working to protect those children
who are at risk for exploitation in vulnerable regions of the world.
This office will also increase our nation's ability to protect children
by establishing a system by which agencies may be accredited to ensure
a transparent placement process. As such, understanding that it must
take measures to ensure that intercountry adoptions are made in the
best interest of the child, the office will not only work to ensure
that all of these adoptions are conducted with respect to the
fundamental rights of the child, they will also work to prevent the
abduction of, sale of, or trafficking in children.
In this new role, the office will find their duties greatly expanded
and we hope that this amendment will express the support of Congress
not only to the efforts of the State Department on behalf of
intercountry adoption, but also to the Commerce, Justice, and State
Appropriations Committee whose job it will be to ensure that the Office
of Children's Issues has sufficient resources to continue their work on
behalf of the millions of children in orphanages throughout the world.
I am thankful to the Chairman for his support of the amendment and
would urge Members who wish to support the State Department's role in
intercountry adoptions to also support the amendment.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, Imperial Beach, the city
which is the brilliant cornerstone on the Southwestern point of our
country, has a beautiful beach as well as a unique location. However,
for too many days of the year, this natural resource cannot be enjoyed
by its children, families, and visitors.
Unfortunately, the burgeoning city of Tijuana located just across the
border and the source of the Tijuana River lacks adequate sewage
treatment. As a result, particularly when rain falls on the mesas and
canyons along this border, raw sewage and other pollutants are washed
into the Tijuana River, flow across the Tijuana Estuary on the Imperial
Beach side of the border, and empty into the Pacific Ocean just next to
the beautiful sand of Imperial Beach.
Congress enacted Public Law 106-457 in 2000 to authorize the
International Boundary and Water Commission, composed of
representatives of both the United States and Mexico, to complete a new
Treaty Minute for creation of a public-private partnership to construct
and operate a wastewater treatment facility in Mexico. However, this
has not occurred.
As members of Congress, our San Diego delegation has sought to
resolve this issue through repeated questions of members of the IBWC.
However, they have not been forthcoming. Therefore, this amendment is
needed to make completion of this agreement not only obligatory but
also to require monthly reports from that Commission on its progress to
the appropriate congressional committees.
The community of Imperial Beach has been prevented from fully using
its natural resource for too many years. It is time to require action.
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is intended to highlight a
troubling situation in Indonesia.
On August 31, 2002, the staff of the International School in West
Papua, Indonesia decided to take a picnic. The teachers lived and
worked in Tembagapura, a company town located high in the mountains
near the Grasberg gold and copper mine. The group of eleven people,
including a six-year old child, drove in two vehicles to a picnic site
about ten miles away on the road to Timika. Because it began to rain,
they decided to return to town for lunch.
The road they were traveling on is not an ordinary road. The road is
surrounded by the gold and copper mine, and is heavily guarded by the
Indonesian military. At both ends of this mountain road are military
check points, which seals the road and control access to Tembagapura.
As they returned home, the group was brutally attacked by a band of
terrorists. Two Americans, Ted Burgon (from Oregon) and Rick Spier
(from Colorado), and an Indonesian man were killed in the ambush. The
attack, which occurred less than a half-mile away from an Indonesian
military check point, went on for approximately 45 minutes. Hundreds of
rounds were fired at the teachers and their vehicles. Most of the
survivors, including the six-year old child, were shot. Several of the
teachers were shot multiple times and suffered horrible injuries.
Ted Burgon of Sunriver, Oregon was killed and his wife Nancy suffered
facial cuts and abrasions. Rick Spier of Littleton, Colorado was
killed, and his wife Patsy was shot in the back and foot. Francine
Goodfriend of Rockford, Illinois was shot and has a spinal cord injury.
Steven Emma of Broward County, Florida was shot in the legs, buttocks,
and suffered injuries to his back. Lynn Poston of Olga, Washington was
shot in the shoulder and legs. Suandra Hopkins of Sunriver, Oregon was
shot in the side, legs, and pellets around the eye and his wife Taia
was shot in the buttocks.
Following the attack, the Indonesian Police promptly began in
investigation. They collected evidence, interviewed witnesses and
reconstructed the ambush. The Indonesian Police issued a report (that I
ask for unanimous consent to submit for the record) concluding, ``there
is a strong possibility that the Tembagapura case was perpetrated by
members of the Indonesian National Army Force, however, it still needs
to be investigated further.''
In early November 2002, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that
``United States intelligence agencies have intercepted messages between
Indonesian army commanders indicating that they were involved in
staging an ambush at the remote mine in which three school teachers,
two of them Americans, were killed. . . .'' The Washington Post has
reported these same intelligence intercepts.
Despite this intelligence, the investigation of the attack has
faltered. The Indonesian Police have been effectively removed from the
case due to their report that implicated the military. The two senior
Indonesian police officers who uncovered evidence of the army's
involvement have been transferred to new posts, and the investigation
has now been handed over to a joint military police team. Not
surprisingly, the Indonesian military has exonerated itself. American
investigative teams, including the FBI, have not been able to complete
their investigations due mainly to the Indonesian military's refusal to
cooperate and its tampering of evidence.
The evasions and obstructions of the Indonesian military are wholly
unacceptable, and it is incumbent upon this Congress to see that a
thorough investigation is conducted. The victims of this brutal attack
deserve no less. My amendment is, therefore, intended to ensure

[[Page H6815]]

that the perpetrators of this heinous crime against Americans are
brought to justice. To the extent that the Indonesian military was
involved, the United States should insist on criminal prosecution of
all involved parties.
My amendment would limit Indonesia from receiving International
Military Education and Training (IMET) funds until the President
certifies to Congress that the Government of Indonesia and the
Indonesian Armed Forces are taking effective measures, including
cooperating with the Director of the FBI, in conducting a full
investigation of the attack and to criminally prosecute the individuals
responsible for the attack.
My amendment will not prohibit the United States from continuing to
conduct programs or training with the Indonesian Armed Forces,
including counter-terrorism training, officer visits, port visits, or
educational exchanges that are being conducted on the date of enactment
it would prevent future exchanges.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is important. It gives voice to our
commitment that the United States will hold accountable the
perpetrators and protectors of terrorism. We will exhaust every means
to protect our citizens. We will pursue terrorists wherever they may be
and hold to account. We will demand justice for attacks against our
citizens and withhold aid from those countries that do not cooperate in
bringing terrorists to justice. As President Bush has stated, ``if you
are not with us you are against us.'' It is time for Indonesia to
choose who it will align itself with, the terrorists or the coalition
of nations that bring them to justice.
Make no mistake, a vote against this amendment is a vote against
holding nations accountable for terrorist attacks.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question
is on the amendments en bloc, as modified, offered by the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).
The amendments en bloc, as modified, were agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment
No. 17 printed in House Report 108-206.

Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Hostettler

Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment made in order
under the rule.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

1Amendment No. 17 offered by Mr. Hostettler:
Page 70, after line 2, insert the following new section
(and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 231. ISSUANCE OF CONSULAR IDENTIFICATION CARDS BY
FOREIGN MISSIONS.

(a) Issuance of Consular Identification Cards.--The
Congress finds that foreign governments have been issuing
consular identification cards to foreign nationals in the
United States for purposes other than those intended by the
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (done at Vienna on 24
April 1963).
(b) Issuance of Consular Identification Cards.--The
issuance by foreign missions of consular identification cards
shall be considered a benefit to a foreign mission under
section 203(2) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act
of 1956 and shall be regulated by the Secretary in accordance
with this section and section 204 of that Act.
(c) Authority to Issue Regulations.--Not later than 180
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of State shall issue regulations consistent with
this section with respect to the issuance by foreign missions
in the United States of consular identification cards to
foreign nationals residing in the United States.
(d) Content of Regulations.--Regulations referred to in
subsection (c) shall include the following restrictions and
requirements:
(1) Notification to the united states government.--A
foreign mission shall notify the Secretary of State of each
consular identification card issued within the United States,
including the name and current address within the United
States of the recipient of a card.
(2) Issuance to bona fide citizens of the country of
origin.--A foreign mission may issue a consular
identification card only to a national of the country
represented by the foreign mission. Foreign missions shall
establish procedures to verify the nationality of card
recipients through either national birth registry systems or
voter registration identification systems, and bona fide
documents such as a passport issued by the country of origin.
(3) Maintenance of accurate and complete records.--A
foreign mission shall maintain at the mission complete and
accurate records of all consular identification cards issued
and shall maintain an automated record system that contains
such records in a manner that can be rapidly accessed to
prevent duplicate or fraudulent issuance of such cards.
(4) Address change notification requirement.--A foreign
mission shall require card recipients to notify the foreign
mission of any change of address within 30 days after such
address change.
(5) Access to audit records.--At the request of the
Secretary of State, a foreign mission shall make available
for audit and review, by the Secretary or the Inspector
General of the Department of State, the records of all
consular identification cards issued.
(e) Failure to Adhere to Regulations.--
(1) If the Secretary of State determines that a foreign
mission has issued consular identification cards in violation
of the requirements of regulations related to the issuance of
such cards by foreign missions and such violation potentially
threatens the security of the United States or facilitates
fraudulent or criminal acts, the Secretary of State shall
notify the government of the country represented by the
foreign mission that the foreign mission must suspend the
issuance of consular identification cards until compliance
with applicable regulations is established.
(2) If the foreign mission of a country fails to suspend
issuance of consular identification cards in accordance with
a notification under paragraph (1), the Secretary of State
shall direct consular officials in that country to cease the
issuance of immigrant or nonimmigrant visas, or both, to
nationals of that country until such time as the Secretary of
State determines that the foreign mission of that country is
in compliance with the requirements of regulations related to
the issuance of such cards by foreign missions.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler) and the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Menendez) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
This amendment establishes, Mr. Chairman, requirements that must be
met by foreign governments in issuing consular identification cards in
the United States and authorizes the Secretary of State to regulate the
issuance of those documents.
In the last 2 years, foreign governments have issued more than 1.5
million consular cards in the United States. Recent testimony by the
FBI before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and
Claims, which I chair, highlights the need for such requirements. The
FBI explained that the most commonly issued of these cards are
vulnerable to fraud and forgery, posing both criminal threats and a
potential terrorist threat. The requirements set forth in the amendment
will address these flaws.
It is important to note that this amendment does not address the
acceptance of these documents in the United States, nor does it
prohibit their issuance so long as the foreign mission complies with
the requirements of the amendment. Rather, it simply extends the
Secretary of State's authority under the Foreign Missions Act to
regulate consulates to include their issuance of consular ID cards.
Further, this amendment does not violate our responsibilities under
the Vienna Convention. In light of these facts, I urge passage of the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, this amendment may seem by the way it was
just described rather innocuous, but it is rather outrageous. It is a
thinly veiled attempt to end something called the matricula consular.
To start with, this amendment could create a negative boomerang
effect on the United States. The amendment tells other countries'
consulates what they can and cannot do above and beyond existing law.
Do we want other countries to do the same to us? Do we want other
countries to tell our consulates how we can relate to our own citizens
abroad? This is an unprecedented attempt to change how a country can
relate to its own nationals in a host country. I think it is a patently
improper interpretation of the Foreign Missions Act and the Vienna
Convention on Consular Affairs. The amendment would set a dangerous
precedent for our embassies abroad.
But let me get to the core issue. This amendment is another anti-
immigration tactic designed to get rid of the

[[Page H6816]]

