[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 110 (Wednesday, July 23, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H7394-H7444]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[[Page H7394]]
FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
APPROPRIATIONS ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 327 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 2800.
{time} 2009
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 2800) making appropriations for foreign operations,
export financing, and related programs for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2004, and for other purposes, with Mr. Thornberry in the
chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today,
pending was the amendment by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms.
Kilpatrick), and the bill was open for amendment from page 5, line 18
through page 12, line 10. Is there further debate on the Kilpatrick
amendment?
If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman
from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms.
Kilpatrick) will be postponed.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. McGovern
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. McGovern:
In the item relating to ``child survival and health
programs fund'', after the first dollar amount insert
``(increased by $75,000,000)''.
In the item relating to ``andean counterdrug initiative'',
after the first dollar amount insert ``(reduced by
$40,000,000)''.
In the item relating to ``foreign military financing
program'', after the first dollar amount insert ``(reduced by
$35,000,000)''.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton)
and I are offering an amendment to make modest reductions in military
aid for Colombia, and to transfer those funds to the Child Survival and
Health Programs Fund for programs that combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis,
malaria, and other infectious diseases.
H.R. 2800 provides $4.3 billion in foreign military financing, of
which $110 million is slated to go to the Colombian military. Our
amendment reduces that amount by $35 million.
The Andean Counterdrug Initiative is fully funded at $731 million,
with at least $159 million in military aid for the Colombian armed
forces. Our amendment reduces that total by just $40 million.
These are modest reductions but, if approved, they will send a
powerful message that Congress believes respect for human rights is
essential, that impunity for high-ranking military officers who commit
human rights abuses must end, and that Congress requires a more defined
U.S. plan and exit strategy in Colombia.
This amendment will also do a great deal of good.
I commend the chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee for
increasing funding for HIV/AIDS, but the total is still about $1
billion less than the $3 billion authorized, the amount the President
recently promised to African leaders. Mr. Chairman, $75 million is a
modest amount, but every dollar counts in the fight against HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, malaria, and other diseases. $75 million could ensure
that 250,000 more people with HIV/AIDS could receive drug treatment for
an entire year. Think of it. This amendment could literally save the
lives of a quarter of a million people over the course of the next
year.
Now, I know some of my colleagues are saying, but we cannot pull out
of Colombia. Well, let me be perfectly clear. No one believes more
strongly than I do that the United States must stay engaged in
Colombia. I will never advocate that we walk away from Colombia. But I
have serious questions about the direction of U.S. policy, the goals
that have yet to be defined for our military involvement there, and how
we define success or failure in Colombia.
The committee has stated that U.S. policy in Colombia stands at a
crossroads, and I agree. In the past 4 years, we have sent over $3.1
billion to Colombia, 80 percent in military and security assistance. On
July 16, the Colombian government announced it will soon present ``Plan
Colombia-Phase II'' and seek substantial U.S. aid increases for 2006
and beyond.
Meanwhile, coca production in the Andes has actually increased since
Plan Colombia began, rising from 185,000 hectares in 2000 to 205,400
hectares in 2002, according to the State Department.
Colombia's small drop in coca production last year did not even bring
its levels back down to where they were in 2000. And Colombia's
decrease is offset by shifting production back to Bolivia and Peru.
That does not seem to be progress to me.
Further, according to the Justice Department, the availability of
cocaine in the United States actually increased in 2002. So let us not
spin ourselves into thinking our policy is working.
Despite human rights conditions placed on U.S. military aid to
Colombia, our aid continues to flow uninterrupted. We keep writing huge
checks, even though every reputable human rights organization in the
world concludes that the Colombian armed forces directly collaborate
with paramilitary forces. These are the same paramilitary forces
responsible for the majority of human rights abuses against civilians.
These are the same paramilitary forces on the State Department's list
of terrorist organizations. These are the same paramilitary forces that
President Uribe's own hand-picked commission determined control at
least 40 percent of the drug trade in Colombia and receive 80 percent
of their funding from drug profits.
Meanwhile, over the past year, human rights crimes by official
Colombian military police have increased, according to the U.N. High
Commissioner for Human Rights in Colombia.
Regions where the Colombia military is most present and active are
precisely the areas where official human rights abuses and political
violence have most sharply escalated, according to the Colombian
government's own Inspector General.
Colombia's Attorney General has dismissed prosecutors who are in
charge of investigating the most serious cases of human rights crimes
committed by high-ranking military officers, closing those cases, and
ignoring others.
{time} 2015
Instead, the Attorney General is opening new investigations against
Catholic bishops, human rights defenders and community leaders.
Impunity is not only alive and well in Colombia, it is better protected
than ever.
Mr. Chairman, when the United States bankrolls a foreign military,
then we have a special obligation not to be indifferent to its human
rights record. We have a special responsibility because this is a
reflection on us, but this Congress has been sending a very disturbing
message to the Colombia military; namely, if you perform poorly, if you
violate the human rights of your own people, do not worry, we will
lower our standards on human rights.
We can do better. These modest reductions in military aid will not
undercut Colombia's fight against the brutal FARC guerillas, but it
could end up being the most significant message sent by this Congress
in support of human rights and democracy. I urge my colleagues to
support the McGovern-Skelton amendment.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I do rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.
The administration has requested $731 million for the Andean
Counterdrug Initiative, or ACI as it is called, in this fiscal year
2004. We have provided full funding for that request, and I think it is
absolutely critical to sustaining our success in Colombia and to
protecting Colombia's neighbors from a spillover effect.
[[Page H7395]]
We have had this debate, Mr. Chairman, in past years and in past
years we could not say with a great deal of confidence that we are
having any real progress. But let me make one basic fact which I think
is very, very clear, and that is that our efforts in Colombia are
making a huge difference. As this chart shows here, by almost any
measure, and this is from August to June of 2001 and 2002 to the year
2002 and 2003, by almost any measure the insurgents killed in action,
up 28 percent. Insurgents captured, up 108 percent. Insurgents
deserting, 106 percent. Terrorists attacks, down 47 percent. Tax on the
economic infrastructure, down 54 percent. Murders, down 16 percent.
This is all in the course of one year of time. So we have had a
tremendous impact.
This administration that exists down there in Colombia today is one
that is very committed to making a difference and making things happen.
Poppy cultivation is spreading. As you can see, a very dramatic
increase in the amount of thousands of hectares being sprayed and a
resultant decline in the amount of cultivation of poppy. And similarly
here, if we look at coca cultivation, even here, even a more dramatic
increase over the last 3 years, and now we are beginning to see the
results, for the first time ever a significant reduction in the amount
of the actual coca production here and cultivation. These are the
direct results, the direct results of the U.S. assisted eradication
program.
We have also requested $110 million, the President's request, for the
foreign military financing for Colombia. This is not blanket military
assistance for Colombia, but it is designed to improve the quality of
very focused support for specialized units in the Colombian ministry.
Mr. Chairman, the former ambassador to Colombia has spoken very
eloquently about this and very forcefully to us. She has told us that
if we are ever going to be able to ratchet down, to change the mix of
how aid in Colombia and eradication programs are working in Colombia,
if we are ever going to get the United States out of there and allow
the Colombians to do the job, the foreign military sales are absolutely
important, critical, so that the Colombians can have not only the
training but have the hardware that is required in order to do that.
The problems that face Colombia are very complex. They are economic.
They are social. They are military, and they are very much linked, of
course, to the social problem we have in this country of drug use and
drug consumption.
There is not going to be any rapid or easy fix to this problem. We
have discovered that over the years. But the nonexistent government
presence and the law enforcement capability in lawless areas of the
country are key to Colombia's social and economic problems, and we are
making a big difference there. We have just been told by the Columbian
ambassador to the United States, in virtually every single case there
is now presence in each of the provinces and each of the counties, as
we would call them here, in this country of military and police
presence, whereas scores had no presence just a couple of years ago. So
we are making a huge difference there.
It is in our interests to support this request to Colombia. I cannot
think of a worse time when we have a President in Colombia that is
absolutely committed to making a difference and to protecting human
rights. When we have an opportunity to make a real difference in this
country, it would be the worst time for us to be cutting these funds.
Mr. Chairman, I would urge, strongly urge, even if the gentleman
suggests that it is not a major cut in the amount of funding, it would
be the wrong signal to be sending to the Columbian people who are very
supportive of President Uribe in his efforts to destroy the FARC, his
efforts to counterattack against the FARC and the paramilitary and to
end the production of coca and opium in the area.
I urge defeat of this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I do rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.
The administration has requested $731 million for the Andean
Counterdrug Initiative, or ACI as it is called, in fiscal year 2004. We
have provided full funding for that request, and I think it is
absolutely critical to sustaining our success in Colombia and to
protecting Colombia's neighbors from a spillover effect.
We have had this debate, Mr. Chairman, in past years. And in past
years we could not say with a great deal of confidence that we were
experiencing real progress. But let me state one basic fact which I
think is very, very clear. Our efforts in Colombia are making a real
difference. As this chart shows here, and this is from August to June
of 2001 and 2002 to the year 2002 and 2003, by almost any measure the
insurgents killed in action is up 28 percent. Insurgents captured, up
108 percent. Insurgents deserting, 106 percent. Terrorists attacks,
down 47 percent. Tax on the economic infrastructure, down 54 percent.
Murders, down 16 percent. This is all over the course of one year of
time. We have seen a tremendous impact.
Colombian President Uribe's administration is one that is very
committed to making a difference and making things happen. Poppy
cultivation was spreading. As you can see, there have been a very
dramatic increase in the number of hectares being eradicated and a
resultant decline in the amount of cultivation of poppy. Similarly, if
we look at coca cultivation, there is an even more dramatic increase
over the last 3 years in eradication efforts. Now we are beginning to
see the results. For the first time in 5 years, we see a significant
reduction in the amount of the actual coca production and cultivation.
These are the direct results, the direct results of the U.S. assisted
eradication program.
The President also requested $110 million, for foreign military
financing assistance for Colombia. This is not blanket military
assistance for Colombia, but it is designed to improve the quality of
very focused support for specialized units in the Colombian military.
Mr. Chairman, the former U.S. ambassador to Colombia has spoken very
eloquently about this and very forcefully to us about the President's
regret. She has told us that if we are ever going to be able to ratchet
down our assistance to Colombia, and if we are ever going to turn over
the program to the Colombians and allow the Colombians to do the job,
then the foreign military sales are absolutely important. It is
critical so that Colombians can have not only the training but have the
hardware that is required in order to be successful.
The problems that face Colombia are very complex. They are economic.
They are social. They are law enforcement and they are very much
linked.
There is not going to be any rapid or easy fix to this problem. We
have discovered that over the years, the nonexistent government
presence and the lack of law enforcement capability in lawless areas of
the country are key to Colombia's social and economic problems. The
U.S. assistance is helping to make a big difference. We have just been
told by the Columbian ambassador to the United States, in virtually
every single province there is now a military and police presence,
whereas scores had no presence just a couple of years ago. Let me
repeat, U.S. assistance is making a huge difference in Colombia.
It is in our interests to support the President's request to
Colombia. I cannot think of a worse time to cut our assistance when we
have a President in Colombia that is absolutely committed to making a
difference and to protecting human rights. We have an opportunity to
make a real difference in this country, therefore it would be the worst
time for the Congress to be voting to cut these funds.
Mr. Chairman, even if the gentleman suggests that this is not a major
cut to the level of funding, it would be the wrong signal to be sending
to the Colombian people who are very supportive of President Uribe in
his efforts to destroy the FARC, his efforts to counterattack against
the FARC and the paramilitary and to end the production of coca and
opium in the area.
I strongly urge defeat of this amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, this bill provides $574 million for Colombia. The
amendment would cut $75 million from that total. And the reason I
support it, although I have great respect for the chairman's position,
is because I have fundamental questions about the direction in which
our Colombia policy is headed.
As my colleagues may know, the United States' commitment to Colombia
has shifted in the last year from being exclusively focused on drugs
towards an open-ended, long-term commitment to aid the Columbian
government in its war against guerillas and terrorists.
The response to that shift in the United States' policy has been more
violence directed at U.S. personnel, including kidnappings, hostages
being taken and planes being shot down.
Next year marks the end of the original 5-year Plan Colombia, and as
we near that time we find that coca production in the region has
increased
[[Page H7396]]
rather than decreased, violence continues unabated, more Colombians are
internally displaced.
The human rights situation is worse. No viable alternative
development scheme is in place, and drug dealing paramilitary
organizations control much of the country. Meanwhile, the amount of
United States assistance to Colombia has increased every year to over
half a billion requested next year. Plans underway in the
administration will lead to an even broader commitment to Colombia to
assist in this civil war in the name of fighting terrorism.
According to the GAO, the administration has not developed estimates
of future program costs, defined their future roles in Colombia,
identified a proposed end state, or determined how they plan to achieve
it.
During the original debate on Plan Colombia, critics said we were
descending a slippery slope. Well, we are hurtling down that slope with
no end in sight. Last year, in the context of agreeing to broaden the
authority for U.S. programs beyond drugs, the new government of
Colombia agreed to adopt major reforms within the military and to
significantly increase security expenditures from its own budget. While
it appears that the Colombians increase their security budget in 2002
and 2003, the United States has no firm commitment that the increased
level will continue in 2004 and beyond. In the meantime, the costs of
simply maintaining the aircraft and equipment we already have there now
exceeds $230 million per year. The best you can say about reforms
within the military is that they are a work in progress.
I support Colombia. I want to help Colombia. But we do not help
Colombia by continuing an unbalanced policy, looking the other way on
human rights problems and continue collusion with paramilitary
organizations and paying the maintenance bill for their helicopters
while failing to insist on a viable development scheme for rural areas.
Passage of this amendment will not cut off aid to Colombia. It will
send a strong signal to the administration that they need to make some
policy changes, clarify the length and terms of our commitment and
present Congress with an exit strategy.
Mr. Chairman, I urge support of the McGovern amendment.
Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I think anybody that has any knowledge at all
recognizes drug abuse is the most dangerous threat that we have in our
country today. We spend nearly $11 billion inside the country to fight
this drug disaster. Aid to Colombia is the most effective weapon we
have against drug production, not drug use.
The estimated economic cost of illegal drug use in the United States
has been over $160 billion in the year 2000. The $731 million provided
in the Andean Drug Initiative in this appropriations bill is necessary
and money well spent and these funds will save the U.S. money in the
long term.
The previous speaker spoke of the number of people that were dying of
AIDS and where the money could be of use to them. There is an estimated
4.7 million Americans age 12 and older in the year 2000 who needed
treatment for illicit drug use and drug abuse problems. That accounts
for 2.1 percent of the national population. If you could measure the
cost per individual what drugs have cost us in this country, it is
$34,200 a year.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation estimates that 1.6 million people
were arrested in the United States in 2001 for drug abuse violations.
Nearly one in four persons were held in U.S. jails and prisons in 2000,
57 percent were imprisoned for drug offenses.
I think the statement that the war on drugs and Plan Colombia is not
working is completely false. It was very slow in getting started and I
blame this body right here for the first 2 years that we were
ineffective because it was an argument about how the money should be
spent, how it should be allotted as far as which helicopters and which
aid. It is our fault here that it took so long to get going.
There was a statement made that the production of coca had increased.
That is false. It has shrunk in the last year. In fact, it has been one
of the most successful years that we have ever had in reducing the
production of this coca in Colombia. Also, there were statements made
about how horrible the paramilitary forces have been, and in the past
they were terrible, but paramilitary forces within the last week have
signed a peace agreement with the government.
If the ELN and FARC would do the same, the communist element that we
are supposedly helping out by shrinking this budget would go away.
I would like to say that reducing drug production is what we need in
this country most, and every penny that we spend on it is worth its
effort, not only from North Carolina to Massachusetts but California to
Missouri. Drugs are blind on who they affect, and the effort we are
putting forth in Colombia is probably the most effective way that we
have of reducing drug use in this country.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I am extremely pleased to cosponsor this amendment with
my friend and my colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
McGovern). We have sponsored a number of amendments over the last
several years to take dollars from the American military assistance to
Colombia, and I do not do this action because I am unsympathetic to
President Uribe and what he is trying to accomplish. I think he is
sincerely working to break the stranglehold that drug cartels and
insurgency groups have on his nation. But the message sent by cutting
this funding, those messages need to reach the Colombian people, this
administration and his administration.
It is true, Mr. Chairman, that more is asked of the American soldier
that is sent to Colombia than Colombia asks of its own soldiers. This
bothers me to no end.
{time} 2030
The Colombian people need to take concerted and consistent steps to
help provide for their long-term security. That means providing for a
sustained financial base.
Our administration needs to come forward with a long-term strategy
for American military involvement in Colombia. Many in this House are
worried about the creeping nature of our expanding mission in Colombia,
known as mission creep. We need to know what role the American troops
will play and for what period of time.
Having this knowledge is even more critically important as we face a
long-term commitment. Our troops have the possibility of continued work
in North Korea, Liberia, not to mention Iraq. We do not have enough
troops to go around the world wearing them out.
We need to increase our end strength, but we have needed to do that
for a while. We also need to look carefully at all of our commitments
and the decisions.
So I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment. It does not
eliminate all funding for Colombia, nor does it touch the critical
programs like IMET, which is developing a more professional military in
Colombia.
I said a moment ago that more is asked of the American soldier that
is down there helping them fight the rebels than they ask of their own
soldiers. Every soldier in the American Army has at least a high school
education or its equivalent or they cannot join. If anyone has a high
school education in Colombia, they are exempt from their military
conscription. If they come from wealthy families, if they have a high
school education, they do not have to serve; but Americans down there
to train them and trying to help beat back the rebels are more highly
educated and are putting themselves on the line, when they in Colombia
do not ask the same as we ask of our soldiers who are there to help
them.