matricula consular. Basically, they have loaded this amendment with
requirements that are unreasonable for workers in this country to be
able to achieve. How can migrant workers be expected to notify their
own mission within 30 days every time they move? And we expect poor
people from rural areas to produce all of the records that they
suggest. This makes no sense. And then in a final attempt to completely
get rid of the matricula consular, they included a punishment so strong
that many countries might simply stop using it. If a country fails to
comply with these onerous provisions, the United States would stop
issuing immigrant and nonimmigrant visas. What country could take that
risk?
I do not quite understand it. I thought we had a victory collectively
in moving into the right way in our bilateral relations with Mexico.
This amendment takes us another step back. Over and over again, Members
on the other side of the aisle have shown their true feelings about
some of the issues on the Hispanic community, the immigrant
communities; and this amendment is no exception.
I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this outrageous and
dangerous amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), chairman of the Committee on
International Relations.
(Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, increasingly, foreign governments have been
lobbying localities in the United States to accept their consular cards
as valid identification. At least two countries now issue consular
cards in the U.S. for these purposes and many others are planning to do
so. No standards govern those cards, and there is little information on
which localities can rely in deciding whether to accept a country's
consular card. All this amendment does is clarify the Secretary of
State's power to ensure that issuance of these cards is rational and
safe.
By authorizing the Secretary of State to regulate these cards and
setting requirements that countries must meet in issuing the cards,
this amendment will allow localities to make informed decisions on
whether to accept such documents. Regulation of the cards will also
protect the American people from the risks that unregulated and
unreliable documents pose. Those risks were underscored recently by the
FBI, which determined that because of their vulnerability to fraud and
forgery, these cards pose criminal threats as well as a potential
terrorist threat. The requirements in this amendment will address those
threats by deterring fraud and improving the reliability of consular
identification cards.
The amendment also provides an enforcement mechanism that empowers
the Secretary of State to regulate consulates' compliance with these
requirements. It is appropriate to vest this responsibility in the
State Department. Not only does its Office of Foreign Missions
currently regulate the activities of foreign consulates in the U.S. but
the Department will also bring to this role its expertise in evaluating
foreign documents. This amendment is needed to allow the State
Department necessary authority to regulate foreign consulates in a
changing environment. For this reason, I urge passage of this
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I just would like to respond to my friend from New
Jersey who every time someone offers an amendment or a bill trying to
get a handle on illegal immigration, known as undocumented, where we
have God knows how many people in this country living in substandard
style because of the illegality of their presence, and it could be in
the millions, it does not mean there is some antipathy toward a racial
group or an ethnic group at all. It is just a feeble attempt to get a
handle on the borders of our country and who is here and who is not.

{time} 1700

The problem is not getting better. It is getting worse. But trying to
do something about it in good faith does not manifest the hostility at
all. We are all immigrants sooner or later or back far enough, but I
really resent the conclusion the gentleman draws that all Republicans
do not like people of different ethnicity. I would say just the
opposite.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I appreciate the chairman's concern. I resent the constant surge of
amendments that confront particularly a single community.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman
from California (Mr. Berman), senior member of the Committee on
International Relations who has worked on these issues.
(Mr. BERMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
I rise in very strong opposition to the amendment. I have to say to
the chairman of the committee, if this amendment were to pass, there
will be no such card and the issue of finding out where the
undocumented people are and who they are will not be enhanced one bit
because no one who is here in undocumented status will give their
accurate address if they know it is going to be turned over to the
administration for enforcement. So the amendment totally undermines the
goal of the chairman of the committee in his comments.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BERMAN. I have 20 seconds. Can I take it on the gentleman's time?
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say no card is better than a
misleading card.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, that is where I believe where a card which
truly reflects the identity of the person who is getting it, which this
card does, helps the police. It helps banks know to open checking
accounts, to stop loan sharks who are trying to put incredible
surcharges on remittances.
Most of all, it is the sanction of this amendment where they have the
gall to say that if the Mexican or any other government refuses to
comply with the State Department's guidelines, we will penalize any
employer in the United States who wanted to get specialized H-1B visa
for a Mexican national, anyone who has stayed in Mexico and waited in
line for 8 years, no nonimmigrant visas, no immigrant visas. What an
outrageous sanction for people who are abiding by the law, for American
employers and American families who are trying to reunite. The sanction
has no relationship whatsoever to the conduct the author of the
amendment is seeking to address.
I strongly urge the body to vote no.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.
In recent weeks we have held a number of hearings on the issue of
identity cards issued by foreign states to their nationals in the
United States. In these hearings, representatives of the Departments of
Justice, Homeland Security, and State have testified that they are
participating in an interagency working group that is studying the
issuance of these cards and developing a policy on their use. I look
forward to seeing the result of their work.
In the meantime, we have been presented with this very troublesome
amendment.
There are three very important reasons to oppose this amendment:
It will encourage fraud. This amendment lays out a policy for the
State Department to implement and part of that policy would be require
foreign states issuing these identity cards to provide the name and
address of every cardholder to the State Department. Knowing as we do
that many of these cards are held by undocumented aliens in the United
States, we can be sure that if the cardholders know that their address
is being sent to the United States government they will be less likely
to provide an accurate address.
This would totally undermine the benefits of these cards to state and
local law enforcement. We have to solve the problem of undocumented
aliens in this country, but in the meantime, undocumented aliens are
living in our states and cities.
Police Departments across the country have decided to accept this
card when other identification is not available. Having some form of ID
is better than having none.
This amendment tells the State Department to implement a policy on
these cards and then requires State to order another sovereign nation
to stop issuing cards to its own nationals if that foreign government
does not comply with the policy. While it is certainly our business to
decide what forms of identification we accept from foreign nationals,
it is not the business of our government to order another government to
stop issuing identification to its citizens.

[[Page H6817]]