Mr. Chairman, I resent this. I resent this very much. If they want
our continued help, they should prove it by having a conscription law
that cuts across all classes and all education. So I urge my colleagues
to vote for this amendment. It will not injure the programs that are
important whatsoever, and it will cause them in Colombia, as well as
our administration, to take a good hard look at what is necessary to
win in Colombia.
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
[[Page H7397]]
(Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, one of the earlier speakers said this is
just a signal. If it were so, it is a wrong signal, it is a wrong time;
but it is not just a signal. It would actually deprive real dollars
from people who are trying to fight narcoterrorists who are funded by
our drug habits.
While 40 million and 35 million, a total of 75 million, may not seem
like a lot here because we spend so much money, it is a significant
percentage of this budget.
The previous speaker said that this has been mission creep. It has
been exactly the reverse. It is mission reduction; and in fact, this
request is substantially under the last request. In fact, there are
fewer dollars being spent in this budget than the previous budget. In
fact, more Colombians are repairing helicopters than in the past, more
Colombians are spraying than in the past, more Colombians are on the
ground. We now have specially trained antinarcotics units. The military
have gone through human rights training and met those standards, in
addition to the Colombian National Police.
We are achieving our goals on the ground, and this amendment would
help devastate those goals at the very moment of their success.
We have had this debate for each of the last 3 years since President
Clinton signed Plan Colombia into law. While there still may be two
points of view this year, the facts clearly show that the debate
should, in fact, be over. Thanks to the strong leadership of President
Uribe, there can no longer be disagreement that the program is showing
clear results. Just maintaining on the House floor that it is not
working does not mean that it is not working. My colleagues can say
things, but they cannot be true.
I have been to Colombia twice this year and have seen firsthand the
signs of remarkable success in that nation. The Uribe government has
taken control of areas previously held by narcoterrorist guerrillas.
There are many towns in Colombia that are still under terrorist
control, but the number is declining. There are now people moving back
to their hometowns. There are mayors willing to run for office again
because the ELN and the paramilitaries are in somewhat of a disarray,
at least in somewhat retreat; and the FARC is somewhat divided. They
still control a significant percentage of the country, but it is less
than it was, and we are making progress.
You cannot plant alternative crops if you believe you are going to be
killed by FARC and then killed by the paramilitaries. First you have
some to order. We are providing people with the chance and getting some
order. If we continue at that rate, we can establish one of the oldest
democracies in the Americas back to a free people.
This is not a civil war. Four percent of the people, that is almost
not much more than the percentage in prisons in the United States,
support the FARC or any of this. The people are overwhelmingly on the
side of this government. This is the most popular government in modern
history in Colombia.
The facts are so clear my colleagues do not need to take my word for
it. I will instead let the editorial board of The Washington Post,
hardly the most conservative group of commentators, tell my colleagues
why now is not the time to lessen our support for this critical program
to keep stability in our hemisphere and control the flow of hard drugs
onto every American street.
On July 13, The Post editorialized as follows: ``Some members of
Congress and human rights groups protested that the attempt to bolster
the Colombian army with equipment and training while sponsoring the
aerial spraying of coca fields would embroil the United States in a
Vietnam-like quagmire. The critics were wrong. Colombian coca and poppy
production has been reduced substantially: according to a United
Nations study, the acreage has dropped by 38 percent in 3 years.''
The Washington Post editorial continued: ``With the traffickers and
their guerrilla allies on the defensive, violence is down, too.
Homicides have fallen by a quarter and kidnappings by a third this year
compared with last year. Colombia's economy is growing, and its
President, Alvaro Uribe, leads the strongest and most popular
government the country has had in decades. Though Plan Colombia still
hasn't achieved many of its goals, there can be little question that
the $2.7 billion invested by the United States so far has gotten
results.''
Again, those were not the gentleman from Indiana's (Mr. Souder)
arguments, but the conclusion of The Washington Post editorial board.
It is now beyond serious dispute that Plan Colombia is working, that it
is beginning to have a serious impact, and that it is at a critical
point. No program is perfect, but the choice now is a clear one. Do we
continue to make progress towards finishing the job, or do we withdraw
and quit? There are many hard decisions in this body, but continuing a
program that is now obviously succeeding against long and hard odds
should not be one of them.
We also continue to have a moral obligation to the people of Colombia
to help them solve deep problems of political, legal, and social order
that are caused in significant part by Americans. In Cartagena earlier
this month, I visited with Colombian soldiers who had been viciously
attacked by narcoterrorist guerillas. They had lost limbs and yet
stayed firm and resolute; some had lost lives, despite the fact that
the groups who attacked them were funded in significant part by the
drug habits of Americans.
From my hometown and the hometowns of the members of this country, I
also visited the Nelson Mandela Village for people who have been
displaced and terrorized in these hometowns; and in talking to these
people, they want to go back home. They do not want to be terrorized.
We are near the point in about half of those areas of stabilizing, and
they have moved and are at the point of moving back. How can we cut
this program now when it is finally working? Even a small cut could be
devastating to Colombia.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support for the McGovern-Skelton
amendment to transfer $75 million in military aid for Colombia to
programs that combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other
infectious diseases.
I have serious concerns with our policy in Colombia and, in
particular, with the ongoing human rights abuses. The number of people
who have disappeared or been killed has risen from 14 to 20 per day in
the last 2 years. Those newly displaced by political violence increased
by 412,000 in 2002, and Colombia has the second largest population of
internally displaced people in the world, trailing only the Sudan. More
than 1,000 people are forced to leave their homes every single day.
What are we doing to hold the Colombian government accountable for
these abuses? There is no evidence to show that Colombia's military
officers involved in human rights abuses are being suspended for their
actions. According to Human Rights Watch, they continue to remain on
active duty and in command of their troops, and Colombian Army
collaboration with paramilitaries raises serious questions about
whether our involvement is making any difference at all and perhaps
even enabling these abuses to continue.
It deeply worries me to see our expanding involvement in Colombia. At
a time when we have forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, can we really
afford to become enmeshed in another large scale conflict? Of course
not. Yet just recently, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said
that the United States was considering transferring some military
capabilities from Iraq to Colombia.
We are moving in a dangerous direction. Congress changed the law last
year to allow U.S. counterdrug aid to support a ``unified campaign''
against drugs and against Colombia's guerrilla and paramilitary groups.
Our mission has actually expanded. The number of U.S. military
personnel on the ground in Colombia has tripled in the last 3 years,
and the Colombia Government announced only a week ago that within four
months it will unveil ``Plan Colombia Phase II,'' counterinsurgency aid
that will help wipe out more than 35,000 insurgents.
Mr. Chairman, this is precisely the same mission the Reagan
administration adopted in El Salvador 20 years ago. It did not work
then; it will not
[[Page H7398]]
work now. And Colombia's over fifty times larger than El Salvador. We
cannot fight Colombia's war and we should not.
Instead of funding a troubling conflict that we ought not to be so
heavily involved with, we should focus those resources on fighting wars
that we can win with the proper resources. The United Nations Joint
Program on HIV/AIDS estimates that last year 2.4 million Africans died
of AIDS-related illnesses, while nearly 30 million continue to live
with the disease. Heavily affected countries in sub-Saharan Africa are
struggling to provide care and treatment for over a third of their
populations. In the Caribbean, an estimated 440,000 people are infected
with HIV/AIDS, a number that is continuing to climb.
By focusing our resources in these areas, we can make a real
difference in the fight to combat these diseases. That is where we
should be redoubling our efforts, not in the murky forests of Colombia.
This is a modest amendment in financial terms but not in what it could
achieve.
I ask my colleagues to please support the McGovern-Skelton amendment.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
I come in very strong opposition to the McGovern amendment. I could
not be any more opposed to any amendment that has been proposed in the
House in some time. Let me discuss for my colleagues, some of them have
been here, some of them have not been here during what has happened
with the increase of illegal narcotics coming in from Colombia.
In 1992 and 1993, these charts are almost unbelievable. There is
almost no cocaine coming in from Colombia, and there was zero heroin
coming in from Colombia. Then appeared on the scene the Clinton
administration which said, oh, we cannot harm the hairs on any
guerrillas, we must protect human rights in Colombia and we must not do
anything about drug trafficking there; we must not interfere in the
civil conflict. We did nothing and tens of thousands died. Members of
the legislature, members of the judiciary, citizens by the thousands
died in the civil war that had gone on there, and the atrocities
increased.
The production of illegal narcotics increased, and the deadly
narcotics came from Colombia. Here is the statistics: again, zero in
1993 and almost all of the deadly heroin coming into the United States,
and this had some results. The results are absolutely incredible.
In the year 2000, 19,698, almost double from 1993, Americans died
from drug-related deaths, more than homicides. We have a silent war
going on in this country. So we sat down and we formed a plan, and it
was opposed time and time again.
Former Congressman Gilman, who chaired the Committee on International
Relations, brought forth a Plan Colombia and plans to try to bring in
helicopters to go after this, to assist in training the Colombians and
attacking drugs and terrorism; and it was shot down time and time
again.
Finally, through the leadership of the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Hastert), who was chair of the Subcommittee on Drug Oversight, and God,
I think, had a hand in making him Speaker of the House, we were able to
get Plan Colombia together.
The critics said we were wrong, The Washington Post said. The critics
now say we are right. Plan Colombia and President Bush have put it into
action to train the military down there, to stop the violence. The
violence has stopped. The statistics we hear are old statistics.
Twenty-five percent reduction in murders, 33 percent reduction in
killing. We stopped some of the killing, and this amendment will again
put us in the position of beginning the killing, beginning the
destruction, not only in Colombia but on our streets and neighborhoods.
{time} 2045
So we have a chance now to move Plan Colombia forward and we cannot
destroy that chance through this amendment.
Plan Colombia, the progress is unbelievable. It benefitted 22,829
families in Colombia, supported 24,549 hectares of legal crops, it
completed 349 community projects, established 33 legal service centers,
constructed 19 oral trial courtrooms, trained 3,400 judges, and aided
774,000 internally displaced people. Those are the statistics. That is
the truth. That is what Plan Colombia has done, and we cannot take a
step backward tonight.
It would be a disaster for those mothers and fathers that I have met
with who have lost their children from the cocaine, the heroin that has
come up from Colombia that we have not stopped. We have a chance
tonight to move Plan Colombia forward or move it backward and allow the
killing to continue in Colombia. Again, in the name of human rights,
how many more people should die there? How many more people should die
on the streets of my neighborhood in Florida or in the streets of New
York? Rich, poor, all are affected by what is going on. What about the
silent deaths by the tens of thousands in our country?
Tonight would be the worst step we could take in the history of this
Congress relating to our work against illegal narcotics to pass this
amendment, to take a step backward to where we were, and to do what did
not work should not be allowed to again happen in the Congress of the
United States. I oppose the amendment.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I have been following events in Colombia since 1957,
and I would like to think that the money that we are spending there is
well spent and will reach a useful conclusion. I wish I could say that,
but after watching that government and that society, especially the
economic elite of that society for a long time, I have reluctantly
concluded that they simply do not have the will to do what is necessary
to win their own battles. I think we have drifted little by little into
a long-term sustained financial and political involvement with little
expectation of real success.
Oh, I know, people say we have reduced this production here and
reduced production there. Baloney. It is like a balloon. It just pops
up somewhere else. I remember when one of the members of the Reagan
administration's antidrug team came to me privately and told me in
despairing terms what a tremendous waste he thought the money was that
we were spending in our antidrug campaign in Latin America. And when he
told me how little we actually intercepted at our borders, I was blown
away, and that has not changed that much.
And so if I thought this money was going to accomplish any useful
purpose, I would say, ``Fine, provide it.'' But when I see the economic
elite of that country still not making the sacrifices that are required
in order to achieve the ends that we say we have, then I think we ought
to look for a more useful place to put that money.
But I have a second question. My understanding is that the leadership
of the Republican Party from the highest levels on down cares very
deeply about our efforts in Colombia. So my question is, if that is the
case, why are so many Members of the majority party watching
``Seabiscuit'' tonight? Why was this House shut down for a couple of
hours to avoid votes on the House floor so that Members of the
Republican leadership structure could enjoy a summer movie?
It seems to me if this issue is important enough for us to provide
our money, then it is important enough for the people who believe in it
the most and the people who brought about our investment in the program
in the first place to be here on the floor defending it. And if they
think it is more important to watch ``Seabiscuit'' than to deal with
this program, then I think that says volumes about how useful even they
think this money is.
So with all due respect to the cries of alarm, I have heard about our
antidrug efforts around the world for years and years, those efforts
cannot be successful unless they are coupled with a determination on
the part of the recipient country to do whatever is necessary to win
the battle against drugs. And when that will is absent or when it is
weak, then Uncle Sam is simply being taken for Uncle Sucker.
So I would suggest my colleagues pay attention to this amendment. At
least that money will be put someplace where it will do some good. And
perhaps if this amendment passes tonight, in the future we will not
have Members of the majority party running off to
[[Page H7399]]
watch ``Seabiscuit'' when something that is supposedly important to the
national security is on the floor of this House.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
I rise in strong support of the McGovern-Skelton amendment. This
amendment transfers $75 million from Colombian military assistance to
global programs for HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment. Now, this
amendment signals to Colombia and the world that this government is
serious about the need to respect human rights, that it believes that
we need to rethink our approach to the Colombian situation, and that we
recognize that the HIV/AIDS pandemic is the greatest health and
humanitarian crisis of our time.
Plan Colombia has failed. Coca production in the Andes has increased.
Eradication programs are shifting production, not eliminating it, and
they are exposing men, women, and children of the region to dangerous
pesticides. At the same time, paramilitary organizations tied to the
Colombian army we are supporting have engaged in gross human rights
violations. Those same paramilitaries, according to the Washington Post
and other sources, are major drug dealers themselves. The Post reports
that paramilitaries control 40 percent, that is 40 percent of the
Colombian drug trade. Human Rights Watch and other humanitarian
organizations have reported that Colombian military officers alleged to
have committed human rights abuses remain on duty.
We should be able to translate United States assistance into
influence to promote the protection of human rights. That is not
happening in Colombia, and civilians are paying the price. We are
compelled to ask: What are we trying to do in Colombia and what is our
exit strategy? How much will we spend on this program and what will it
accomplish? The United States has a long and troubled history in Latin
America, and we should end this chapter.
At the same time, this bill underfunds the President's $3 billion
HIV/AIDS initiative, so this amendment would help correct this
imbalance that will cost lives. While the money that this amendment
would transfer from the Colombian account is a modest sum by most
standards, it can go a long way towards helping those individuals who
are suffering and dying from HIV and AIDS and other opportunistic
infections such as tuberculosis and malaria.
Now, with the cost of generic anti-retroviral drugs dropping to under
$300 a year, let me tell my colleagues what $75 million would do.
Seventy-five million dollars would allow another 250,000 HIV/AIDS
infected individuals access to these lifesaving drugs. Seventy-five
million dollars could also pay for approximately 7 million people to
take the normal $10 treatment course for tuberculosis, which is the
leading killer of HIV and AIDS patients. And with the cost of most
malaria treatment courses ranging from $2 to $5, up to 15 million
patients could be treated with just $75 million.
Let me be clear, though, that as much good as this money can do, it
can in no way overcome the nearly $1 billion shortfall in spending for
our global AIDS, TB, and malaria initiatives. Now, the President has
promised $3 billion, but it is obvious that this Congress must deliver
on that. I would hope that the President would try very hard to find
some way to make up the difference between the $3 billion that we
authorized back in May and the just over $2 billion that we are now
appropriating.
Thanks to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Kilpatrick) and the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), with this amendment we have an opportunity to
piece this money, and that is what we are doing, piecing this $1
million together. But it is worth it.
It would be a travesty to underfund our first-year pledge of the 5
years, $15 billion commitment we made so recently to fight global AIDS,
particularly since the President spoke so much about it during his
recent trip to Africa. Expectations have been raised, and we must
deliver upon them or we risk further damage to our credibility.
This amendment improves our foreign policy in two directions. It
helps correct a Colombian policy that has gone badly astray, and it
transfers desperately needed funds to the most urgent humanitarian and
health crisis of our time. It helps us, this House, deliver on the
President's promise. So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number
of words.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the leadership of the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr.
Skelton) in bringing this amendment before us this evening. I also
respect the commitment of the Speaker of this House to Colombia.
Recently he talked of this initiative as saving the lives of American
children. But, frankly, I get different information.
I identify with what the gentleman from North Carolina talked about a
little while ago, where there are 4.7 million drug abusers in this
country, where cocaine production is steady in the region. It may be
shifted around a little bit, but in terms of the region itself the
cocaine production has been steady for years. And, in fact, cocaine
access in the year 2002, the most recent I have available, those
statistics suggest that as far as our young people are concerned,
cocaine access and use is up.
I am concerned that the program in Colombia is not the most humane
program, that not enough money is being invested in alternative
development, manual eradication on the ground with aid to farmers. I am
concerned that this package, over time, has not been balanced; that
when you take all of the money into account, you are looking at
approximately 80 percent that is going to be in police and military
aid.
My choice, if we were dealing with this in an ideal world, would in
fact be to transfer the money, as proposed under the amendment. That
would result in tens of thousands of people being saved from infectious
diseases. Not that we abandon Colombia, but that we are more focused in
terms of what we do invest; investing in sadly underfunded programs for
domestic treatment of drugs, increasing funding for the alternative
development to help these small farmers switch crops, insisting, as my
friend from Massachusetts has talked about, on the respect for human
rights and the rule of law, and providing greater political and
financial support for civilian democratic institutions.
But most of all, Mr. Chairman, if we are going to spend this money,
for heaven sakes spend less of it on K Street. Do not spend so much on
consultants, on contractors. I suspect that we can document that far
more of this money ultimately is being spent in this country than is
being spent on the ground in Colombia.
{time} 2100
I think this amendment is a good first step. I welcome this debate
this evening on the floor of the House, and I hope it takes us in a
more productive direction.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. I must admit,
however, I do so with some ambivalence, for I share many of the
concerns that have been articulated by the proponents. They are right
about the balloon effect, because even as coca cultivation declines in
Colombia, we are seeing an increase in Peru and Bolivia. I also share
their concern about human rights abuses, about the relentless assault
on labor leaders and human rights workers, and about military ties to
the paramilitaries. It is reported in our own Department of State
country reports. But it would be unfair not to acknowledge that there
have been sincere efforts made by the Uribe administration to address
these issues and some progress has been made.
Furthermore, I believe that the Colombian people, particularly the
economic elite, as has been alluded to earlier, should be doing more.
Unfortunately, the conflict is being currently fought by poor
Colombians and paid for to a substantial degree by American taxpayers
as indicated by the ranking member of the full committee. And while I
applaud the initiative of President Uribe to levy a war tax, that was a
one-time event. There has to be a permanent revenue stream of new
[[Page H7400]]
money generated by the Colombian people themselves. The percentage of
GDP spent on the security forces is still much lower than in other
Latin American countries which do not have to confront such a vicious
internal conflict. I submit that a new permanent war tax paid by
Colombians ought to be a condition of continued American assistance.
But I would suggest that it is not in our interest at this point in
time to reduce aid to Colombia. It is important to note that President
Uribe has made a firm commitment to fight illegal armed groups, all of
them, not just the FARC and the ELN, but also the paramilitaries. And
it cannot be denied that the Colombian military has been much more
aggressive in dealing with these right-wing paramilitary groups since
the Uribe administration has come to power. Many believe that this has
resulted in a cease-fire and the beginning of a peace process with the
largest faction, the so-called AUC. So now at least there is the
possibility of a peace accord with this particular group. If there is a
chance to remove one of the armed groups from this conflict, we must
take it.
To cut aid just as this process is beginning would send a very bad
signal, even if an unintentional one. In fact, we should be increasing
aid substantially because it is in our national security interests to
do so. Remember, the entire amount we spend on all of Latin America in
a year is less than the amount we are spending in a single week in
Iraq. Our aid should be more balanced, should be directed to help
develop democratic institutions, support human rights and encourage
social and economic development in our own hemisphere, especially in
Colombia. For if we are ever going to do anything that will
substantially and permanently reduce the flow of cocaine and heroin
into the streets of the United States, stability and healthy democratic
institutions are essential. And peace is a prerequisite for that
stability.
That is why I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment of my friend
from Massachusetts.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number
of words.
I rise in strong support of the McGovern-Skelton amendment, and I
thank my colleagues for their outstanding leadership on this critical
issue. This amendment, let us be clear what it does, cuts a modest
amount, $75 million in aid to Colombia's military, a military that our
own State Department has certified is implicated in atrocities against
the Colombian people. It redirects that aid to the fight against HIV/
AIDS, TB, and malaria. And after that $75 million is diverted, still
there is $315.8 million in military aid and a total of $574 million,
over a half a billion dollars in overall aid that will still go to
Colombia. So this is a very modest proposal.
To those who say we need to continue to fund Colombia's military at
current levels because of the war on terror, I say you have not done
your homework. A recent report prepared at the request of Colombia's
President Uribe further documents the illicit ties between Colombia's
military and the paramilitary forces in that country. This is a report
prepared at the request of the President of Colombia. The
paramilitaries and their organizations have been designated as
terrorist organizations by the United States. They massacre civilians,
and they ship drugs to the U.S. Instead of giving more money to a
military known to collaborate with those the Bush administration calls
terrorists, we should employ a different strategy, one that deprives a
corrupt military and the terrorists with whom it collaborates of
resources and American taxpayer dollars so that they cannot as easily
continue their brutal abuse of the Colombian people. Why would any
Member of this body want to make the mission of terrorists and
criminals easier?
The McGovern-Skelton amendment would redirect $75 million to the
child survival and health account for programs that combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, malaria, and other infectious diseases. These are
programs that are proven to be effective in improving and saving lives.
Instead of wasting American dollars on an initiative that has destroyed
lives and increased the suffering of innocent civilians in Colombia, I
think our dollars would be better spent funding programs we know can
save lives.
Our dollars are better spent on programs that work, as opposed to
Plan Colombia which has failed. After 3 years and over 3 billion U.S.
taxpayer dollars, Plan Colombia has failed miserably. It has failed to
strengthen Colombia's democratic institutions. Known human rights
offenders continue to go unpunished and operate with impunity. It has
failed to reduce drug production, use, and availability. Though it may
have reduced by some the production in Colombia, as a region, the
Andean region actually produces more coca. It has cost the lives of
Americans, contractors, even missionaries. Plan Colombia has made a bad
situation in Colombia even worse and has not provided any measurable
benefit to the American people.
Our aerial fumigation program in Colombia has caused untold
environmental damage, poisoning and destroying legal crops, water
sources, and harming the health of children and families. Trade
unionists continue to be murdered. Last year, according to the
International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, 85 percent of all
trade union murders took place in Colombia. Aid to Colombia's military
puts the blood of innocent civilians in that country on our hands. The
number of people killed or disappeared per day, according to Amnesty
International, increased from an average of 14 in 2000 to 20 in 2002.
This is not what we should be calling progress. The number of people
newly displaced by political violence increased 30 percent, from
317,340 in 2000 to 412,000 displaced people in 2002 alone, and nearly 3
million altogether since the violence has started.
I have been to Colombia. I love Colombia and the Colombian people.
And I know that the way to help them is not by putting money and
resources in the hands of those who are implicated in their abuse and
their murder. Escalating a civil war and providing aid to a military
still rife with corruption is illegal, it is immoral, and it is
inexcusable. But today we are not debating an end to the U.S. military
aid to Colombia. As I said, still over half a billion dollars will go
there even with the McGovern-Skelton amendment. I urge support of that
modest and sensible amendment.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
I rise in support of the McGovern-Skelton amendment to transfer a
small amount of money for military funding for Colombia to increase
funding for bilateral HIV/AIDS, TB, and other infectious diseases
programs. This amendment says much about what we believe the priorities
of our country should be in providing overseas assistance. Instead of
providing more tax dollars to an ineffective drug eradication program
and to the Colombian military, which is linked to human rights abuses,
we should focus on alleviating the human rights tragedies that are the
result of HIV/AIDS.
Aid to Colombia has failed to end the drug flow to America, and it
has failed to protect human rights. Strong ties between the Colombian
military and the paramilitary group AUC, which has been listed by the
United States as a terrorist organization, are deeply disturbing, given
the atrocious human rights abuses committed by the AUC. Most
interestingly, The Washington Post recently published the findings of a
report commissioned by President Uribe that showed the AUC, which
frequently fights alongside the Colombian military, is a drug-
trafficking organization. The report estimated that as much as 80
percent of the AUC's funding comes from drug trafficking. This means
that the U.S. is funding a military that is working with a terrorist
drug-trafficking organization in an effort to eradicate drugs. Does
this not seem a little paradoxical?
The AUC's close relationship with the Colombian military is also
disturbing because it implicates the United States in human rights
abuses. How can the U.S. fund a military which has combined forces with
a terrorist group responsible for torture, executions, and
disappearances of innocent Colombian citizens? Until the Colombian
government ceases its relationship with violent paramilitary groups
that terrorize ordinary citizens, the United States must not directly
fund it.
[[Page H7401]]
Furthermore, the process in which the drug eradication program is
conducted through fumigation is conflict-ridden. Fumigation seems to
chase coca cultivation from one area to another. The State Department's
international narcotics control strategy reports for 2000 and 2002 show
that coca production in Colombia's neighbors, Peru and Bolivia, and
other areas of Colombia totaled 184,900 hectares in 2000 and rose to
205,400 hectares by the end of 2002. In the end, coca production
persists because it is the most economically viable option for very
poor peasant farmers in the area. Coca control initiatives must focus
on alternative development assistance to small farmers so they are able
to make the transition to legal crops. Effective development assistance
coupled with manual eradication efforts is the only sustainable
solution to the problem of coca cultivation.
Further, fumigation destroys the alternate development projects set
up to sustain the lives of peasants. In the Putumayo village of La
Isla, both a livestock and aquaculture project was destroyed, killing
the chickens and the fish that represented economic opportunity for
residents. Despite U.S. denials, fumigation affects health. It causes
skin outbreaks and gastrointestinal disorders and respiratory ailments,
particularly among young children, according to local physicians.
Ineffective and highly questionable funding of the Colombian military
should not continue. U.S. taxpayer dollars should not be given to a
military that is conducting human rights abuses against its own
citizens. Instead, taxpayer dollars should be spent on worthy
initiatives such as the HIV/AIDS programs that would genuinely benefit
millions of suffering people.
The McGovern-Skelton amendment makes a modest step in that direction
and it deserves a ``yes'' vote. I urge my colleagues join me in voting
``yes'' in support of the McGovern-Skelton amendment.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to be recorded as opposed to this
amendment. I served on the Committee on Government Reform in my first
term here and then have served on the Speaker's drug task force. I have
been to Colombia, and I have met the new President of Colombia, who has
been here several times. I think it would be a real mistake to cut down
on our funds to Colombia when things are moving ahead and have
progressed so much in the last 5 years.
I yield to the gentleman from Florida, whom I did travel to Colombia
with.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Illinois for
yielding. I also thank her for her leadership and for her work on the
Committee on Government Reform. I had the opportunity to chair the
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources when
some of the Plan Colombia was put together.
{time} 2115
And in conclusion here, we know that in the past, not much was done
to stem illegal narcotic production and trafficking or the violence in
Colombia. We had a President in Colombia who tried to the Cumbayah and
the peace in dealing with the terrorists and that did not work. We now
have a President in Colombia who is committed to the tenets of Plan
Colombia, which is a strong interdiction, which is demanding reforms in
the military to cultivation of other alternative crops, to building the
judiciary and the strength of the institutions of Colombia. We have a
President of the United States who is committed to Plan Colombia. We
have seen the results in the past where tens of thousands have died per
year in Colombia and in the United States. And now we have an
opportunity to move forward. Even the statistics of the Washington
Post, which was a critic in the beginning of Plan Colombia, now says
the critics were wrong. A 25 percent reduction in murders, a 33 percent
reduction in killings. So we have a President here committed to the
plan. We have a President in Colombia committed to the plan, and it is
a working plan and people are not dying.
Finally, let me insert in the Record since 1993, the number of deaths
provided to me today by ONDCP, Americans who died from drug-related
deaths in this country, drug-induced deaths, 148,185 Americans, more
than we have lost in any tragedy we can imagine of contemporary times,
in the period from 1993 to 2000, not even a 10-year period. We have a
chance to stop the death and the dying and the destruction of lives
here. We have a chance to stop the death and destruction and lives
being lost in our neighboring country Colombia; so it would be a step
backward to pass this amendment proposed by the gentleman. I know he is
well intended, but I strongly urge opposition to this.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
I would like to speak in strong support of the McGovern-Skelton
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
McGovern).
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Let me just go over a few facts here.
Fact: If the McGovern-Skelton amendment passes, we still have $195.3
million in hard military aid for the Colombian military in this bill.
Fact: That $195.3 million joins the $120.5 million in the military
aid under the Defense appropriations bill that passed this House on
July 8.
So fact: If the McGovern-Skelton amendment is approved, this House
will still provide a minimum of $315.8 million in military aid to the
Colombian military.
I want to say to my colleagues the important fact is not how much
acreage is sprayed, it is how much coca is grown. And the fact is
despite this policy coca production in the Andean region has increased
since Plan Colombia was enacted in 2000. Those are not my statistics.
Those are the statistics by the United States State Department.
Fact: While coca cultivation in Colombia dropped 15 percent last
year, coca levels in Colombia are still higher than they were in 2000.
Fact: The modest drop in coca production in Colombia is completely
offset by shifting coca cultivation back to Bolivia and Peru. Is that
progress? Is that success? All of us want to protect our constituents
from these illegal drugs, but the bottom line is this is not doing it.
Fact: U.S. counterdrug efforts in Colombia and the Andes have had
absolutely no apparent impact on the availability or use of cocaine
here in the United States. This is according to the January, 2003
National Drug Threat Assessment.
Fact: If we want to stop drug production abroad, then invest in drug
treatment and prevention right here at home.
The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the cosponsor of this
amendment, raised, I think, a very important issue about the fact that
more is being expected of our military personnel in Colombia than of
the Colombian military personnel themselves. President Uribe has said
that he has introduced a law to change the recruitment criteria so that
people who have high school degrees or are from wealthy families in
Colombia are not automatically exempt from serving in the military, but
such a law has been introduced every year since the 1990s. President
Uribe has not made it a priority. His priorities are part of a national
referendum this fall, and changing the recruitment law is not one of
them. I mean we need to see a little action, not just talk.
The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) talked about how
important it is that the government of Colombia is making progress in
trying to work out a truce with the paramilitaries, but the fact of the
matter is almost every human rights group in the world is concerned
about what is happening because the Colombian government Peace
Commissioner Luis Carlos Restrepo confirmed the fears of human rights
advocates that paramilitaries involved in horrific crimes will get a
free pass. I quote him: ``For those who have committed crimes against
humanity, we are looking for punishment that is not jail . . . ''
Another concern with the paramilitaries is that the demobilized
paramilitaries could go straight into the peasant soldier program, thus
in effect legalizing paramilitaries without screening out the worst
offenders or even significant retraining. There is no clear end in
sight, no exit strategy as we get more and more involved in Colombia.
[[Page H7402]]
In November of 2001, there were 220 U.S. private contractors in
Colombia carrying out military and counterdrug operations. Today there
are 308. In November, 2001, we had 117 U.S. military presence in
Colombia; today we have 358. The $75 million that we seek to transfer,
this modest amount, to the HIV/AIDS tuberculosis and malaria accounts I
hope will be used in Colombia. I hope much of it will be used to help
the people of Colombia who have suffered so much. Speakers on the other
side have talked about all the important development initiatives that
are going on there. I support those. I wish that more of our aid to
Colombia was in the form of development assistance and not so much of
it in the form of military aid.
Let me finally close by saying we talk a lot about human rights in
this Chamber, and we talk about human rights in Iraq, we talk about
human rights in Iran, we talk about human rights in China, every other
place in the world. We need to talk about human rights in Colombia. And
anybody who has been to Colombia who has been outside the U.S. embassy,
who has been outside President Uribe's palace, who has been outside the
U.S. military headquarters there will see firsthand that that country
is experiencing a very difficult time right now, and it is not just
because of the FARC guerillas which have one of the most brutal
records, but it is also because of the impunity that continues to exist
in that country and the fact that the Colombian military still has yet
to sever its ties with the paramilitaries. Vote for the McGovern-
Skelton amendment.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to any
attempts to cut funding for Andean Counterdrug Initiatives (ACI).
July 13 marked the third anniversary of Congressional approval of
Plan Colombia. We need to reaffirm, not dismantle, our commitment to
this program, to the people of Colombia, and to American citizens. I
have led three congressional delegations to Colombia over the past five
months. I can say firsthand that our significant investment is
beginning to pay dividends. Together with the strong commitment of the
Uribe Administration and historic levels of support from the Colombian
people, U.S. involvement in Colombia is beginning to hit narco-
terrorists where it hurts.
We are seeing tremendous results in illegal crop eradication, and
Plan Colombia's efforts have produced record reductions in coca
production and in the destruction of drug labs. Each week brings news
of new seizures of cocaine and heroine--interdictions that are usually
the result of U.S.-supplied intelligence. In fact, just three weeks ago
during my most recent CODEL, Colombian officials seized over a ton of
cocaine from a drug trafficking boat off the Carribean coast.
The Colombian government is reestablishing state presence in areas of
the country that for decades lacked it. Criminals who have remained at
bay for years are being captured and extradited to the United States
for prosecution. During the first 11 months of President Uribe's
tenure, 68 individuals have been extradited from Colombia to the United
States.
Mr. Chairman, Plan Colombia is working. I have seen firsthand the
devastation that drug production and trafficking has on Colombia. To
those who question our investment, I would ask them to visit, as I
have, Colombian soldiers who have lost their limbs or eyesight or
sustained permanent disabilities in their battle to return peace to
their nation--and keep drugs off American streets.
I would also ask them to visit Barrio Nelson Mandela, a USAID-
sponsored facility for internally displaced people who have been forced
from their homes by drug traffickers and guerillas. This facility
showed me how our work on behalf of Colombia's millions of internally
displaced people is offering men, women, and children a second chance
at a violence-free, productive life.
My travels to Colombia have shown me just how critical U.S.
assistance is to their government. With such promising results over the
last 3 years, we need to sustain the momentum.
Of course obstacles remain, and progress is slower than we would like
it to be. But now is not the time to turn our backs on this battle that
is so intrinsically tied to our war on terrorism and the scourge of
illegal drug use.
The Uribe Administration is committed to this war. But it needs
United States assistance to improve mobility, intelligence, and
training. Make no mistake: Colombia today is doing its share. Spending
on security forces has increased under President Uribe from $2.7
billion to over $4 billion.
We simply cannot afford for President Uribe to fail to rid his
country of the narco-terror threat. Nor would Colombians understand
such a step if this amendment prevails.
The Administration requested $731,000,000 for the Andean Counterdrug
Initiative (ACI) for fiscal year 2004. Full funding of this request is
critical to sustaining our success in Colombia and to protecting
Colombia's neighbors from a spillover effect.
It's simple, Mr. Chairman: Now is not the time to turn our backs on
the progress we are making against narco-terrorism in Colombia. We
cannot win this war on drugs and drug-supported terrorism without the
proper tools and resources. Vote ``no'' on the McGovern amendments.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on amendment offered by the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
McGovern) will be postponed.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Kolbe
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Kolbe:
Strike beginning page 7, line 3, after ``law'', and ending
line 17, after ``expenses'' but before the semicolon, and
insert:
except the provisions of section 292(d)(4) of Public Law 108-
25, for a United States contribution to the Global Fund to
Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (the ``Global Fund''),
and shall be expended at the minimum rate necessary to make
timely payment for projects and activities: Provided further,
That of the funds appropriated and allocated for HIV/AIDS
under this heading, not less than $15,000,000 should be made
available as a contribution to the International AIDS Vaccine
Initiative; not more than $6,326,000 may be available for
administrative expenses of the Office of Coordinator of
United States Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS
Globally (the ``Coordinator'').