Finally, under the Hostettler amendment, a foreign state's refusal to
comply with a State Department order to stop issuing identification to
its citizens would result in the State Department instituting a ban on
visas for the offending country. This makes absolutely no sense. Under
this logic, we would punish nationals of a country, refuse them visas
for which they qualify--for family reunification or to accept a job. We
would punish these lawful immigrants, their families, and U.S.
employers because some nationals of their country might have a
meaningless ID. This publishes those who follow the rule because there
are some who might not.
Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
It is bad for foreign policy; it is bad for domestic policy; and we
should reject it.
Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly).
(Mr. GALLEGLY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time.
Mr. Chairman, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security have
serious national security concerns regarding the issuance of consular
cards. The FBI concluded the matricula consular is not a reliable form
of identification due to the nonexistence of any means to verify the
true identity of the card holder. The FBI also testified that, although
there are many generations of the Mexican consular card, 90 percent of
those in circulation are the older generation, which are very
vulnerable to counterfeit and forgery.
The truth is that Poland, Mexico, Nicaragua, and other countries that
are trying to expand their consular ID programs in the United States
are doing so in an effort to allow illegal immigrants to receive
services to which they are not entitled. One service is the ability to
use such cards to board commercial airplanes. Mr. Chairman, this is a
dramatic step backwards toward the type of security we had before 9/11.
In addition, the six countries currently expanding the consular card
programs could easily be 60 in the next few years.
I strongly urge my colleagues to advocate that the United States
Federal Government, through the Department of State, regulate the
issuance of those cards.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) who resides and deals
with the border all the time.
(Mr. HINOJOSA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the
Hostettler-Gallegly amendment. It is a thinly veiled attack on the
consular ID card that has been used by the Embassy of Mexico for over
130 years, sometimes referred to as the Matricula Consular card.
Contrary to what the Hostettler-Gallegly amendment contends, Mexico
and other foreign governments have been issuing consular identification
cards to foreign nationals in the United States following precisely the
guidelines established by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
This amendment would constitute a violation of that convention.
Under that convention, consular function is established as
``performing any other functions entrusted to a consular post which are
not prohibited by the laws and regulations of the receiving state.''
There is no U.S. Federal law which forbids the issuance of consular ID
cards. In fact, the Treasury Department has issued regulations under
section 326 of the PATRIOT Act that would allow the financial
institutions to accept consular ID cards as valid forms of ID for the
purpose of opening accounts.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Hostettler/Gallegly
amendment. It is a thinly veiled attack on the Consular ID Card that
has been issued by the Embassy of Mexico for over 131 years, sometimes
referred to as the Matricula Consular card.
Contrary to what the Hostettler-Gallegly amendment contends, Mexico
and other foreign governments have been issuing consular identification
cards to foreign nationals in the United States following precisely the
guidelines established by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
This amendment would constitute a violation of that convention.
Under that convention, consular function is established as
``performing any other functions entrusted to a consular post which are
not prohibited by the laws and regulations of the receiving State.''
There is no U.S. Federal law which forbids the issuance of Consular ID
cards.
In fact, the Treasury Department has issued regulations under Section
326 of the PATRIOT Act that would allow financial institutions to
accept Consular ID cards as valid forms of ID for the purpose of
opening accounts. More than 100 financial institutions accept these
cards as valid forms of ID. Police Departments across the United States
praise the use of these cards, because they enable them to identify
foreign nationals.
The State Department adamantly opposes this amendment because an
Interagency Working Group is already working to address the issue of
Consular ID cards. Consequently, this amendment prejudges the outcome
of the Interagency Working Group's efforts.
The State Department also has reciprocity concerns. The U.S. does, in
certain instances, issue Consular ID cards to American nationals
overseas.
The State Department fears reciprocal retaliation from overseas if
the amendment were to pass.
These Consular ID cards are simply identification cards. They do not
legalize the status of any immigrant.
They cannot be used to obtain any immigration or citizenship benefits
such as work authorization or to obtain public benefits.
Their continued use, with consultations between the U.S. and Mexican
governments, will foster greater transparency and increase security in
the United States.
For these reasons and many others, I strongly urge my colleagues to
oppose this amendment.
Mr. BACA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Tancredo
Amendment.
I have always been a strong advocate of efforts that give Hispanics
and other minorities greater access to our financial services system.
Whether that means providing more financial literacy programs or
approving the use of the matricula consular card, we must do what it
takes to make sure that every person in this country can live the
American dream.
That is why I am here today.
When we look to the future, we have to make sure that it includes
people of all races and all colors. We must give all members of our
society the tools they need to fully participate and benefit from our
great democracy.
Unfortunately, there are those in this body who are trying to shut
the doors on our immigrant community.
They do not care that there are as many as 10 million American
households that do not have bank accounts. That is not acceptable.
Hispanics deserve the same opportunity others have to buy a home,
invest in a business, pay for a college education, and improve the
financial security of their families.
How do we do this? We do this by giving everyone the keys that open
the doors to our financial system.
Everyone deserves the opportunity to open a bank account or get a
credit card. We cannot have a society of ``haves'' and ``have-nots.''
That is why Arrowhead Credit Union in my district, Wells Fargo, Bank
of America, and credit unions and banks across the country support the
use of the matricula consular.
They understand that when you hurt our most vulnerable members of our
society, we all lose.
The support that financial institutions have given to these cards is
matched by the support we have received from local law enforcement
organizations.
In my district, the Rialto police department recently decided to
accept matricula consular cards, joining the police departments in
Chino, Colton, Fontana, Indio, Redlands, San Bernardino, and Upland.
There are now more than 100 law enforcement agencies in California
that accept the matricula card.
I trust our local law enforcement officers, our first responders, to
protect our communities. I urge you to do the same.
I urge all my colleagues to vote NO on the Hostettler/Gallegly/
Tancredo amendment.
Mr. SOLIS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this
amendment.
If passed, it would require the State Department to heavily regulate
foreign government's issuance of identification documents.
If the State Department determines that a foreign government is not
in compliance with the issued regulations, a foreign government could
have to suspend issuance of the identification documents and stop
issuing visas to individuals from that country altogether.
The amendment would violate the Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations and U.S. citizens living abroad.
If the U.S. does not acknowledge valid foreign IDs, others have no
obligation to recognize U.S. IDs.

[[Page H6818]]

It's clear to me that this amendment is an attack on the Mexican
consular ID and the millions of Mexicans living in the U.S. and
elsewhere who use it daily as a form of identification.
The matricula plays a vital role in our homeland security efforts by
enabling the reliable identification of millions of Mexicans living and
working in the United States.
800 police departments, various local governments, and at least 80
banks have accepted the matricula because it increases public safety,
national security, and our economic competitiveness.
Law enforcement understands that the matricula helps identify people,
including suspects, witnesses, and those who come forward to report
crimes and suspicious activities.
The matricula is a safe, secure form of identification.
It has a number of extremely sophisticated security features,
including a digitized photo, in-person consular interviews and review
of supporting documentation, as well as standards for supporting
documentation that are more demanding than those used for U.S.-
government issued IDs.
Acceptance of the Mexican consular ID has a proven track record of
increasing public safety.
Failure to recognize it would preclude millions of Mexicans living
and working in the U.S. to identify themselves and assist in our
homeland security efforts.
I urge my colleagues to vote against the Hostettler-Gallegly
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The question is on the
amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr.
Hostettler) will be postponed.