Mr. KOLBE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Arizona?
There was no objection.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, this perfecting amendment simply clarifies
the responsibilities of the new AIDS coordinator that has been added by
legislation adopted by the Congress and signed into law by the
President. I believe it is acceptable to the minority.
I yield to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) for her
comment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the Chair for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to the chairman's amendment;
however, I do have a few comments. This amendment clarifies some of the
authorities in the bill with respect to the HIV/AIDS coordinator, while
preserving the underlying language in the bill setting up the framework
for HIV/AIDS programs. While the President is intent on ensuring that
all AIDS funding pass through the new coordinator's office, there are
some in Congress who would question the wisdom of such a requirement.
Both the Agency for International Development and the Centers for
Disease Control have years of experience programming funds spent to
combat HIV/AIDS. At the moment it is unclear what function the new
coordinator will serve. If the office attempts to micromanage HIV
programs as opposed to coordinate them among Federal agencies, there
will potentially be serious delays in program implementation. This bill
gives the coordinator adequate authority and also ensures that the
appropriate agency controls program funds.
Everyone is anxious to make progress in this fight, but we have to be
careful that we do not create a bureaucratic mess in the name of
coordination. This amendment removes a limitation that would have
focused the resources of the coordinator's operation, and it is my
expectation, as we move forward to create this new bureaucracy, that
Congress will exercise its oversight prerogatives on the use of such
funds.
Again, I do have do not object to the chairman's amendment and I urge
its adoption.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe).
The amendment was agreed to.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
[[Page H7403]]
Mr. Chairman, I had an amendment. It was very simple, and it would
have provided $200 million of the funds appropriated for the HIV/AIDS
assistance, that it be directed for orphans and vulnerable children
affected by HIV/AIDS.
With the support of the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) and
the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), ranking member, I was able
to add a similar amendment to the Global AIDS authorizing language
earlier this year, and it required that 10 percent of all HIV/AIDS
funding go toward assistance to orphans and vulnerable children. The
amendment I was going to offer today would have made good on this
promise. It would have made Congress show that it was going to be
responsible in the way that it passed the Global AIDS legislation
earlier this year. This amendment would have helped to protect the
youngest victims of the AIDS pandemic, those who cannot advocate for
themselves.
The AIDS emergency is quickly becoming the worst health care
catastrophe in the country and is leaving millions of children
suffering the loss of their parents in its wake. Already, 25 million
people have died from AIDS worldwide. And as more and more parents die,
millions of children around the world are left facing an increasingly
bleak future. For example, in Uganda, Christopher, a 13-year-old boy,
is now officially one of the 1.7 million children orphaned by the AIDS
epidemic in his country. After losing his mother to AIDS this past
December, Christopher runs his household. He cares for his 9-year-old
brother. Their three sisters are in the care of relatives, as the
siblings had to be separated because no one single family could take on
all five children. Although Christopher appears to be healthy, his
younger sister has been getting sicker, and more frequently she is
unable to play and to function as any child would.
But yet none of these children have gone for HIV testing. Why?
Because if an HIV test is confirmed as positive, a foster family would
be less likely, less inclined to look after a sick child whose days are
numbered. At an age when most boys are thinking about their next soccer
game, like my nephew, Christopher's thoughts are only of daily
survival. If he goes to school, who will work the land? Who will ensure
that there will be food on the table for suppertime, not to mention
look after his younger brother?
In a society where resources are scarce and poverty is a common
denominator, children like Christopher are more vulnerable as they have
no one to protect them. If Christopher chooses to go to school, he will
leave his home, the farm garden plot unattended, and that risk is just
too great for him to take.
We have a responsibility today to ensure that this money goes to
improve safe, healthy children, the survival of children, children like
Christopher and his siblings.
I knew that my amendment was going to be subject to a point of order
as I had taken it to the Committee on Rules, and I was unable to
provide this body with a waiver to allow the House to move forward and
vote on this vital issue. However, I am very hopeful that the gentleman
from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs.
Lowey), ranking member, will continue to work to enhance the report
language as the appropriation process moves forward to ensure that
orphans and vulnerable children receive their appropriate share of the
HIV funding that we promised them.
{time} 2130
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage in a brief colloquy with the gentleman
from California.
Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I had intended to offer an amendment dealing with
Afghanistan. Last year the overwhelming majority of the House voted to
establish a single fund to carry out a wide variety of vitally needed
programs in Afghanistan when it passed the Afghanistan Freedom Support
Act of 2002. That act was eventually passed on a Senate vehicle, but
was very close to what we passed here with a margin of 390 to 22.
The intention was to appoint a strong administrator who would carry
out programs unencumbered by the need to draw funds from and conform to
every particle of the complex legal and regulatory framework of the
many parts of the foreign assistance acts that need to be brought to
bear on the problem of rebuilding Afghanistan.
Over time, the situation has continued to be grave. Our achievements
in Afghanistan are in danger of being overturned and our sacrifices in
Afghanistan are in danger of having been made in vain. The bill before
us, hopefully, requires that $600 million from titles II and III be
spent in Afghanistan, and those funds have been identified in broad
terms by the administration. The committee has done an excellent job in
this bill in general and in providing funds for Afghanistan in
particular, and I salute the chairman and the committee for this
achievement.
The problem is that funding under the mechanism contemplated in the
bill does not take advantage of the new mechanisms provided by Congress
last year. This funding cannot be as flexible and is subject to the
guidance of a single administrator as it could be if it were provided
in a single account.
The current coordinator, Ambassador Taylor, has experience in using
this sort of account when he was Coordinator for Assistance for Eastern
Europe and the Former Soviet Union. We did not know that Ambassador
Taylor was going to be appointed to this position when last year's bill
was drafted, but we certainly need to give him the flexibility and the
overall responsibility he had for this new and very difficult job he
has assumed.
The President did not sign the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act until
December of 2002, and it is understandable that the administration did
not establish the account in its 2003 budget and that the committee
followed the administration's guidance in framing this bill.
But it is many months later and things are not going well in
Afghanistan. Let us spend the $600 million the right way, if we can.
At this time I submit for the Record the text of the amendment I was
considering offering.
Amendment to H.R. 2800, as Reported
Offered by M. ______________________________
Page 122, after line 2, insert the following:
Assistance for Afghanistan
Sec. ____. For necessary expenses to carry out the
provisions of title I of the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act
of 2002 (other than section 103(c) of such Act), and the
amounts otherwise provided for in this Act for ``child
survival and health programs fund'', ``development
assistance'', ``economic support fund'', ``migration and
refugee assistance'', ``nonproliferation, anti-terrorism,
demining and related programs'', ``peacekeeping operations'',
and assistance for Afghanistan under section 523 are reduced
by, $425,000,000, $21,000,000, $150,000,000, $150,000,000,
$72,000,000, $12,000,000, $20,000,000, and $425,000,000,
respectively.
Explanation of the Royce-Hyde Amendment
The amendment `` reaches back'' and transfers into the
Afghanistan Freedom Support Fund account precisely $425
million from a variety of accounts previously identified by
the Administration for Afghanistan:
$150 million from Development Assistance;
$150 million from Economic support Fund;
$20 million from Peacekeeping Operations;
$21 million from the Child Survival Fund;
$72 million from Migration and Refugee Assistance; and
$12 million from Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining
and Related Programs.
It maintains the $600 million total spending by reducing
the earmark in Section 523 by $425 million. It leaves
remaining earmark of $175 million to be drawn from other
Title II and III accounts. It does not reduce spending on
Afghanistan by one dollar.
Mr. Chairman, I believe that the House took wise, considered action
when it established the Afghanistan account. We filed a report and took
the bill to the floor under an open rule. We then had discussions with
the Senate, which passed its version, which the House accepted by voice
vote. If there need to be changes to this measure, our committee has
shown that it is capable of moving amendatory language through this
Chamber.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the
interest of the gentleman from California, who is an outstanding member
of the Committee on International Relations.
We have provided separate accounts for Iraq, for the former Soviet
Union
[[Page H7404]]
and to the nations formerly in the Warsaw Pact. As the gentleman
correctly notes, we have not yet funded an account for Afghanistan. The
amendment that the gentleman has put in the Record is difficult to
follow, but I believe the gentleman has described its operation
accurately. I will work with the gentleman and the committee to fund
this account in conference this year at the authorized level or more,
though I cannot commit to the precise accounts within the bill from
which we will draw the funds required.
Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, I am
pleased to accept the gentleman's assurance that he will work to have
this account funded, and I am sure that he will do so. I will do
everything I can to help make that happen.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I am deeply concerned as we face this legislation with
the continued decline in USAID urban programming. Now, most in the
assembly probably do not give it a great deal of attention, but it is a
nagging part of the international turmoil that shows up daily in the
headlines to be found in some of these mega-urban areas around the
world with populations of 10 million or more. This is a dangerous trend
that has not been unnoticed by our security activities.
In its Outlook 2015, the CIA ranked rapid urbanization as one of the
top seven security concerns of this country. It stated that ``cities
will be the sources of crime and instability as ethnic and religious
differences exacerbate the competition for ever scarcer jobs and
resources.''
The sheer scale of growth in these cities around the world is
striking. In 1950 there was one city in the world with more than 10
million people, the City of New York. By 2015, it is expected there
will be 23 mega-cities with populations exceeding 10 million.
Over half the world's population already lives in cities. In the next
25 years, we anticipate that there will be another 2.5 billion people
added to this population, more in the next 25 years in these cities
than we expect in the entire world's population in the next 50 years.
They are going to settle in areas like Bombay, Sao Paulo, Jakarta and
Karachi.
The problems that come along with this concentrated population
growth, air pollution, water and sanitation problems, transportation
gridlock, disastrous housing conditions, produce political, social,
economic instability and unrest.
We have a tool in the U.S. Agency for International Development's
Urban Programs Office. It works to help stabilize these massive urban
areas as they attempt to fight these environmental, economic, social
and political problems.
Unfortunately, the United States programs in this area have faced a
decade of rapid decline and staff cutbacks. In 1993, we had $8 million.
This year's presidential request is for $2.5 million.
I have appreciated the effort of the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman
Kolbe) and the ranking member, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs.
Lowey) and their focusing of attention. There have been requests for
more money. The Senate language last year strongly recommended
additional funding, yet only $3 million was funded for 2003, and the
prospects are for continued decline this year. It is the cost of
approximately two cruise missiles.
Mr. Chairman, I would ask if there is some possibility on behalf of
this program, to the Chair or ranking member, if there might be some
way to give some attention as this bill works its way through the
legislative process to perhaps focus some additional attention on being
able to make some additional investment to deal with these severely
stressed areas?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's concern. He
certainly has identified an area of great concern, and one that clearly
does need to be dealt with.
The growing urbanization that exists in the world makes these issues
of the cities a major problem. Certainly I would agree that clean water
and the environment is something that we need to be focused on and that
USAID needs to be focused on.
So I would agree completely with the gentleman's concerns here that
this is an area that USAID needs to give greater attention to.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, again I want to thank the gentleman for his
important work in this area. I know that we have talked quite a bit
about the importance of focusing on urban areas and creating a sense of
civility in the areas by working on transportation and health and
orderliness in our communities. I look forward to working with the
gentleman. I appreciate his assistance in helping us craft important
language in the reports of this bill, and I know that working together
and working with AID, we can increase the intensity of their commitment
to this project.
I look forward to working with the Chair and the gentleman in the
next year.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I deeply appreciate
the expressions of concern and the hard work. There is probably no
committee in Congress that has a more difficult assignment and
stretched in more areas that really are a matter of life and death. But
I think here even a few million dollars could greatly expand our
efforts. I would look forward to working with Members, and I appreciate
their concern.
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I first would like to thank the gentleman from Arizona
(Chairman Kolbe) and the ranking member, the gentlewoman from New York
(Mrs. Lowey) for their hard work on this important bill.
I am extremely pleased that there is funding included in this bill in
a number of important programs, including development assistance for
the Child Survival and Disease Fund, the World Bank, funds for peace
initiatives in the Middle East, the Fund for Ireland and many other
important programs. I thank my colleagues and appreciate their work.
However, I would like to raise my concern about one issue that is of
particular importance to the women of the world, UNFPA. This body
debated the issue just last week, but I must repeat the facts: UNFPA
provides reproductive health care, including family planning services,
but not abortion, to the world's poorest women, and specializes in
caring for refugees and prevention of HIV/AIDS.
The loss of funds is hurting millions of women in the world's poorest
countries. UNFPA estimates that $69 million, the amount Congress
appropriated these last 2 years but the administration then canceled,
could prevent 4 million unwanted pregnancies, 1.6 million abortions,
9,400 maternal deaths, 120,000 cases of serious maternal injury and
illness and more than 150,000 infant deaths.
Even though this bill contains $25 million for UNFPA, the money will
never get to those in need because the President's cancellation of the
funds remains in force. I urge my colleagues to remove the harmful
language that continues the blockage on money going to UNFPA and to
help save the lives of millions of women and children around the world.
Mr. Chairman, I also rise to engage the gentleman from Arizona
(Chairman Kolbe) in a colloquy to clarify language contained in the
foreign operations report on behalf of my dear friend and colleague,
the gentleman from new York (Mr. Towns), who was called back to New
York on important business.
Mr. Chairman, I am concerned about the language that appears on page
18 where the committee notes, ``USAID does not currently fund any
programs specifically aimed at obstetric fistula repair, and urges
USAID to initiate programs in the most heavily affected areas.''
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. Maloney. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman does correctly read the
language as it appears in the report. This language that you seek to
clarify was offered by the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
[[Page H7405]]
Mrs. MALONEY. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for bringing this
issue to the floor. This condition is so devastating, I think it makes
a lot of people uncomfortable. We need to get more comfortable with the
fact that the problem exists, and we must play a role in solving it. I
am glad we are discussing it on the floor today.
A recent report commissioned by UNFPA has recognized obstetric
fistula as a condition that is both preventable and treatable.
Obstetric fistulas are virtually unknown in places where early
pregnancy is discouraged, young women are educated, family planning is
accessible and medical care is provided at childbirth. Women with
fistulas are living indicators of failed maternal health systems.
I am proud that the committee report accompanying this bill urges the
Agency for International Development to initiate programs in the areas
most heavily affected by fistula. We must work hard to encourage USAID
to take on this issue.
The United States has consistently taken the lead on fighting HIV-
AIDS, and I believe we should do the same for obstetric fistula. We
know the difference that a trained physician can make through
prevention and treatment. We need more trained doctors, organized
education efforts for women and families and basic medical equipment in
the countries affected by fistula to eradicate this terrible condition.
These are the types of assistance that USAID can and should be
providing, and I thank the gentlewoman again for raising this issue.
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, the Engender Health/UNFPA report
highlighted the problem of obstetric fistulas in sub-Saharan Africa.
This report provided valuable information that led us to understand
that this condition is far more serious and widespread than previously
noted. I commend the gentlewoman for her work on this issue and am
seeking clarification of the phrase ``most heavily affected areas.''
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman will yield further, I
share her concern. What does the gentlewoman from New York recommend?
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, the Engender Health/UNFPA report details
widespread fistula occurrence in nine countries in sub-Saharan Africa:
Benin, Chad, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Uganda and
Zambia.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs.
Maloney) has expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mrs. Maloney was allowed to proceed for 1
additional minute.)
{time} 2145
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, there are currently 35 hospitals in the
aforementioned countries that have the capacity to conduct fistula
repair surgery, but are without the financial resources. The Hamlin
Fistula Hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, which has successfully
performed fistula repairs since 1974, is the only known medical
establishment focusing solely on fistula repair and has long been
regarded as a model center for those involved in such care.
I would encourage USAID to follow the letter of the committee's
language and initiate programs in the most heavily affected areas,
which would include the aforementioned nine sub-Saharan countries and
Ethiopia, in addition to Sierra Leone.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I agree with that formulation.
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I hope the chairman of the subcommittee
agrees also.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. MALONEY. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I do agree with the ranking member that the
heavily affected areas that she describes should be considered on a
priority basis.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments to this section of the
bill?
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to engage in a
colloquy with the chairman of the subcommittee regarding the Inter-
American Foundation.
Mr. Chairman, I deeply appreciate the consideration the gentleman
from Arizona has given to the Inter-American Foundation and his support
of increased funding for IAF in the past. I know he understands the
importance of this vital program in Latin America and the Caribbean.
For more than 3 decades, the Inter-American Foundation has provided
grants to community organizations to implement their own creative ideas
for development and poverty reduction. For example, a year ago I had
the opportunity to visit a project in Esteli, Nicaragua, and I visited
entrepreneurial women at the time who were receiving grants from the
Inter-American Foundation to provide technical support and micro-credit
assistance to help them launch a small business on their own and become
self-sustainable. I am concerned though, Mr. Chairman, about a decrease
in funding in the Inter-American Foundation in the bill before us.
As the gentleman knows, 40 of my colleagues join me in respectfully
requesting a minimum level of funding of $20 million for the Inter-
American Foundation fiscal year 2004. We were encouraged by the
gentleman's subcommittee's leadership in increasing the program from
$13.1 million in fiscal year 2002 to $16.1 million in 2003. However,
this year's bill reflects the President's budget request of only $15.2
million for the Inter-American Foundation in fiscal year 2004, a
decrease from last year's level.
Unfortunately, I believe the President's budget request was low
because it was prepared prior to the fiscal year 2003 foreign
operations bill was passed. Therefore, the President perhaps did not
use the actual $16.1 million fiscal year 2003 funding level as a base.
Mr. Chairman, given the wide support of the Inter-American
Foundation, would the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), the chairman
of the subcommittee, be willing to work for increased funding, at a
minimum, providing the same level it received in fiscal year 2003 for
the program as the bill moves forward towards conference?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. SOLIS. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for the concerns
that she has expressed here about the Inter-American Foundation. I do
support the valuable work of the foundation and the fact that it
promotes entrepreneurship, self-reliance, democratic principles, as
well as the economic progress for the poor in Latin America and the
Caribbean region.
The committee funded the Inter-American Foundation at the President's
requested level, as the gentlewoman noted. The funding level is not
higher in this bill because of the low budget allocation that the
subcommittee received, a level that is $1 million lower than the Senate
subcommittee has to work with, and it is certainly not intended to show
anything but full support for the Inter-American Foundation.
I recognize that it is important that the Inter-American Foundation
experiences steady funding to ensure the viability of the crucial
program that the gentlewoman has discussed. If the subcommittee
receives a higher budget allocation in conference, I will certainly
work to support an increased funding level for this program.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would like to thank
the gentleman for his leadership and support on this vital program, and
I look forward to working with him on this issue.
The CHAIRMAN. If there are no further amendments to this section of
the bill, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
development assistance
For necessary expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development to carry out the provisions of
sections 103, 105, 106, and 131, and chapter 10 of part I of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $1,317,000,000, of which
up to $50,000,000 may remain available until September 30,
2005: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated under
title II of this Act that are managed by or allocated to the
United States Agency for International Development's Global
Development Secretariat, may be made available except through
the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations: Provided further,
[[Page H7406]]
That $194,000,000 should be allocated for trade capacity
building: Provided further, That $250,000,000 should be
allocated for basic education: Provided further, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading and managed by the
United States Agency for International Development Bureau of
Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, not less
than $11,000,000 shall be made available only for programs to
improve women's leadership capacity in recipient countries:
Provided further, That such funds may not be made available
for construction: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading that are made available for
assistance programs for displaced and orphaned children and
victims of war, not to exceed $32,500, in addition to funds
otherwise available for such purposes, may be used to monitor
and provide oversight of such programs.
international disaster and famine assistance
For necessary expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development to carry out the provisions of
section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended
for international disaster relief, rehabilitation, and
reconstruction assistance, $235,500,000, to remain available
until expended.
In addition, for necessary expenses of the United States
Agency for International Development for assistance for
famine prevention and relief, including for mitigation of the
effects of famine, $80,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That such funds shall be made available
utilizing the general authorities of section 491 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and shall be in addition to
amounts otherwise available for such purposes: Provided
further, That funds appropriated by this paragraph shall be
available for obligation subject to prior consultation with
the Committees on Appropriations.
transition initiatives
For necessary expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development for international disaster
rehabilitation and reconstruction assistance pursuant to
section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$55,000,000, to remain available until expended, to support
transition to democracy and to long-term development of
countries in crisis: Provided, That such support may include
assistance to develop, strengthen, or preserve democratic
institutions and processes, revitalize basic infrastructure,
and foster the peaceful resolution of conflict: Provided
further, That the United States Agency for International
Development shall submit a report to the Committees on
Appropriations at least 5 days prior to beginning a new
program of assistance.
development credit authority
(including transfer of funds)
For the cost of direct loans and loan guarantees provided
by the United States Agency for International Development, as
authorized by sections 108 and 635 of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, funds may be derived by transfer from funds
appropriated by this Act to carry out part I of such Act and
under the heading ``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the
Baltic States'': Provided, That such funds shall not exceed
$21,000,000, which shall be made available only for micro and
small enterprise programs, urban programs, and other programs
which further the purposes of part I of the Act: Provided
further, That such costs shall be as defined in section 502
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further,
That the provisions of section 107A(d) (relating to general
provisions applicable to the Development Credit Authority) of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as contained in section
306 of H.R. 1486 as reported by the House Committee on
International Relations on May 9, 1997, shall be applicable
to direct loans and loan guarantees provided under this
heading. In addition, for administrative expenses to carry
out credit programs administered by the United States Agency
for International Development, $8,000,000, which may be
transferred to and merged with the appropriation for
Operating Expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development: Provided further, That funds made
available under this heading shall remain available until
September 30, 2007.
payment to the foreign service retirement and disability fund
For payment to the ``Foreign Service Retirement and
Disability Fund'', as authorized by the Foreign Service Act
of 1980, $43,859,000.
operating expenses of the united states agency for international
development
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$604,100,000, of which $30,000,000 may remain available until
September 30, 2005: Provided, That none of the funds
appropriated under this heading and under the heading
``Capital Investment Fund'' may be made available to finance
the construction (including architect and engineering
services), purchase, or long term lease of offices for use by
the United States Agency for International Development,
unless the Administrator has identified such proposed
construction (including architect and engineering services),
purchase, or long term lease of offices in a report submitted
to the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days prior to
the obligation of these funds for such purposes: Provided
further, That the previous proviso shall not apply where the
total cost of construction (including architect and
engineering services), purchase, or long term lease of
offices does not exceed $1,000,000: Provided further, That in
addition not to exceed $15,000,000 may be derived by transfer
from the ``Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund'' (Public Law
108-11) to support the United States Agency for International
Development mission in Iraq: Provided further, That none of
the funds in this Act may be used to open a new overseas
mission of the United States Agency for International
Development without the prior written notification of the
Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That the
authority of sections 610 and 109 of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 may be exercised by the Secretary of State to
transfer funds appropriated to carry out chapter 1 of such
Act to ``Operating Expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development'' in accordance with the provisions
of those sections.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last
word.
Mr. Chairman, in the course of the reading of the legislation, I
would like to raise a discussion about the famine in Ethiopia,
particularly as it relates to the funding that is listed under
International Development.
Let me just say that over the years, my office has worked with the
Ethiopian community on the recurring famine in the Eritrea and Ethiopia
region. The predecessor to this seat, Congressman Mickey Leland, lost
his life in Ethiopia over a famine that occurred in 1989.
One of the concerns that I have with respect to this focus is the
recurring aspect of the famine. I was intending to offer an amendment
that is subject to a point of order that would increase the technical
assistance regarding the need to enhance the skills that Ethiopia has
to avoid the recurring, if you will, the recurring famine, and to be
able to train the Ethiopian government to respond preemptively, if you
will, in a preventive manner to the recurring famines that happen to
occur.
So my concern, and the point of my amendment, which I will not offer
and which I simply want to acknowledge on the record, is to ensure that
the funds that we use are funds that can also not only work in
accordance with the need of the present famine, but are we doing
anything to invest in resources, in water needs, in wells, in order to
be prepared for the recurring famine.
It is well known that in this region this drought occurs on a regular
cycle. And the question remains as to whether or not, and I know the
ranking member and the chairman are certainly well in tune with the
idea of the recurring droughts, it concerns my constituents that it
appears that we are without assistance in terms of training individuals
to be preventive as opposed to being reactive.
So in order to not delay this point with respect to an amendment that
has a point of order, to the ranking member, the discussion that I am
having is that my concern with the funding is that Ethiopia has had a
recurring drought over the last 3 decades, and that recurring drought
has seen a major loss of life. My question is whether the assistance
that we are giving helps provide preventive measures to be able to
respond to the recurring drought as opposed to reactive measures. I
wanted to raise that point on the record. I wanted to acknowledge what
is obvious, that people are dying; and as well, I might inquire of the
gentlewoman from New York as to whether or not in this section, whether
there is technical assistance provided to those nations that are
suffering from drought in this foreign development provision.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman for bringing
this issue to our attention. The chairman and I are very sensitive to
the conditions which the gentlewoman describes. Yes, there is
assistance that is being provided by AID. We would like to further
discuss it with the gentlewoman and work with the gentlewoman to see if
that assistance could be intensified.
I thank the gentlewoman for bringing this issue to our attention.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank
the gentlewoman. There are a number of companies here in the United
States
[[Page H7407]]
that deal with water development, well development; and many of them I
have had discussions with. I know that AID is engaged with them. But I
would like to think that there could be a major, sort of Marshall Plan
that really collaboratively deals with this ongoing problem of this
continuing drought that causes such enormous loss of life, and I would
hope that our monies could be used in that direction.
Mr. Chairman, I would have provided this amendment to H.R. 2800, the
Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill for FY 2004, requesting that
none of the funding allocated in this Appropriation Act shall inhibit
any technical assistance to Ethiopia and other famine-stricken regions
in Africa. I will discuss this amendment, however, I believe that
further work with AID will be as necessary as I presented.
A comprehensive, multifaceted effort to address issues of hunger-
relief in Ethiopia and other regions at risk of famine must be in place
because it is estimated that between 11 and 14 million people could go
hungry within the coming months.
Ethiopia's poverty-stricken economy is based on agriculture, which
accounts for approximately half of its gross domestic product (GDP), 85
percent of its exports, and 80 percent of its total employment. The
agricultural sector suffers from frequent drought and poor cultivation
practices, and as many as 4.6 million people require annual food
assistance. The present environmental conditions in Ethiopia are
creating a scenario in which thousands are suffering daily from hunger
and malnutrition. Approximately 15 percent of Ethiopia's October-
November 2002 harvest was destroyed due to severe drought conditions.
This agricultural disaster resulted in the failure of root and other
green vegetables upon which many Ethiopians rely for sustenance. Due to
this loss in crop yield, families that depend on subsistence farming
not only lack food needed to survive, but also the seeds needed for
replanting the following year.
As a result of the poor environmental conditions, livestock in
addition to crops are suffering as well. With mortality rates steadily
rising, livestock populations fortunate enough to survive are suffering
from lowered body weight, thus causing reduced traction, power and milk
production; this only further exacerbates the impending food shortage.
With the combination of plummeting livestock prices and raging cereal
prices, poorer households are facing an even worse predicament in
obtaining food. In addition to food shortages, access to safe, clean
drinking water continues to be an area of enormous concern. On any
given day, less than 20 percent of Ethiopia's population has access to
safe drinking water. These conditions are devastating the country and
more needs to be done to address this plight of hunger in the region.
I cannot emphasize enough the impact that famine is having on the
young people of Ethiopia. According to one estimate, six children die
of drought-related conditions daily in Ethiopia. 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
secure food stations.
As horrific as the famine situation is in Ethiopia, there are a
number of other countries facing a similar plight. The United Nations
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. Countries like Ethiopia are forced to rely greatly on
foreign aid and debt relief to push the economy forward.
Mr. Chairman, given the conditions which I have outlined I feel that
it is imperative that we ensure that none of the funding allocated in
this Appropriation Act shall limit the provision of any added technical
assistance to Ethiopia and other countries suffering from conditions of
famine. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and support the
unimpeded flow of funds to famine-stricken nations in Africa.
Amendment to H.R. 2800, as Reported Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
technical assistance for improved means of crop production and water
purification in famine stricken areas of africa
Sec. ____. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to limit any added technical assistance to Ethiopia
and other famine stricken regions in Africa as to improved
means of crop production and water purification.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Capital investment fund
For necessary expenses for overseas construction and
related costs, and for the procurement and enhancement of
information technology and related capital investments of the
United States Agency for International Development, pursuant
to section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$49,300,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That this amount is in addition to funds otherwise available
for such purposes: Provided further, That the Administrator
of the United States Agency for International Development
shall assess fair and reasonable rental payments for the use
of space by employees of other United States Government
agencies in buildings constructed using funds appropriated
under this heading, and such rental payments shall be
deposited into this account as an offsetting collection:
Provided further, That the rental payments collected pursuant
to the previous proviso and deposited as an offsetting
collection shall be available for obligation only pursuant to
the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations: Provided further, That the assignment of
United States Government employees or contractors to space in
buildings constructed using funds appropriated under this
heading shall be subject to the concurrence of the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development: Provided further, That funds appropriated under
this heading shall be available for obligation only pursuant
to the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.
operating expenses of the united states agency for international
development office of inspector general
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$35,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2005,
which sum shall be available for the Office of the Inspector
General of the United States Agency for International
Development.
Other Bilateral Economic Assistance
economic support fund
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
chapter 4 of part II, $2,240,500,000 to remain available
until September 30, 2005: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $480,000,000
shall be available only for Israel, which sum shall be
available on a grant basis as a cash transfer and shall be
disbursed within 30 days of the enactment of this Act:
Provided further, That not less than $575,000,000 shall be
available only for Egypt, which sum shall be provided on a
grant basis, and of which sum cash transfer assistance shall
be provided with the understanding that Egypt will undertake
significant economic reforms which are additional to those
which were undertaken in previous fiscal years: Provided
further, That in exercising the authority to provide cash
transfer assistance for Israel, the President shall ensure
that the level of such assistance does not cause an adverse
impact on the total level of nonmilitary exports from the
United States to such country and that Israel enters into a
side letter agreement in an amount proportional to the fiscal
year 1999 agreement: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $250,000,000
should be made available only for assistance for Jordan:
Provided further, That not less than $12,000,000 of the funds
appropriated under this heading should be made available for
Cyprus to be used only for scholarships, administrative
support of the scholarship program, bicommunal projects, and
measures aimed at reunification of the island and designed to
reduce tensions and promote peace and cooperation between the
two communities on Cyprus: Provided further, That not less
than $35,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading
should be made available for assistance for Lebanon of which
not less than $4,000,000 should be available only for
American educational institutions for scholarships and other
programs: Provided further, That notwithstanding section
534(a) of this Act, funds appropriated under this heading
that are made available for assistance for the Central
Government of Lebanon shall be subject to the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations:
Provided further, That not to exceed $65,000,000 of the funds
appropriated under this heading in this Act may be made
available for the costs, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, of modifying direct loans
and guarantees for Pakistan: Provided further, That not to
exceed $67,000,000 shall be available to the Department of
State Office of Overseas Buildings Operation for construction
of United States Agency for International Development
facilities in Mali, Guinea, Cambodia, and Georgia: Provided
further, That funds appropriated under this heading shall be
made available for administrative costs of the United States
Agency for International Development to provide adequate
security, carry out programs in Afghanistan, and implement
regional programs in Asia and the Near East, including the
Middle East Partnership Initiative, in addition to amounts
otherwise available for such purposes: Provided further, That
with respect to funds appropriated under this heading in this
Act or prior Acts making appropriations for foreign
operations, export financing, and related programs, the
responsibility for policy decisions and justifications for
the use of such funds, including whether there will be a
program for a country that uses those funds and the amount of
each such program, shall be the responsibility of the
Secretary of State and the Deputy Secretary of State and this
responsibility shall not be delegated.
international fund for ireland
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$19,600,000, which
[[Page H7408]]
shall be available for the United States contribution to the
International Fund for Ireland and shall be made available in
accordance with the provisions of the Anglo-Irish Agreement
Support Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-415): Provided, That such
amount shall be expended at the minimum rate necessary to
make timely payment for projects and activities: Provided
further, That funds made available under this heading shall
remain available until September 30, 2005.
assistance for eastern europe and the baltic states
(a) For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Support for East
European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989, $452,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2005, which shall be
available, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
assistance and for related programs for Eastern Europe and
the Baltic States: Provided, That funds appropriated under
this heading shall be considered to be economic assistance
under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for purposes of
making available the administrative authorities contained in
that Act for the use of economic assistance: Provided
further, That funds made available for assistance for Kosovo
from funds appropriated under this heading and under the
headings ``Economic Support Fund'' and ``International
Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' should not exceed 15
percent of the total resources pledged by all donors for
calendar year 2004 for assistance for Kosovo as of March 31,
2004.
(b) Funds appropriated under this heading or in prior
appropriations Acts that are or have been made available for
an Enterprise Fund may be deposited by such Fund in interest-
bearing accounts prior to the Fund's disbursement of such
funds for program purposes. The Fund may retain for such
program purposes any interest earned on such deposits without
returning such interest to the Treasury of the United States
and without further appropriation by the Congress. Funds made
available for Enterprise Funds shall be expended at the
minimum rate necessary to make timely payment for projects
and activities.
(c) With regard to funds appropriated under this heading
for the economic revitalization program in Bosnia and
Herzegovina, and local currencies generated by such funds
(including the conversion of funds appropriated under this
heading into currency used by Bosnia and Herzegovina as local
currency and local currency returned or repaid under such
program) the Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development shall provide written approval for
grants and loans prior to the obligation and expenditure of
funds for such purposes, and prior to the use of funds that
have been returned or repaid to any lending facility or
grantee.
(d) The provisions of section 529 of this Act shall apply
to funds made available under subsection (c) and to funds
appropriated under this heading: Provided, That
notwithstanding any provision of this or any other Act,
including provisions in this subsection regarding the
application of section 529 of this Act, local currencies
generated by, or converted from, funds appropriated by this
Act and by previous appropriations Acts and made available
for the economic revitalization program in Bosnia may be used
in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States to carry out the
provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the
Support for East European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989.
(e) The President is authorized to withhold funds
appropriated under this heading made available for economic
revitalization programs in Bosnia and Herzegovina, if he
determines and certifies to the Committees on Appropriations
that the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina has not
complied with article III of annex 1-A of the General
Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina
concerning the withdrawal of foreign forces, and that
intelligence cooperation on training, investigations, and
related activities between state sponsors of terrorism and
terrorist organizations and Bosnian officials has not been
terminated.
assistance for the independent states of the former soviet union
(a) For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
chapters 11 and 12 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 and the FREEDOM Support Act, for assistance for the
Independent States of the former Soviet Union and for related
programs, $576,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2005: Provided, That the provisions of such chapters
shall apply to funds appropriated by this paragraph: Provided
further, That of the funds made available for the Southern
Caucasus region, notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds may be used for confidence-building measures and other
activities in furtherance of the peaceful resolution of the
regional conflicts, especially those in the vicinity of
Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabagh: Provided further, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading, $1,500,000 should be
available only to meet the health and other assistance needs
of victims of trafficking in persons: Provided further, That,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds
appropriated under this heading in this Act or prior Acts
making appropriations for foreign operations, export
financing, and related programs, that are made available
pursuant to the provisions of section 807 of the FREEDOM
Support Act (Public Law 102-511) shall be subject to a 6
percent ceiling on administrative expenses.