Sequential Votes Postponed In Committee Of The Whole

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. 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. 6
offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), amendment No. 7 offered
by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), amendment No. 8 offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher), and amendment No. 17
offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote.
Remaining votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Paul

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Paul) 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 pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 74,
noes 350, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 364]

AYES--74

Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Boozman
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Coble
Collins
Crane
Cubin
Culberson
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Duncan
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Foley
Forbes
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Gibbons
Goode
Hayes
Hostettler
Istook
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kingston
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
Miller (FL)
Moran (KS)
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Ney
Norwood
Obey
Otter
Paul
Pence
Platts
Pombo
Putnam
Renzi
Rogers (AL)
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryun (KS)
Schrock
Sessions
Shadegg
Shuster
Smith (MI)
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Weldon (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Young (AK)

NOES--350

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Ballance
Ballenger
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burns
Burr
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Case
Castle
Chocola
Clay
Clyburn
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fletcher
Ford
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall
Harman
Harris
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jenkins
John
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kirk
Kleczka
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murphy
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Northup
Nunes
Nussle
Oberstar
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Simmons
Simpson
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sweeney
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--10

Bartlett (MD)
Berkley
Chabot
Ferguson
Gephardt
Hayworth
Janklow
Jefferson
Johnson (CT)
Millender-
McDonald

Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney) (during the vote). Members are
reminded there are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.

{time} 1729

Messrs. McDERMOTT, LINDER, MATHESON, CASTLE, MEEKS of New York,
ABERCROMBIE, HOLT, and GRAVES changed their vote from ``aye'' to
``no.''
Messrs. NEY, KINGSTON, SMITH of Michigan, YOUNG of Alaska, SCHROCK,
PUTNAM, and CRANE changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

[[Page H6819]]

{time} 1730

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The pending business is the
demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 7 offered by the gentleman
from Iowa (Mr. King) 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 pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, the
remainder of this series will be conducted as 5-minute votes.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 187,
noes 237, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 365]

AYES--187

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Bonilla
Bonner
Boozman
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Collins
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Duncan
Dunn
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gibbons
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kline
LaHood
Latham
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Manzullo
McCotter
McCrery
McInnis
McIntyre
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Otter
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (MI)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Stenholm
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOES--237

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Ballance
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boehlert
Boehner
Bono
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Case
Castle
Clay
Clyburn
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Tom
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Goss
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Houghton
Hoyer
Hyde
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
John
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Simmons
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walsh
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn

NOT VOTING--10

Berkley
Emerson
Ferguson
Gephardt
Hayworth
Janklow
Jefferson
Johnson (CT)
Millender-McDonald
Spratt

{time} 1738

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mrs. Tauscher

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 8 offered by the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Tauscher) 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 pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 207,
noes 219, not voting 8, as follows:

[Roll No. 366]

AYES--207

Abercrombie
Allen
Andrews
Baird
Baldwin
Ballance
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Cannon
Capps
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Case
Clay
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cramer
Crane
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Ford
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gilchrest
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon
Graves
Green (TX)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
John
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kleczka
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Majette
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Osborne
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Petri
Pombo
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Rodriguez
Rohrabacher
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sweeney
Tanner
Tauscher
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weller
Wexler
Wilson (SC)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn

[[Page H6820]]

NOES--219

Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Baca
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capuano
Carson (OK)
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole
Collins
Cox
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Doolittle
Duncan
Emerson
English
Everett
Feeney
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goss
Granger
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hayes
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Hostettler
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy (MN)
Kildee
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Lampson
Lantos
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
McCotter
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Ortiz
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Pascrell
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sandlin
Saxton
Schrock
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stenholm
Strickland
Sullivan
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Velazquez
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--8

Berkley
Ferguson
Gephardt
Hayworth
Janklow
Jefferson
Millender-McDonald
Spratt

Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised that
there are two minutes remaining in the vote.

{time} 1751

Messrs. CARTER, SIMPSON, TANCREDO, OTTER, NEUGEBAUER, TERRY,
WHITFIELD, BURTON of Indiana, BROWN of South Carolina, Mrs. CUBIN,
Messrs. SHIMKUS, FEENEY, BRADY of Texas, NETHERCUTT, KIRK, Mrs. JOHNSON
of Connecticut and Mrs. BIGGERT changed their vote from ``aye'' to
``no.''
Mrs. KELLY, and Messrs. EDWARDS, THOMAS, RAHALL and ABERCROMBIE
changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Hostettler

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The pending business is the
demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler) on which further proceedings were
postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 367]

AYES--226

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bereuter
Berry
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Boozman
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carson (OK)
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole
Collins
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeLay
DeMint
Doolittle
Duncan
Dunn
Emerson
English
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (KY)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Manzullo
Marshall
Matheson
McCotter
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Portman
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ross
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (MI)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Stenholm
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Upton
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (PA)
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOES--198

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Ballance
Becerra
Bell
Berman
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bono
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Case
Clay
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Tom
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Green (TX)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hensarling
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
John
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kleczka
Kolbe
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lofgren
Lowey
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Ose
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Rahall
Rangel
Renzi
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weller
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn

NOT VOTING--10

Berkley
Ferguson
Gephardt
Hayworth
Janklow
Jefferson
Millender-McDonald
Smith (WA)
Spratt
Weldon (FL)

[[Page H6821]]

Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised there
are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.

{time} 1759

Mr. BAIRD changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

personal explanation

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman. As you know, I was absent today for
medical reasons. If I had been in attendance, I would have voted ``no''
on rollcall vote No. 364; ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 365; ``no'' on
rollcall vote No. 366; and ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 367.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment
No. 32 printed in House Report 108-206.

Amendment No. 32 Offered by Mr. Rangel

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

Amendment No. 32 offered by Mr. Rangel:
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
(and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. ____. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT HIV/AIDS IN CERTAIN COUNTRIES
OF THE CARIBBEAN REGION.