(b) Of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less
than $70,000,000 should be made available for assistance for
Armenia and not less than $90,000,000 should be available for
assistance for Russia.
(c)(1) Of the funds appropriated under this heading that
are allocated for assistance for the Government of the
Russian Federation, 60 percent shall be withheld from
obligation until the President determines and certifies in
writing to the Committees on Appropriations that the
Government of the Russian Federation:
(A) has terminated implementation of arrangements to
provide Iran with technical expertise, training, technology,
or equipment necessary to develop a nuclear reactor, related
nuclear research facilities or programs, or ballistic missile
capability; and
(B) is providing full access to international non-
government organizations providing humanitarian relief to
refugees and internally displaced persons in Chechnya.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
(A) assistance to combat infectious diseases, child
survival activities, or assistance for victims of trafficking
in persons; and
(B) activities authorized under title V (Nonproliferation
and Disarmament Programs and Activities) of the FREEDOM
Support Act.
(d) Of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less
than $63,000,000 should be made available, in addition to
funds otherwise available for such purposes, for assistance
for child survival, environmental and reproductive health,
and to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and other infectious
diseases, and for related activities.
(e) Section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act shall not apply
to--
(1) activities to support democracy or assistance under
title V of the FREEDOM Support Act and section 1424 of Public
Law 104-201 or non-proliferation assistance;
(2) any assistance provided by the Trade and Development
Agency under section 661 of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 (22 U.S.C. 2421);
(3) any activity carried out by a member of the United
States and Foreign Commercial Service while acting within his
or her official capacity;
(4) any insurance, reinsurance, guarantee or other
assistance provided by the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation under title IV of chapter 2 of part I of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2191 et seq.);
(5) any financing provided under the Export-Import Bank Act
of 1945; or
(6) humanitarian assistance.
{time} 2200
Amendment Offered By Ms. Kaptur
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Ms. Kaptur:
In the item relating to ``assistance for the independent
states of the former soviet union'', add at the end the
following:
(__) Of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less
than $94,000,000 should be made available for assistance for
Ukraine.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against this
amendment.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I say to the chairman of the subcommittee,
I hope at some point the reservation can be withdrawn.
I offer this amendment today on behalf of the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and myself in order that both Russia and
Ukraine be treated evenhandedly in terms of U.S. foreign policy.
Indeed, the underlying bill seriously alters priorities relative to the
former Soviet Union and the Newly Independent States. It singles out
Russia for special treatment while completely eliminating, indeed,
zeroing out Ukraine in the account assistance for the Independent
States of the Former Soviet Union.
I ask my colleagues to think about this very important region of the
world. It is a little over a decade since independence became possible
for all the states of the former Soviet Union. Many challenges lie
before us in persevering with the peoples of these nations to complete
their transition to open societies. And thus, the underlying bill is
flawed and surprising in that it shows a deep preference, indeed, a
prejudice towards Russia over Ukraine; and I would argue that this does
not serve U.S. interests geopolitically for the long term. Indeed, it
creates the impression that the United States is picking favorites, and
that really we should be adopting a policy that has equanimity,
balance, impartiality and even-handedness.
As this chart clearly demonstrates, since the 1990s we have tried to
be balanced in the assistance that we have given to U.S. organizations
working in both nations. For example, in the year of 2002 we provided
to U.S. organizations helping the transition about $154 million in
Ukraine and approximately
[[Page H7409]]
$159 million in Russia. We have tried in both nations to give about a
hundred to $200 million to U.S. groups aiding that transition.
This year, however, the administration has asked us for $94 million
for Ukraine and $73 million for Russia. But this bill, the underlying
bill provides $90 million for Russia, more than the administration
requested by almost $20 million, and zeros out Ukraine.
I would have to say that we know that there are problems in both
countries. We know that they are not part of Europe, yet they are both
trying to accede to Europe and the United States, especially in this
region, has to be very careful about signaling that it has preference
of one country over another.
Let me remind my colleagues also that Ukraine has supported the
United States in the war on Iraq and also Afghanistan. It permitted us
to use air space and it has already deployed a nuclear, biological and
chemical battalion to Kuwait and it has started relocating 1,800 troops
to Iraq, thus contributing one of the four largest stabilization forces
to the coalition. These deployments will cost Ukraine about $2.5
million per month.
In addition, let me remind my colleagues Ukraine also stopped its
intended sale of turbines to Iran several years ago, causing severe
unemployment in one of its largest cities in the eastern half of the
country in Kharkiv.
Now, though Ukraine has miles to go in democratic transition as does
Russia, to argue that Russia is more deserving or further ahead somehow
in the transition has severe underlying problems. And both nations are
still dealing with corruption, with election fraud, with problems of
rule of law, but to say that one is better than the other and therefore
deserves so much more support I believe to be foolish. Both nations
have severe internal difficulties, but for this bill to favor one over
the other creates further imbalance in a region that can only be made
healthy by the transition of all those countries to full democratic
status.
So I would just plead with my colleagues in the majority as well as
on my side of the aisle to support the Kaptur-Weldon amendment and
provide $94 million in assistance as the administration has requested
to Ukraine while still maintaining the bill's level of support to
Russia at the level of $90 million. Please treat them even-handedly. It
really is in America's strategic interest.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I would be quite brief here and if there are no other
speakers on this, I would make my point of order at the end.
I would make the point to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur),
first of all, for whom I have a great deal of respect for and
particularly admire the commitment she has made to the democracy in the
Ukraine and the support for freedom and democracy in that struggling
country, I would make the following point to her, that although there
is a specific earmark in our bill for programs in Russia, that is
because we believe very strongly in the struggling democracy programs
there that need to have very specific support. There is not, and I will
just say that the gentlewoman's chart is in error, there is not a zero
amount for Ukraine. There is an amount for the former Soviet Republics,
for Eastern Europe. We just do not earmark a specific amount for the
Ukraine as we do not earmark for other countries.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, could I, with all due respect, ask the
gentleman, is there not in the bill a $90 million earmark for Russia?
Mr. KOLBE. Reclaiming my time, as I said a moment ago, there is an
earmark for Russia. There is not earmarks for other countries, but
there is a sum of money which is available to be spent in these
countries, and it is certainly anticipated that programs in the Ukraine
that do support democracy would be supported by that account.
We just simply do not earmark the specific amount for any of the
countries in the bill, whether we are talking about Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia, the other countries. There is no specific amount.
Ms. KAPTUR. If the gentleman would yield, I thank the gentleman very
much for his courtesy. I just wish to also mention that there are
designations in the bill also for Armenia.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I correct myself. The gentlewoman is
correct. Armenia and Russia do have earmarks.
point of order
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I would make a point of order against the
amendment because it does propose to change existing law and
constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill, and therefore finds
itself in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.
That rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general
appropriation bill shall not be in order if it changes existing law.''
It gives affirmative direction, in effect. In this legislation this
proposed amount does do that.
Mr. Chairman, I would ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of
order?
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to join my Chair in thanking
the member of our committee, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur),
for her commitment to Ukraine. I know of her important work in
developing agriculture initiatives there and understanding how
important agriculture is to Ukraine. I thank the gentlewoman for
bringing this issue to our attention. I can assure the gentlewoman that
the Ukraine, as always, will get a significant amount of money to
continue the important work that the gentlewoman and others have been
doing in Ukraine.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule on the point of order.
The Chair finds that this amendment proposes a legislative floor on
spending not authorized by law. The amendment, therefore, constitutes
legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The point of order is
sustained and the amendment is not in order.
Are there further amendments to this paragraph of the bill?
If not, the Clerk will continue to read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Independent Agencies
INTER-AMERICAN FOUNDATION
For necessary expenses to carry out the functions of the
Inter-American Foundation in accordance with the provisions
of section 401 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1969,
$15,185,000, to remain available until September 30, 2005.
AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION
For necessary expenses to carry out title V of the
International Security and Development Cooperation Act of
1980, Public Law 96-533, $17,689,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2005: Provided, That funds made available
to grantees may be invested pending expenditure for project
purposes when authorized by the board of directors of the
Foundation: Provided further, That interest earned shall be
used only for the purposes for which the grant was made:
Provided further, That notwithstanding section 505(a)(2) of
the African Development Foundation Act, in exceptional
circumstances the board of directors of the Foundation may
waive the $250,000 limitation contained in that section with
respect to a project: Provided further, That the Foundation
shall provide a report to the Committees on Appropriations
after each time such waiver authority is exercised.
peace corps
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
Peace Corps Act (75 Stat. 612), $314,000,000, including the
purchase of not to exceed five passenger motor vehicles for
administrative purposes for use outside of the United States:
Provided, That none of the funds appropriated under this
heading shall be used to pay for abortions: Provided further,
That funds appropriated under this heading shall remain
available until September 30, 2005: Provided further, That
the Director of the Peace Corps may make appointments or
assignments, or extend current appointments or assignments,
to permit United States citizens to serve for periods in
excess of five years in the case of individuals whose
appointment or assignment, such as regional safety security
officers and employees within the Office of the Inspector
General, involves the safety of Peace Corps volunteers:
Provided further, That the Director of the Peace Corps may
make such appointments or assignments notwithstanding the
provisions of section 7 of the Peace Corps Act limiting the
length of an appointment or assignment, the circumstances
under which such an appointment or assignment may exceed 5
years, and the percentage of appointments or assignments that
can be made in excess of 5 years.
millennium challenge account
For necessary expenses for the ``Millennium Challenge
Account'', $800,000,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That the availability of such amount is contingent
upon enactment of authorization.
[[Page H7410]]
Department of State
international narcotics control and law enforcement
For necessary expenses to carry out section 481 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $241,700,000: Provided, That
funds appropriated under this heading shall remain available
until September 30, 2005: Provided further, That during
fiscal year 2004, the Department of State may also use the
authority of section 608 of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, without regard to its restrictions, to receive excess
property from an agency of the United States Government for
the purpose of providing it to a foreign country under
chapter 8 of part I of that Act subject to the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations:
Provided further, That the Secretary of State shall provide
to the Committees on Appropriations not later than 45 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act and prior to the
initial obligation of funds appropriated under this heading,
a report on the proposed uses of all funds under this heading
on a country-by-country basis for each proposed program,
project, or activity: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not more than $24,180,000
may be available for administrative expenses.
andean counterdrug initiative
For necessary expenses to carry out section 481 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to support counterdrug
activities in the Andean region of South America,
$731,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2005:
Provided, That in fiscal year 2004, funds available to the
Department of State for assistance to the Government of
Colombia shall be available to support a unified campaign
against narcotics trafficking, against activities by
organizations designated as terrorist organizations such as
the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the
National Liberation Army (ELN), and the United Self-Defense
Forces of Colombia (AUC), and to take actions to protect
human health and welfare in emergency circumstances,
including undertaking rescue operations: Provided further,
That this authority shall cease to be effective if the
Secretary of State has credible evidence that the Colombian
Armed Forces are not conducting vigorous operations to
restore government authority and respect for human rights in
areas under the effective control of paramilitary and
guerrilla organizations: Provided further, That the President
shall ensure that if any helicopter procured with funds under
this heading is used to aid or abet the operations of any
illegal self-defense group or illegal security cooperative,
such helicopter shall be immediately returned to the United
States: Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated
by this Act may be made available to support a Peruvian air
interdiction program until the Secretary of State and
Director of Central Intelligence certify to the Congress, 30
days before any resumption of United States involvement in a
Peruvian air interdiction program, that an air interdiction
program that permits the ability of the Peruvian Air Force to
shoot down aircraft will include enhanced safeguards and
procedures to prevent the occurrence of any incident similar
to the April 20, 2001 incident: Provided further, That the
Secretary of State, in consultation with the Administrator of
the United States Agency for International Development, shall
provide to the Committees on Appropriations not later than 45
days after the date of the enactment of this Act and prior to
the initial obligation of funds appropriated under this
heading, a report on the proposed uses of all funds under
this heading on a country-by-country basis for each proposed
program, project, or activity: Provided further, That section
482(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 shall not apply
to funds appropriated under this heading: Provided further,
That assistance provided with funds appropriated under this
heading that is made available notwithstanding section 482(b)
of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, shall be
made available subject to the regular notification procedures
of the Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That
the provisions of section 3204(b) through (d) of Public Law
106-246, as amended by Public Law 107-115, shall be
applicable to funds appropriated for fiscal year 2004:
Provided further, That the reports required by sections
3204(e) and (f) of Division B, title III, chapter 2 of Public
Law 106-246, shall be submitted also to the Committees on
Appropriations on the dates specified in those sections:
Provided further, That of the funds appropriated under this
heading, not more than $15,680,000 may be available for
administrative expenses of the Department of State, and not
more than $4,500,000 may be available, in addition to amounts
otherwise available for such purposes, for administrative
expenses of the United States Agency for International
Development.
migration and refugee assistance
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary to
enable the Secretary of State to provide, as authorized by
law, a contribution to the International Committee of the Red
Cross, assistance to refugees, including contributions to the
International Organization for Migration and the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and other activities
to meet refugee and migration needs; salaries and expenses of
personnel and dependents as authorized by the Foreign Service
Act of 1980; allowances as authorized by sections 5921
through 5925 of title 5, United States Code; purchase and
hire of passenger motor vehicles; and services as authorized
by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, $760,197,000,
which shall remain available until expended: Provided, That
not more than $18,500,000 may be available for administrative
expenses: Provided further, That funds appropriated under
this heading may be made available for a headquarters
contribution to the International Committee of the Red Cross
only if the Secretary of State determines (and so reports to
the appropriate committees of Congress) that the Magen David
Adom Society of Israel is not being denied participation in
the activities of the International Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement: Provided further, That none of the funds
made available pursuant to this Act after March 31, 2004, by
the Department of State under the headings ``Migration and
Refugee Assistance'' and ``United States Emergency Refugee
and Migration Assistance Fund'' for the purposes of provision
of assistance to refugees or internally displaced persons may
be provided to an organization that has failed to adopt a
code of conduct consistent with the Inter-Agency Standing
Committee Task Force on Protection From Sexual Exploitation
and Abuse in Humanitarian Crises six core principles for the
protection of beneficiaries of humanitarian assistance.
united states emergency refugee and migration assistance fund
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 2(c) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of
1962, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601(c)), $15,831,000, to remain
available until expended.
nonproliferation, anti-terrorism, demining and related programs
For necessary expenses for nonproliferation, anti-
terrorism, demining and related programs and activities,
$335,200,000, to carry out the provisions of chapter 8 of
part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for anti-
terrorism assistance, chapter 9 of part II of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, section 504 of the FREEDOM Support
Act, section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act or the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 for demining activities, the clearance
of unexploded ordnance, the destruction of small arms, and
related activities, notwithstanding any other provision of
law, including activities implemented through nongovernmental
and international organizations, and section 301 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for a voluntary contribution
to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and for a
United States contribution to the Comprehensive Nuclear Test
Ban Treaty Preparatory Commission: Provided further, That of
this amount not to exceed $20,000,000, to remain available
until expended, may be made available for the
Nonproliferation and Disarmament Fund, notwithstanding any
other provision of law, to promote bilateral and multilateral
activities relating to nonproliferation and disarmament:
Provided further, That such funds may also be used for such
countries other than the Independent States of the former
Soviet Union and international organizations when it is in
the national security interest of the United States to do so
following consultation with the appropriate committees of
Congress: Provided further, That funds appropriated under
this heading may be made available for the International
Atomic Energy Agency only if the Secretary of State
determines (and so reports to the Congress) that Israel is
not being denied its right to participate in the activities
of that Agency: Provided further, That of the funds made
available for demining and related activities, not to exceed
$690,000, in addition to funds otherwise available for such
purposes, may be used for administrative expenses related to
the operation and management of the demining program.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Schiff
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Schiff:
In the item relating to ``nonproliferation, anti-terrorism,
demining and related programs''--
(1) after the first dollar amount insert the following:
``(increased by $15,000,000)''; and
(2) after the second dollar amount insert the following:
``(increased by $15,000,000)''.
In the item relating to ``foreign military financing
program'', after the first dollar amount insert the
following: ``(reduced by $90,000,000)''.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, my amendment increases the nonproliferation
and disarmament funds by $15 million, from $20 million to $35 million.
The effect of this amendment, therefore, is to restore the full amount
of the President's request for the nonproliferation and disarmament
fund. Why should we do that? Why should we meet the President's request
for funding of this account?
Perhaps the single greatest threat we face as a Nation is from
terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction. It is why we went to
war in Iraq. It is why we established the Department of Homeland
Security, to address
[[Page H7411]]
this significant threat to American lives. And within the threat of
terrorist possession of weapons of mass destruction, the greatest
danger within that threat is the potential access of terrorists to
nuclear material and the ability to create a nuclear weapon.
We will survive another biological attack like the anthrax attacks.
We will survive chemical attacks. But a nuclear attack in this country,
on our soil or against our troops around the world would fundamentally
change this Nation. And around the world there are literally hundreds
of facilities that have some kilos, others that have tons of plutonium
or highly enriched uranium in an unsecured condition.
The technology of the atomic bomb is a half century old. It is not
difficult to replicate. Obtaining the nuclear material is the
terrorists' main obstacle and that challenge may be far too easily
overcome.
Removing the weapons usable material from the most vulnerable
facilities around the world is a national security imperative for this
country. What are we waiting for? It is far easier to prevent the theft
of nuclear material than to track down the thieves after the material
is gone. Fifty million dollars for a global cleanout of this material
would be sufficient for several years if we were maximally efficient;
$35 million, the President's request, is barely adequate; $20, what we
do today, is simply irresponsible.
The State Department has identified 24 top targeted sites of
vulnerable stockpiles. If we look at our pace over the last decade, in
August of 2002 in Project Vinca operation we removed 48 kilos of highly
enriched uranium, enough to make one to three nuclear bombs from a
vulnerable site in Yugoslavia.
To succeed we had to go hat in hand to a private organization, the
Nuclear Threat Initiative, for $5 million. Project Sapphire some years
before that airlifted 600 kilos of highly enriched uranium away from a
vulnerable location in Kazakhstan.
We have had a total of three efforts like this in the last 10 years.
At that pace our work will never be done. Our risks will be
unacceptably high.
Meeting our national security needs in the post Cold War period means
addressing the most immediate threats first and with adequate
resources. Restoring the funds to the nonproliferation and disarmament
account in an amount requested by the President is what this amendment
would do. I ask for Members' support.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
I thought it was the intention of the gentleman from California (Mr.
Schiff) to withdraw the amendment at the end, but as I understand it he
intends to go ahead with this.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, my understanding is that the chairman was
prepared to offer this evening that he would work with me in
conference.
Mr. KOLBE. That was what I intended to say. Is it the gentleman's
intention then to withdraw it at that point?
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, it is my intention.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the
gentleman's comments about this account. I would just like to note that
we have recommended $335 million. That is an increase of $31 million in
what is called the NADR, the Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining
and Related Programs.
{time} 2215
The gentleman's asked for a specific sub-account within there of the
nonproliferation and disarmament fund. He has asked for money to be
additionally placed in there, and I would just note that we have
provided an increase of $5.1 million. That is a 34 percent increase in
that account there.
So I think we have done very well, and I would also note that this
particular State Department discretionary fund has not had the best
record of expeditiously obligating funds. I would just say the problem
we have had is one that the gentleman has correctly identified, or
maybe not has correctly identified, but is certainly one of the
allocations that we have available to us.
As I mentioned on the previous amendment, we have an allocation of a
full billion dollars less than what is available to the Senate, and I
would hope that when we are in conference if we have additional funds
available to us to be able to work with the gentleman to increase the
funding for this; and with that, Mr. Chairman, if that is satisfactory,
if the gentleman would like to respond to that, I would yield to him
for the purpose of commenting on that.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I appreciate the chairman's willingness to work with me to try to
improve the funding of this account in conference committee. The
Senate, my understanding, has gone even beyond the President's request
of $45 million. We are currently at $20 million, and I would hope that
we would work together to meet the President's request of 35; and based
on the Chairman's willingness to work together, I will move to withdraw
my amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there other amendments to this section of the bill?
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I would ask if I could engage the chairman of the
subcommittee on the firearm issue.
I want to begin by thanking the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Bilirakis) and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) who are co-
chairs of the Hellenic Caucus, for their leadership and interest in
this issue and thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the
ranking member, and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for their
interest.
Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge that the House conferees on the foreign
operations appropriations work to include language in the conference
report regarding the recent article 98 agreement between the United
States and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
As my colleagues may be aware, the Former Yugoslav Republic was
allowed to sign this agreement as Macedonia, which directly violates
United States policy regarding use of that nomenclature. Currently,
FYROM and Greece are involved in negotiations under the auspices of the
United Nations regarding usage of the name ``Macedonia,'' and the
United States has said it will recognize FYROM only as the Former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia while these negotiations are ongoing.
Despite this, the State Department allowed FYROM to sign the article
98 agreement as Macedonia, thus showing utter disregard for our Greek
allies. While I certainly understand that this important agreement
which ensures that Americans will not be brought before the
International Criminal Court by FYROM is designed to protect American
citizens and members of the U.S. Armed Forces, I find it inexcusable
that we obtained the signature of FYROM at the expense of our friends
in Greece.
It is my view that the name ``Macedonia'' properly belongs to Greek
culture and, therefore, should not be used by any other country. Greek
Macedonia is one of the oldest civilizations known to man, and the
history of this name should be recognized and respected.
Mr. Chairman, I ask that language be included in the conference
report on foreign operations which states that the State Department
should not have allowed the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to
sign the article 98 agreement as Macedonia. Further, this language
should affirm that it is the United States policy for the Former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to be referred to only as the Former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and this policy should be observed in
all future relations between the United States and FYROM. In this
manner, we can ensure that the culture of our Greek allies is never
disrespected in this way again.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ANDREWS. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding and I
would be pleased to respond.
[[Page H7412]]
I appreciate the effort that my friend from New Jersey has made to
bring this issue to our attention. Clearly, it has been United States
policy to recognize this nation as the Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, and I know that our State Department did not intend to
change this policy through this article 98 agreement, which was
intended to deal with another set of issues regarding the protection of
American service personnel overseas, an issue which is important to
many of us in this body.
Clearly, this issue of the nation's name is an issue of contention in
that the northern region of Greece also goes by Macedonia. I can tell
the gentleman that we will raise this issue with the Department of
State, and we will see if our colleagues in the Senate would agree to a
restatement of current policy in the Statement of Managers that
accompanies the fiscal year 2004 conference agreement.
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the chairman
very much for his leadership and his work on this issue; and I know how
good his word is, and I appreciate that. I also thank the ranking
member for her leadership.
The CHAIRMAN. If there are no further amendments to this section of
the bill, the Clerk will continue to read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Department of the Treasury
International Affairs Technical Assistance
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 129 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$19,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2006,
which shall be available notwithstanding any other provision
of law.
debt restructuring
For the cost, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, of modifying loans and loan
guarantees, as the President may determine, for which funds
have been appropriated or otherwise made available for
programs within the International Affairs Budget Function
150, including the cost of selling, reducing, or canceling
amounts owed to the United States as a result of concessional
loans made to eligible countries, pursuant to parts IV and V
of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and of modifying
concessional credit agreements with least developed
countries, as authorized under section 411 of the
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, as
amended, and concessional loans, guarantees and credit
agreements, as authorized under section 572 of the Foreign
Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461), and of
canceling amounts owed, as a result of loans or guarantees
made pursuant to the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, by
countries that are eligible for debt reduction pursuant to
title V of H.R. 3425 as enacted into law by section
1000(a)(5) of Public Law 106-113, $95,000,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2005: Provided, That
$20,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading may
be made available to carry out the provisions of part V of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961: Provided further, That
$75,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading may
be used by the Secretary of the Treasury to pay to the
Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Trust Fund
administered by the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development amounts for the benefit of countries that are
eligible for debt reduction pursuant to title V of H.R. 3425
as enacted into law by section 1000(a)(5) of Public Law 106-
113: Provided further, That amounts paid to the HIPC Trust
Fund may be used only to fund debt reduction under the
enhanced HIPC initiative by--
(1) the Inter-American Development Bank;
(2) the African Development Fund;
(3) the African Development Bank; and
(4) the Central American Bank for Economic Integration:
Provided further, That funds may not be paid to the HIPC
Trust Fund for the benefit of any country if the Secretary of
State has credible evidence that the government of such
country is engaged in a consistent pattern of gross
violations of internationally recognized human rights or in
military or civil conflict that undermines its ability to
develop and implement measures to alleviate poverty and to
devote adequate human and financial resources to that end:
Provided further, That on the basis of final appropriations,
the Secretary of the Treasury shall consult with the
Committees on Appropriations concerning which countries and
international financial institutions are expected to benefit
from a United States contribution to the HIPC Trust Fund
during the fiscal year: Provided further, That the Secretary
of the Treasury shall inform the Committees on Appropriations
not less than 15 days in advance of the signature of an
agreement by the United States to make payments to the HIPC
Trust Fund of amounts for such countries and institutions:
Provided further, That the Secretary of the Treasury may
disburse funds designated for debt reduction through the HIPC
Trust Fund only for the benefit of countries that--
(1) have committed, for a period of 24 months, not to
accept new market rate loans from the international financial
institution receiving debt repayment as a result of such
disbursement, other than loans made by such institution to
export-oriented commercial projects that generate foreign
exchange which are generally referred to as ``enclave''
loans; and
(2) have documented and demonstrated their commitment to
redirect their budgetary resources from international debt
repayments to programs to alleviate poverty and promote
economic growth that are additional to or expand upon those
previously available for such purposes: Provided further,
That any limitation of subsection (e) of section 411 of the
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954
shall not apply to funds appropriated under this heading:
Provided further, That none of the funds made available under
this heading in this or any other appropriations Acts shall
be made available for Sudan or Burma unless the Secretary of
Treasury determines and notifies the Committees on
Appropriations that a democratically elected government has
taken office.
TITLE III--MILITARY ASSISTANCE
Funds Appropriated to the President
international military education and training
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 541 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$91,700,000, of which up to $3,000,000 may remain available
until expended: Provided, That the civilian personnel for
whom military education and training may be provided under
this heading may include civilians who are not members of a
government whose participation would contribute to improved
civil-military relations, civilian control of the military,
or respect for human rights: Provided further, That funds
appropriated under this heading for military education and
training for Guatemala may only be available for expanded
international military education and training and funds made
available for Nigeria and Guatemala may only be provided
through the regular notification procedures of the Committees
on Appropriations.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Hefley
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Hefley:
Page 40, line 24, after the first dollar amount insert the
following: ``(reduced by $600,000)''.
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is intended to cut $600,000
out of the IMET account to prevent Indonesia from receiving IMET
funding in fiscal year 2004.
As many of my colleagues may remember, last week I offered an
amendment to the Foreign Service Reauthorization Act of 2004 and 2005
that would limit Indonesia's participation in the IMET program. It
passed overwhelmingly here. In fact, it passed overwhelmingly in the
other body and everywhere it has been offered. My amendment would limit
Indonesia from receiving International Military Education and Training
funds until the President certifies to Congress, and not do away with
it entirely, it just says 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.
What attack am I talking about? My colleagues may or may not
remember, for those Members who are not aware, on August 31, 2002, the
staff of the International School of West Papua, Indonesia, decided to
go on a picnic, a Sunday afternoon 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 11 people,
including a 6-year-old child, drove in two vehicles to a picnic site
about 10 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 now is not an ordinary road. The road
is surrounded by the gold and copper mine and is heavily guarded by the
Indonesian military; and in fact, at both ends of this mountain road
are military checkpoints which seal the road and control access to
Tembagapura.
As they returned home, the group was brutally attacked by a band of
terrorists. Two Americans and an Indonesian were killed in the ambush.
The attack, which occurred less than a half mile away from an
Indonesian military checkpoint, went on, and listen to me with this
because it is astounding to me. This attack was a half mile from a
military checkpoint, and it went on for
[[Page H7413]]
45 minutes, with no one doing anything to stop it. Hundreds of rounds
were fired at the teachers and at their vehicles. Most of the
survivors, including the 6-year-old child, were shot. Several of the
teachers were shot multiple times and suffered horrible injuries; and
Mr. Chairman, I could go on and on about this, but in the interests of
time and in deference to the chairman, let me just say that every
indication in our investigation so far by the CIA, the FBI, and even
the Indonesian police forces indicate that the military was responsible
for this attack.
But after all these months, we are getting little or no cooperation
in the investigation. That is what we want to get to the bottom of. We
want to find out who did this and bring these killers to justice.
Mr. Chairman, I would encourage support of this amendment. I would
hope that my colleagues would accept this amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's
amendment.
I applaud the gentleman for offering this amendment and for giving us
the opportunity to have an open discussion about recent events in
Indonesia. Last August, two U.S. citizens and one Indonesian were
killed in an ambush in Papua, Indonesia, and eight other Americans were
wounded. This incident took place in an area under the nominal control
of an American company and the victims were their employees.
While the Indonesian military has sought to blame indigenous rebel
movements for this act of terror, all signs point to the direct
involvement of the Indonesian military. The FBI has been dispatched
several times to assist in the investigation. The cooperation of the
Indonesian military authorities has been sporadic at times and at times
nonexistent.
The debate on whether to allow military training for Indonesia has
gone on for over 10 years now. Last year, over my objections, Congress
allowed for the resumption of full IMET training for the first time
since 1992. Let us examine the Indonesians' response to this action:
One, continued lack of cooperation with the FBI investigation into
the killings in Papua;
Two, an active media campaign to discredit the FBI's initial
conclusions that the Indonesian military was most likely involved in
this incident;
Three, a horrific military crack down in Aceh which has resulted in
hundreds of civilians killed, executions, rape, numerous schools
burned, and thousands forced into military camps;
The shutting out of foreign journalists and human rights
organizations from Aceh;
A similar campaign in Papua, targeting mostly Christian and
Melanesian populations;
A continuing mockery of justice in cases involving the abuses in East
Timor in 1999;
And efforts by the Indonesian Army to slow or hinder U.S. anti-
terrorism assistance for the Indonesian police.
In short, Indonesia has not shown any inclination to work more
closely with us and to change policies which they know are
objectionable. If anything, their behavior indicates that they have
chosen to use this as an opportunity to defy the United States.
This amendment cuts $600,000 requested for Indonesian IMET and will
send a strong signal to the Indonesians. Allowing unrestricted IMET
demonstrates to the Indonesians that they cannot afford to ignore State
Department and congressional calls for military reform, real
cooperation in the war on terrorism and an end to violence and
corruption.
I urge support of the Hefley amendment.
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the gentleman from Arizona's (Mr.
Kolbe) and the gentleman from New Jersey's (Mr. Andrews) initiative to
include language stating that the State Department should not have
allowed the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to sign the article
98 agreement as Macedonia. FYROM is the country's name, not Macedonia.
All historical and archaeological evidence demonstrates that the
ancient Macedonians were Greek. Macedonia is a Greek name that has
designated the northern area of Greece for over 2,000 years.
In 1944, the name of the Skopje region was changed to Macedonia as
part of Tito's imperialist campaign to gain control of the Greek
province of Macedonia. The United States opposed Tito's use of the name
Macedonia at that time and has now stated that it will recognize FYROM
only as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia while negotiations
between Greece and FYROM continue.
{time} 2230
Since 1995, bilateral relations between Greece and FYROM have
improved significantly, especially in investment and trade. Currently,
Greece is the largest foreign investor in FYROM. As a result, FYROM
amended its constitution and removed the clauses about taking over and
invading Greece, and they removed the emblem of Greece, the ancient
symbol of Verjina, from its flag, and they removed the ancient tower,
the white tower in the geographical area of Greece, from their money.
However, the dispute over the official name of FYROM still continues
today between Athens and Skopje under the negotiations with the United
Nations. I am concerned that any implied recognition of FYROM as
Macedonia, however seemingly insignificant, may very well prove
destabilizing for the region and possibly derail the United States
effort at finding a solution between FYROM and Greece.
Those who may think that Macedonia is Greek and this is merely a
semantics issue should consider what it would have been like if at the
height of the Cold War the former Soviet Union had drawn in Alaska as
part of its territory and put the Washington monument on its flag.
So I strongly support the commitment by the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Kolbe) and my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Andrews) and their efforts, and hope that their language clarifying
U.S. policy on FYROM will be included and that the State Department
will be urged not to allow FYROM or any other nation to use Macedonia
as a designation for FYROM.
Macedonia is geographically in Greece, historically and presently. I
applaud the chairman on this bill and the ranking member, and I ask for
their support with this.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Hefley amendment, which
would cut all international military and education and training IMET
funding for Indonesia. We in Congress ended IMET funding for Indonesia
due to horrendous human rights abuses committed by Indonesia's
military. Mr. Chairman, nothing has changed. Indonesia's military has
continued to engage in horrific human rights violations against its own
people, especially in Aceh and Papua, has obstructed the investigation
of the death of two U.S. and one Indonesian citizen, and deliberately
evaded accountability for crimes against humanity in East Timor.
Of great concern to me is Indonesia's failure to resolve and provide
meaningful justice for the murder of two U.S. citizens and an
Indonesian on the Freeport McMoRan mining road in Papua in August 2002.
The TNI, which has been labeled as culpable for the crime by
independent monitors, has threatened parties investigating the crime
and has resisted cooperation with the FBI.
The Indonesian military has launched a major military offensive in
Aceh, the largest since its 1975 invasion of East Timor, which within a
few years resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands. In early
December 2002, the Indonesian government and the Free Aceh Movement,
GAM, signed a peace accord in Geneva called the Cessations of
Hostilities Agreement. This agreement has since collapsed, and on May
19, 2003, the Indonesian government declared martial law in Aceh.
The TNI has since committed extrajudicial executions, it has
committed torture, rape, and mass displacement of civilians.
International humanitarian and human rights organizations, as well as
foreign journalists, have been denied access to Aceh.
[[Page H7414]]
Access for Indonesian journalists is severely restricted. Human rights
monitors and defenders have been particularly targeted. TNI-sponsored
militia thugs have attacked their offices. U.S. journalist William
Nessen has been detained and faces a possible 5-year sentence for so-
called visa violations. When Nessen originally tried to surrender to
military forces they apparently shot at him.
Finally, the trial process of the Indonesian ad hoc Human Rights
Court in East Timor has been a grave distortion of truth and an
internationally recognized travesty of justice. As of now, the court
has acquitted 12 and convicted 5, delivering light sentences. Four of
the five are less than the legal minimum under Indonesian law, and
those convicted remain free pending appeal.
To date, the Indonesian government has not provided the
documentation, executed arrest warrants, or facilitated witness
interviews as requested by the joint U.N.-East Timor Serious Crimes
Unit. Senior level government official in Indonesia responded to an SCU
indictment of high-level Indonesian security forces personnel for
crimes against humanity for murder, deportation and persecution by
publicly snubbing the indictments and openly threatening East Timor.
Congress has already provided significant carrots outside of the
provision of IMET millions in counter-terrorism training for the TNI
and the police, multilateral military exercises, and senior-level
contacts despite these and other inexcusable actions by the Indonesian
armed forces and government.
Resuming IMET funding this year will send the wrong signal and it
will reward bad behavior. This Congress should vote ``yes'' on the
Hefley amendment, and I urge my colleagues to strongly support the
Hefley amendment, which would cut all international military and
education training funding for Indonesia.
Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite
number of words, and I rise today to express my strong support for the
amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado, which is designed to
force the government of Indonesia to do what until now it has utterly
failed to do, bring to justice the murderers who killed two American
citizens and wounded eight others in Papua, Indonesia, in August of
2002.