Section 1(f)(2)(B)(ii)(VII) of the State Department Basic
Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2651a(f)(2)(B)(ii)(VII))
is amended by inserting after ``Zambia,'' the following:
``Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize,
Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica, Montserrat, Saint Kitts and
Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Lucia,
Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Dominican Republic,''.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and a Member opposed (Mr.
Bereuter) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)

{time} 1800

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee)
and I have brought this amendment to this piece of legislation which
would expand the coverage of the $15 billion emergency plan for AIDS
relief to include 14 additional countries in the Caribbean.
Recently, the President had a very successful trip to Africa where,
in support of the African Growth and Opportunity Bill, he made it
abundantly clear that in order to be healthy trading partners with the
United States of America you had to be healthy, and the $15 billion was
an attempt to prevent and to provide cure for the ravaging epidemic
that has swept sub-Saharan Africa.
In addition to Africa, Haiti and Guyana were named. What we are
saying is that we have spent a lot of time and effort in trying to
build a better Caribbean basin initiative program where our friends in
the Caribbean can share in trade with the United States of America. The
leaders of the countries in this area believe that in order to get a
handle on this disease, which is the largest region second only to sub-
Saharan Africa, that you have to go beyond Guyana, you have to go
beyond Haiti; you have to have a comprehensive approach to this disease
in education, in prevention and in cure.
And so it makes a lot of sense, we think, that as we approach this
serious disease, that we give the leaders, especially the medical
leaders in this area, an opportunity to put their program to work.
Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Lee), who has spent most of her legislative career
trying to correct this disease, and I thank her for her effort, and I
ask unanimous consent that she be entitled to yield to whomever the
time would allow her to yield to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Isakson). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and
I want to thank the gentleman from New York for yielding me this time
and for his leadership and his commitment to addressing the HIV/AIDS
pandemic globally.
We passed very recently H.R. 1298, the United States Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003, and the
President signed this into law. This bill would expand the list of
countries which the HIV/AIDS response coordinator has directed funding
authority over.
Now, while USAID administers programs in some of the countries, such
as Jamaica and the Dominican Republic, the practical effect of this
amendment would be to highlight the Caribbean as a region that deserves
our special attention in the fight against the global AIDS pandemic. As
we look at the Caribbean, we must focus on the fact that the prevalence
rates are similar to what they were in sub-Saharan Africa before this
unbelievable explosion.
Today, over 500,000 people in the Caribbean are estimated to be
living with HIV and AIDS with prevalence rates in most countries
ranging from 1 to 3 percent. While it is clear that Africa, as the
epicenter of the AIDS pandemic, should be the focus of our global AIDS
initiative, we must be very clear and aware that the Caribbean is
poised to undergo a dramatic increase in the number of new AIDS cases,
with estimates of over 1 million people infected by 2010.
The Caribbean has, as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel)
indicated, the second largest population of persons affected outside of
sub-Saharan Africa with AIDS. And it is important that while he support
AIDS prevention and treatment efforts in Haiti and Guyana, two of the
hardest-hit countries respectively, we must also promote a regional
response to the epidemic rather than a piecemeal two-country strategy.
Such a response must also take into consideration the high volume of
mobility within the Caribbean due to labor force shifts and the tourism
industry.
We have a moral obligation to act not only because of the devastation
that the AIDS pandemic has and will cause, but also because of our
close connection to the Caribbean region and its people, as there are
nearly 23 million Caribbean immigrants residing in the United States
today; and over 10 million people from the United States visit the
Caribbean annually.
The Rangel-Lee amendment does not preclude other countries from
receiving funding, it does not authorize new funding, and will not
steer an arbitrary level of funding to go to the Caribbean. It merely
adds CARICOM countries and the Dominican Republic to the list of
countries the HIV/AIDS response coordinator will oversee so that we can
better coordinate our response to the pandemic in the Caribbean region.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. LEE. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the Rangel-Lee
amendment. I think it is a very constructive contribution to our global
fight against AIDS, and I urge all of our colleagues to do so.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I did claim the time in opposition, although I recognize the efforts
and interests on the part of the gentleman from New York and the
gentlewoman from California, and I respect the contribution just made
by the ranking member of the committee. They want to focus more
attention on HIV/AIDS in the Caribbean region. That is understandable.
Actually, the authorizing legislation focuses not just on Africa, not
sub-Saharan Africa only, but also specifically mentions the Caribbean,
the only other part of the world mentioned beyond sub-Saharan Africa.
It is a growing problem in the island nations and the coastal
countries of the Caribbean, no doubt about it; and this would add 13
countries to the list of two Caribbean countries already identified by
the President as focus countries. Under PL 180-25, the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS Act, it provides the President with the
authority to add additional countries to the list of countries under
the purview of the coordinator.
I would have to say to the gentleman from New York that this does not
expand the coverage because there are no

[[Page H6822]]

limits on the number of countries that may be assisted; but it does
place those countries listed, illustrative countries, as being under
the purview of the coordinator to give special attention. It actually
puts more control by the White House through the coordinator on any of
those that are listed. And if the gentleman expands that list, then we
run the danger, I think, of diluting the focus of the HIV/AIDS. China
could just as well be listed soon, unfortunately; Southeast Asia,
certainly countries there.
I would say, Mr. Chairman, that since we have no adverse and
negative, or very negative reaction from the White House, and since I
think it does no damage, although we may well be adding all of the
countries eventually we are going to work under this kind of theory, I
would not express opposition to the gentleman and gentlewoman's
amendment.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BEREUTER. I yield to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands.
(Mrs. CHRISTENSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to
me, and I will be brief.
A little over a month ago, I rose to urge the passage of H.R. 1298
because of the moral imperative for Congress to act and take an
affirmative step towards fighting AIDS globally, particularly in Africa
and the Caribbean. We may not be able to correct all the deficiencies
we saw in that bill today, but the Lee-Rangel amendment does help in
one critical area, and that is in expanding the coverage of that $15
billion emergency plan to an additional 14 countries in the Caribbean.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, the Caribbean has the second highest rate of
HIV infection and AIDS in the world, and the economies of those small
island nations are strained to deal with the impact of it.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Rangel) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for their
leadership and commitment for the Caribbean and for continuing to press
for the amendment that is before us now. I urge my colleagues to
support it.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I urge support of the amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment
No. 33 printed in House Report No. 108-206.

Amendment No. 33 Offered by Mr. Sherman

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment made in order under
the rule.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 33 offered by Mr. Sherman:
At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new
section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. ____. STATEMENT OF POLICY RELATING TO DEMOCRACY IN IRAN.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Iran is neither free nor democratic. Men and women are
not treated equally in Iran, women are legally deprived of
internationally recognized human rights, and religious
freedom is not respected under the laws of Iran. Undemocratic
institutions, such as the Guardians Council, thwart the
decisions of elected leaders.
(2) The April 2003 report of the Department of State states
that Iran remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism
in 2002.
(3) That report also states that Iran continues to provide
funding, safe-haven, training and weapons to known terrorist
groups, notably Hizballah, HAMAS, the Palestine Islamic
Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
(b) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States that--
(1) currently, there is not a free and fully democratic
government in Iran;
(2) the United States supports transparent, full democracy
in Iran;
(3) the United States supports the rights of the Iranian
people to choose their system of government; and
(4) the United States condemns the brutal treatment,
imprisonment and torture of Iranian civilians expressing
political dissent.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, our hearts go out to the people of Iran who are
fighting valiantly for freedom and democracy. The least we could do in
this bill is to provide our support and put the United States on record
in favor of minority rights, women's rights, democracy, and freedom for
the people of Iran.
I want to commend Senator Brownback, who authored the very words of
this amendment and persuaded the Senate to adopt them and add them to
their version of this bill. I want to commend the Senate for adopting
these words on a voice vote.
Let me just summarize the provisions of this amendment. It contains,
first, findings which state: ``Iran is neither free nor democratic. Men
and women are not treated equally. Women are deprived of legal and
internationally recognized rights. Religious freedom is not respected
under the laws of Iran. And undemocratic institutions, such as the
Guardians Council, thwart the decisions of elected leaders.''
It goes on to cite the September 2003 report of the Department of
State which identified Iran as the most active state sponsor of
terrorism in the year 2002, and specifically sites the provisions of
that report which indicate that Iran continues to provide funding and
safe haven to such terrorist groups as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the
Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
The second part of the amendment indicates it is the policy of the
United States to support transparent, full democracy in Iran; that the
United States supports the rights of the Iranian people to choose their
system of government; and the United States condemns the brutal
treatment and torture of Iranian civilians expressing political
dissent.
Mr. Chairman, I would hope that we could adopt this amendment on
voice vote, just as the Senate did, so as to eliminate a possible
difference between the bodies as this bill goes to conference.
I should also point out, Mr. Chairman, that I have a separate bill,
H.R. 2466, that provides much more substantive support for democracy.
It is called the Iran Democracy Support Act, and I would hope that on
some other occasion we would be on this floor debating that bill, and I
invite my colleagues to cosponsor it.
But for now let me urge the adoption of this amendment.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SHERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, we have no objection to the gentleman's
amendment, and we hope he will take yes for an answer.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SHERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from California.

{time} 1815

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I congratulate the gentleman from
California (Mr. Sherman) for introducing this important amendment.
The Iranian people continue to suffer under a theocratic, terror-
supporting dictatorship. Those courageous enough to call for democratic
change are regularly met by the regimes-supported security forces and
vigilante groups. Just last month the Iranian government acknowledged
they arrested some 4,000 peaceful demonstrators. What was their crime?
They wanted freedom.
This amendment affirms that the view of this body is that Iranians
deserve real freedom, that they should not suffer because of their
religious or political beliefs or because of their gender. The Sherman
amendment supports Iranians' right to choose their own system of
government, rather than having to endure the theocracy that has been
forced upon them.
Oppression in Iran is a humanitarian issue, but it is not only that.
The existence of a dictatorial Iranian regime directly affects the
security of the United States which now faces an enemy with a rigid
ideology which it backs through an unlimited use of terrorism, and it
may soon have nuclear weapons.

[[Page H6823]]

Freedom in Iran is a nonpartisan issue. I strongly support this
amendment and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me
in voting in favor of it.
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I urge support for
this amendment today. I urge my colleagues to take a look at H.R. 2466,
the Iran Democracy Support Act, for consideration on another day. I
thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Isakson). The question is on the
amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment
No. 37 printed in House Report 108-206.

Amendment No. 37 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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

Amendment No. 37 offered by Mr. McKeon:
At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new
section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. ____. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE EXTRADITION OF
VIOLENT CRIMINALS FROM MEXICO TO THE UNITED
STATES.

(a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
(1) The Mexican Supreme Court ruled in October 2001 that
Mexico will not extradite criminals who face life sentences
in the United States.
(2) Due to this ruling, the United States has been unable
to prosecute numerous suspects wanted for violent crimes that
they committed in the United States if there is a possibility
that these criminals will face life imprisonment.
(3) The person or persons responsible for the April 29,
2002, murder of Los Angeles County Sheriff Deputy David March
is believed to have fled to Mexico to avoid prosecution for a
possible life imprisonment.
(4) The attorneys general from all 50 States have asked
United States Attorney General John Ashcroft and Secretary of
State Colin Powell to continue to address this extradition
issue with their counterparts in Mexico.
(5) The Governments of the United States and Mexico have
experienced positive cooperation on numerous matters relevant
to their bilateral relationship.
(6) The Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs has been
demonstrating to the Mexican Supreme Court the international
ramifications of the Court's October 2001 ruling.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the United States Government should encourage the Mexican
Government to work closely with the Mexican Supreme Court to
persuade the Court to reconsider its October 2001 ruling so
that the possibility of life imprisonment will not have an
effect on the timely extradition of criminal suspects from
Mexico to the United States.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to the Foreign
Relations Authorization Act to address the issue of extradition,
specifically as it pertains to Mexico. The seriousness of this issue is
best described by the following tragic story:
On April 29, 2002, over a year ago, Deputy David March, a 7-year
veteran of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, was shot and killed in
the line of duty. David March was 33 years old, a husband, a father, a
son, a brother, a neighbor, a stalwart in our community. The suspect
who took his life was a Mexican national, a convicted felon. He fled to
Mexico to avoid prosecution.
Historically, the Mexican government has refused to extradite Mexican
nationals who commit crimes and flee to Mexico unless there are
assurances granted by the United States that the death penalty would
not be sought. Then in October, 2001, the Mexican Supreme Court ruled,
in addition to the death penalty, they would not extradite criminals
who also face life imprisonment sentences in the United States. For the
crime that was committed, one of those penalties would be required. As
such, Deputy March's killer roams free in Mexico; and the United States
is unable to threaten a sentence commensurate with this murderer's
horrific crime.
It should be noted this is not an isolated case for it is estimated
that more than 60 suspected killers from Los Angeles County alone are
in Mexico, along with countless more individuals who are suspected of
rape, child molestation, attempted murder and other serious, violent
crimes.
Mr. Chairman, this is an outrage. We cannot allow the most heinous
criminals to escape the bar of justice. They must pay the penalties for
their crimes, and the victims and their families must have reprieve
through a judicious process.
Just imagine the turmoil that these families feel. David's younger
sister went to school with my youngest daughter, good friends growing
up. It is a great family. Every day they have to get up knowing that
their son, brother, husband, father, is no longer with them, and the
person who committed the crime, that took his life, is free. It is just
not fair.
As such, my amendment expresses the sense of Congress that the United
States Government should work closely with and encourage the Mexican
government to persuade its Supreme Court to reconsider this October,
2001, ruling so the possibility of life imprisonment will not have an
effect on the timely extradition of criminal suspects from Mexico to
the United States.
It also should be noted that, historically, the United States
government and the Mexican government have cooperated on many issues of
mutual concern to our bilateral relationship, including elements of
extradition as it pertains to drug trafficking. I am confident that,
with further cooperation between our two governments, we can continue
in like manner to address all of the points of concern within the issue
of extradition to the point of complete resolution.
I thank the chairman for his help in getting this bill to the floor.
I thank the ranking member. I thank the gentleman from California (Mr.
Dreier), the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the gentleman from
California (Mr. Berman), the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert)
and other Members who have been supportive in this important effort.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McKEON. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this is an outstanding amendment, and we
support it, and we are pleased the gentleman has offered it.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does any Member rise in opposition to the
amendment?
If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from California (Mr. McKeon).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment
No. 41 printed in House Report 108-206.

Amendment No. 41 Offered by Ms. Waters

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

Amendment No. 41 offered by Ms. Waters:
At the end of Division B, insert the following:

SEC. ____. REPORT ON PROGRESS MADE IN MODIFYING THE ENHANCED
HIPC INITIATIVE.

Within 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
and annually thereafter, the Secretary of the Treasury shall
submit to the Committees on Financial Services, on
Appropriations, and on International Relations of the House
of Representatives and the Committees on Foreign Relations
and on Appropriations of the Senate a written report that
describes the progress made in modifying the Enhanced HIPC
Initiative (as defined in section 1625(e)(3) of the
International Financial Institutions Act) as called for in
section 501 of of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003.
Conform the table of contents accordingly.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page H6824]]

Mr. Chairman, a few years ago, at the end of 20th century, the world
community came together under the leadership of several of the world's
most influential churches and created the Jubilee 2000 movement, a
worldwide movement to cancel the debts of the world's poorest
countries. The Jubilee 2000 movement included the Catholic Church, the
Episcopalian Church, the World Council of Churches, Bread for the
World, many other Christian, Jewish and other faith-based
organizations. Student groups, HIV/AIDS activists, development
specialists, business leaders and labor unions also joined this diverse
movement.
In 1999, Jubilee 2000 convinced the G-8 group of industrialized
countries to develop the Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries
Initiative, known as HIPC, a program to significantly reduce poor
country's debt. In 2000, Jubilee 2000 convinced the United States
Government as well as the governments of other G-8 countries to
authorize this debt relief program and appropriate the funds to carry
it out.
Unfortunately, the Enhanced HIPC Initiative has failed to provide a
lasting solution to poor country debts. At least 18 heavy indebted poor
countries are still spending more money on debt payments than they are
on health care.
The goal of Jubilee 2000 was to completely cancel the debts of the
world's poorest countries. We must do more to accomplish this goal. We
must do more to proclaim Jubilee for the poorest of the poor.
Earlier this year, I introduced H.R. 643, the Debt Cancellation for
the New Millennium Act. This bill would urge the President to negotiate
with the IMF and the World Bank to completely cancel 100 percent of the
debts of the world's most impoverished countries who owe these
institutions and give these countries a fresh start in the new
millennium. This bill has 45 cosponsors.
H.R. 1298, the Global AIDS bill, included a debt relief provision,
Title V, urging the administration to advocate deeper debt relief
within the Enhanced HIPC Initiative. Title V states that the Secretary
of the Treasury should immediately commence efforts with the IMF, the
World Bank and other creditor countries to modify the Enhanced HIPC
Initiative to reduce poor countries' debts to ensure that poor
countries are not required to spend more than 10 percent of their
annual current revenues on debt payments. For poor countries facing a
public health crisis as a result of HIV/AIDS, the limit would be 5
percent. The Global AIDS bill was signed into law by the President on
May 27, 2003, and is now Public Law 108-025.
Title V of the Global AIDS bill, which was added in the Senate by
amendment and subsequently approved by the House, reflected provisions
in H.R. 1376, a bipartisan debt relief bill introduced by the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Frank), the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos), the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays),
the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus) and the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Mrs. Maloney). H.R. 1376 would have required the Secretary
of the Treasury to submit reports to Congress describing the efforts
and progress made in negotiating improvements to the Enhanced HIPC
Initiative. Unfortunately, Title V of the Global AIDS bill does not
require the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress on the
administration's effort.
My amendment would require the Secretary of the Treasury to report to
Congress on the progress made in modifying the Enhanced HIPC Initiative
as called for in Title V. This simple reporting requirement would
enable Congress to monitor the administration's effort to achieve
deeper debt relief for poor countries. A reporting requirement also
could provide an incentive for multilateral development institutions
and other creditor countries to support proposals for deeper debt
relief.
Deeper debt relief for the world's heavily indebted poor countries
will remove a major obstacle to HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention,
poverty reduction and economic growth. I urge my colleagues to support
my amendment.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. WATERS. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the gentlewoman's
amendment. It is sorely needed. I could not think of a more noble
project than to assist Buddhist countries with huge debts with debt
relief. This is a measure that deserves bipartisan support. I ask all
of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for it.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. WATERS. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, the amendment points to an important
subject, the need for prompt implementation of the Act, and we
certainly think that the Committee on International Relations and other
relevant committees ought to receive periodic reports and hold hearings
and briefings, if necessary.
The reporting provisions in the legislation require the Secretary of
Treasury to inform the Congress of his progress in implementing the
Act, but we have no objection to the amendment of the gentlewoman at
this point. Unless we figure something differently, we are entirely
supportive.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman
from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) for his words of support. I do not think
there would be any other information which would lead to opposition to
the amendment, and I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos)
for his support and superb leadership on this committee.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does any Member rise in opposition to the
amendment.
If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Waters).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Walden of Oregon) having assumed the chair, Mr. Bereuter, Chairman pro
tempore 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. 1950) to authorize appropriations for the Department of State for
the fiscal years 2004 and 2005, to authorize appropriations under the
Arms Export Control Act and the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for
security assistance for fiscal years 2004 and 2005, and for other
purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

____________________