Among the victims of that tragic attack were Ted Burgon of Sun River,
Oregon, in my district, and Rick Spier of Colorado, both of whom lost
their lives. Ted's wife Nancy was wounded in the ambush, as were Ken
Balk and Saundra Hopkins, also of Sun River, Oregon, and their young
daughter. A number of other members of their party suffered injuries at
the hands of the terrorists who perpetrated this cowardly attack.
Mr. Chairman, despite the time that has elapsed since the tragedy in
Indonesia, the murderers of Burgon and Spier have not been brought to
justice. Perhaps most disturbingly there seems to have been little
effort on the part of the Indonesian government, which receives
substantial aid from the people of the United States, to ensure that
these killers are made to pay for their crimes. Indeed, strong evidence
suggests that government officials have actively thwarted American
investigations into the attack. This amendment is intended to correct
this inequity.
Mr. Chairman, since the attack occurred, evidence has been brought to
light suggesting that members of the Indonesian military, and not a
rogue band of criminals, bears responsibility for the ambush. Following
the attack, the Indonesian police conducted an inquiry and ultimately
issued a report asserting that, and I quote, ``There is a strong
possibility that the attack was perpetrated by members of the
Indonesian National Army Force.'' Indeed, the attack occurred less than
a half a mile away from the Indonesian military checkpoints. Moreover,
various news services have reported that U.S. intelligence agencies
have intercepted messages between Indonesian military officials
implicating army personnel in the attack.
Mr. Chairman, from the beginning, Indonesian authorities have been
less than cooperative in assisting the FBI investigations into the
murders. Investigative agents were denied the opportunity to interview
witnesses without Indonesian authorities present and were not permitted
to bring forensic evidence back to the United States for analysis.
It is my firm belief that if prosecuting the murderers of American
citizens on Indonesian soil is not a priority for the government of
Indonesia, they should not expect to receive assistance from the people
of the United States. My colleague's amendment would prevent Indonesia
from receiving international military education and training funds
until the President certifies to the Congress that the Indonesian
government and the Indonesian military are cooperating with American
authorities in their investigation into the attack.
Given the strong possibility that members of the Indonesian military
were involved in the ambush, it would be an affront to the memory of
Ted Burgon and Rick Spier, as well as the grieving families they left
behind, to continue providing funding to the Indonesian armed forces.
So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, many statements have been made on the floor about this
amendment. Unfortunately, very little of them have been accurate. Let
me read the amendment, since it is less than two full lines. ``Page 40,
line 24. After the first dollar amount insert the following (reduce by
$600,000).''
Mr. Chairman, this does not reduce the funding for Indonesia. It
would take only $600,000 out of the international military education
and training account. It is a cut to the general appropriations
account. And it is correctly drafted this way, because to put other
kinds of restrictions in it would not have been in order.
So I want to make it very clear to my colleagues that this is not an
amendment which in any way directly affects Indonesia at all. The
language that has been stated here on the floor might, but the
amendment itself has no impact itself on Indonesia.
As to the issue of the tragic killing of U.S. citizens in Indonesia,
our report in fact does deal with this on page 46 where we outline in
some considerable detail the problems and make note with this sentence,
Mr. Chairman: ``Most disturbing, the committee understands that the
Federal Bureau of Investigation has not found Indonesian officials to
be particularly cooperative.'' So we have made note of this. We are
very concerned about it.
But certainly attacking IMET as the way to get at this would be the
absolute contrary way to do so. IMET is about exposing foreign military
officers and enlisted personnel to civilian control, to respect for
human rights, to the rule of law. It is, as its very title suggests,
about education and training. And as we know from the programs that
exist, human rights and civil rights, respect for human rights and
respect for civil rights is a very major component of this training. If
you want to reform the Indonesian military, then cutting off IMET is
exactly the opposite of what one ought to do. At some point we ought to
be increasing IMET for Indonesia, and perhaps indeed that is what may
happen.
But I would also note, before I close, that our legislation does not
permit or does not provide for any foreign military sales to Indonesia,
and so that is specifically prohibited. But I am happy that this
amendment does not in any way affect the IMET funding specifically for
Indonesia. It represents what is less than a six-tenths of 1 percent
cut in the total amount. And while I am a strong supporter of IMET,
because I believe that it does exactly what we want to do, and we have
adequate proof of this around the world, that it exposes military
officers in other countries to human rights, to civil rights, to the
values that we believe are important in this country, and because of
that I strongly support it, but I am not prepared at this hour of the
evening to quibble about what is less than a six-tenths of 1 percent
cut in this funding.
And so, Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to accept the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I take this time to point out a provision that is in
the bill
[[Page H7415]]
that provides $100 million of aid to Serbia. That aid is conditioned
upon certain standards being met that the Yugoslav government is
cooperating with the International Criminal Tribunal, including access
for investigators in the surrender and transfer of indictees or the
assistance in their apprehension.
{time} 2245
I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member of the
subcommittee for their help in including this language again in this
year's appropriation bill.
Mr. Chairman, I want to point out that the Committee on
Appropriations has worked with our Helsinki Commission to make sure
this language is included again this year in the appropriation process.
It reinforces our commitment to the International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia. This body has played a very important role in
moving forward the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the
former Yugoslavia. I want to point out to my colleagues that the
conditional language that has been included in this appropriation bill
yearly has been very helpful to the prosecutor in getting cooperation
from the Government of Serbia. We have seen reform within their
government, and we are all very pleased to see the reforms that are
taking place. But there is still a lot of work that needs to be done.
Let me just point out that there are still 18 indictees that are at
large, including Bosnian Serb leader Karadzic and Army Commander
General Mladic. So we still have work to be done with the International
Criminal Tribunal. This language is very important. I want to thank the
Committee on Appropriations and its leadership for continuing to
include this conditionality. It speaks to the priority of this body. I
am very pleased it is included in the bill. I certainly support it.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
foreign military financing program
For expenses necessary for grants to enable the President
to carry out the provisions of section 23 of the Arms Export
Control Act, $4,314,000,000: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $2,160,000,000
shall be available for grants only for Israel, and not less
than $1,300,000,000 shall be made available for grants only
for Egypt: Provided further, That the funds appropriated by
this paragraph for Israel shall be disbursed within 30 days
of the enactment of this Act: Provided further, That to the
extent that the Government of Israel requests that funds be
used for such purposes, grants made available for Israel by
this paragraph shall, as agreed by Israel and the United
States, be available for advanced weapons systems, of which
not less than $568,000,000 shall be available for the
procurement in Israel of defense articles and defense
services, including research and development: Provided
further, That funds appropriated by this paragraph shall be
nonrepayable notwithstanding any requirement in section 23 of
the Arms Export Control Act: Provided further, That funds
made available under this paragraph shall be obligated upon
apportionment in accordance with paragraph (5)(C) of title
31, United States Code, section 1501(a).
None of the funds made available under this heading shall
be available to finance the procurement of defense articles,
defense services, or design and construction services that
are not sold by the United States Government under the Arms
Export Control Act unless the foreign country proposing to
make such procurements has first signed an agreement with the
United States Government specifying the conditions under
which such procurements may be financed with such funds:
Provided, That all country and funding level increases in
allocations shall be submitted through the regular
notification procedures of section 515 of this Act: Provided
further, That none of the funds appropriated under this
heading shall be available for assistance for Indonesia,
Guatemala, Sudan, and Liberia: Provided further, That funds
made available under this heading may be used,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for demining, the
clearance of unexploded ordnance, and related activities, and
may include activities implemented through nongovernmental
and international organizations: Provided further, That only
those countries for which assistance was justified for the
``Foreign Military Sales Financing Program'' in the fiscal
year 1989 congressional presentation for security assistance
programs may utilize funds made available under this heading
for procurement of defense articles, defense services or
design and construction services that are not sold by the
United States Government under the Arms Export Control Act:
Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading
shall be expended at the minimum rate necessary to make
timely payment for defense articles and services: Provided
further, That not more than $40,500,000 of the funds
appropriated under this heading may be obligated for
necessary expenses, including the purchase of passenger motor
vehicles for replacement only for use outside of the United
States, for the general costs of administering military
assistance and sales: Provided further, That not more than
$361,000,000 of funds realized pursuant to section
21(e)(1)(A) of the Arms Export Control Act may be obligated
for expenses incurred by the Department of Defense during
fiscal year 2004 pursuant to section 43(b) of the Arms Export
Control Act, except that this limitation may be exceeded only
through the regular notification procedures of the Committees
on Appropriations: Provided further, That foreign military
financing program funds estimated to be outlayed for Egypt
during fiscal year 2004 shall be transferred to an interest
bearing account for Egypt in the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York within 30 days of enactment of this Act.
peacekeeping operations
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 551 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$85,000,000: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated
under this heading shall be obligated or expended except as
provided through the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.
TITLE IV--MULTILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE
funds appropriated to the president
international financial institutions
global environment facility
For the United States contribution for the Global
Environment Facility, $107,500,000, to the International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development as trustee for the Global
Environment Facility, by the Secretary of the Treasury, to
remain available until expended.
contribution to the international development association
For payment to the International Development Association by
the Secretary of the Treasury, $850,000,000, to remain
available until expended.
contribution to the multilateral investment guarantee agency
For payment to the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency
by the Secretary of the Treasury, $4,001,672, for the United
States paid-in share of the increase in capital stock, to
remain available until expended.
limitation on callable capital subscriptions
The United States Governor of the Multilateral Investment
Guarantee Agency may subscribe without fiscal year limitation
for the callable capital portion of the United States share
of such capital stock in an amount not to exceed $16,339,982.
contribution to the enterprise for the americas multilateral investment
fund
For payment to the Enterprise for the Americas Multilateral
Investment Fund by the Secretary of the Treasury, for the
United States contribution to the fund, $25,000,000, to
remain available until expended.
contribution to the asian development fund
For the United States contribution by the Secretary of the
Treasury to the increase in resources of the Asian
Development Fund, as authorized by the Asian Development Bank
Act, as amended, $151,921,405, to remain available until
expended.
Contribution to the African Development Bank
For payment to the African Development Bank by the
Secretary of the Treasury, $5,104,930, for the United States
paid-in share of the increase in capital stock, to remain
available until expended.
limitation on callable capital subscriptions
The United States Governor of the African Development Bank
may subscribe without fiscal year limitation for the callable
capital portion of the United States share of such capital
stock in an amount not to exceed $79,609,817.
contribution to the african development fund
For the United States contribution by the Secretary of the
Treasury to the increase in resources of the African
Development Fund, $107,370,856, to remain available until
expended.
contribution to the european bank for reconstruction and development
For payment to the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development by the Secretary of the Treasury, $35,431,111 for
the United States share of the paid-in portion of the
increase in capital stock, to remain available until
expended.
limitation on callable capital subscriptions
The United States Governor of the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development may subscribe without fiscal
year limitation to the callable capital portion of the United
States share of such capital stock in an amount not to exceed
$122,085,497.
contribution to the international fund for agricultural development
For the United States contribution by the Secretary of the
Treasury to increase the resources of the International Fund
for Agricultural Development, $15,004,042, to remain
available until expended.
[[Page H7416]]
international organizations and programs
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 301 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and of
section 2 of the United Nations Environment Program
Participation Act of 1973, $194,550,000: Provided, That none
of the funds appropriated under this heading may be made
available to the Korean Peninsula Energy Development
Organization (KEDO) or the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA).
TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS
compensation for united states executive directors to international
financial institutions
Sec. 501. (a) No funds appropriated by this Act may be made
as payment to any international financial institution while
the United States Executive Director to such institution is
compensated by the institution at a rate which, together with
whatever compensation such Director receives from the United
States, is in excess of the rate provided for an individual
occupying a position at level IV of the Executive Schedule
under section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, or while
any alternate United States Director to such institution is
compensated by the institution at a rate in excess of the
rate provided for an individual occupying a position at level
V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of title 5,
United States Code.
(b) For purposes of this section, ``international financial
institutions'' are: the International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development, the Inter-American Development Bank, the
Asian Development Bank, the Asian Development Fund, the
African Development Bank, the African Development Fund, the
International Monetary Fund, the North American Development
Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development.
private and voluntary organizations
Sec. 502. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act for development assistance may be made
available to any United States private and voluntary
organization, except any cooperative development
organization, which obtains less than 20 percent of its total
annual funding for international activities from sources
other than the United States Government: Provided, That the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development, after informing the Committees on
Appropriations, may, on a case-by-case basis, waive the
restriction contained in this subsection, after taking into
account the effectiveness of the overseas development
activities of the organization, its level of volunteer
support, its financial viability and stability, and the
degree of its dependence for its financial support on the
agency.
limitation on residence expenses
Sec. 503. Of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act, not to exceed $100,500 shall be for
official residence expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development during the current fiscal year:
Provided, That appropriate steps shall be taken to assure
that, to the maximum extent possible, United States-owned
foreign currencies are utilized in lieu of dollars.
limitation on expenses
Sec. 504. Of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act, not to exceed $5,000 shall be for
entertainment expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development during the current fiscal year.
limitation on representational allowances
Sec. 505. Of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act, not to exceed $125,000 shall be
available for representation allowances for the United States
Agency for International Development during the current
fiscal year: Provided, That appropriate steps shall be taken
to assure that, to the maximum extent possible, United
States-owned foreign currencies are utilized in lieu of
dollars: Provided further, That of the funds made available
by this Act for general costs of administering military
assistance and sales under the heading ``Foreign Military
Financing Program'', not to exceed $2,000 shall be available
for entertainment expenses and not to exceed $125,000 shall
be available for representation allowances: Provided further,
That of the funds made available by this Act under the
heading ``International Military Education and Training'',
not to exceed $50,000 shall be available for entertainment
allowances: Provided further, That of the funds made
available by this Act for the Inter-American Foundation, not
to exceed $2,000 shall be available for entertainment and
representation allowances: Provided further, That of the
funds made available by this Act for the Peace Corps, not to
exceed a total of $4,000 shall be available for entertainment
expenses: Provided further, That of the funds made available
by this Act under the heading ``Trade and Development
Agency'', not to exceed $2,000 shall be available for
representation and entertainment allowances.
prohibition on taxation of united states assistance
Sec. 506. (a) Prohibition on Taxation.--None of the funds
appropriated by this Act may be made available to provide
assistance for a foreign country under a new bilateral
agreement governing the terms and conditions under which such
assistance is to be provided unless such agreement includes a
provision stating that assistance provided by the United
States shall be exempt from taxation, or reimbursed, by the
foreign government, and the Secretary of State shall
expeditiously seek to negotiate amendments to existing
bilateral agreements, as necessary, to conform with this
requirement.
(b) Reimbursement of Foreign Taxes.--An amount equivalent
to 200 percent of the total taxes assessed during fiscal year
2004 by a foreign government or entity against commodities
financed under United States assistance programs for which
funds are appropriated by this Act, either directly or
through grantees, contractors and subcontractors shall be
withheld from obligation from funds appropriated for
assistance for fiscal year 2005 and allocated for the central
government of such country and for the West Bank and Gaza
Program to the extent that the Secretary of State certifies
and reports in writing to the Committees on Appropriations
that such taxes have not been reimbursed to the Government of
the United States.
(c) De Minimis Exception.--Foreign taxes of a de minimis
nature shall not be subject to the provisions of subsection
(b).
(d) Refund to the Treasury and Reprogramming of Funds.--Of
the funds withheld from obligation for each country or entity
pursuant to subsection (b), one-half may become available for
reprogramming for other purposes (pursuant to section 515 of
this Act and consistent with the purposes for which such
funds were originally appropriated) and one-half shall be
deposited in the General Fund of the Treasury on, or within 5
days after, September 1, 2005, pursuant to the certification
required under subsection (b).
(e) Implementation.--The Secretary of State shall issue
rules, regulations, or policy guidance, as appropriate, to
implement the prohibition against the taxation of assistance
contained in this section.
(f) Definitions.--As used in this section--
(1) the terms ``taxes'' and ``taxation'' refer to value
added taxes and customs duties imposed on commodities
financed with United States assistance for programs for which
funds are appropriated by this Act; and
(2) the term ``bilateral agreement'' refers to a framework
bilateral agreement between the Government of the United
States and the government of the country receiving assistance
that describes the privileges and immunities applicable to
United States foreign assistance for such country generally,
or an individual agreement between the Government of the
United States and such government that describes, among other
things, the treatment for tax purposes that will be accorded
the United States assistance provided under that agreement.
Mr. KOLBE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the remainder of the bill through page 53, line 19, be considered
as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Arizona?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
prohibition against direct funding for certain countries
Sec. 507. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended
to finance directly any assistance or reparations to Cuba,
Libya, North Korea, Iran, or Syria: Provided, That for
purposes of this section, the prohibition on obligations or
expenditures shall include direct loans, credits, insurance
and guarantees of the Export-Import Bank or its agents.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Weiner
Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Weiner:
In section 507 (relating to prohibition against direct
funding), after ``Iran,'', insert ``Saudi Arabia,''.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman reserves a point of order on the
amendment.
Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and the ranking member
for the fine work they have done on this bill under difficult
circumstances with many challenges.
After September 11, President Bush, I think, articulated our national
policy very well by saying that nations are either for us in the war on
terrorism or against us. I supported the President then, and I believe
we must be tireless in pursuit of terrorists and those who sponsor
terrorism overseas.
I rise today because I believe we need to make a change in this bill
to fully live up to that promise. I suspect that most of my colleagues
know the record of Saudi Arabia; but today I will be offering an
amendment that strikes what is arguably, and agreed, a very small
amount of money in this bill for Saudi Arabia and says that under this
bill there shall be none for that country.
For many of my colleagues and for many Americans, it is intuitive why
we
[[Page H7417]]
would take this action. They would probably be surprised to learn that
even a small amount of funding is going to that nation. We know, for
example, as a matter of fact, that Saudi Arabia, far from being a force
for peace in the Middle East, has been systematically exporting
terrorism. Testimony heard in this Congress said that more than 50
percent of Hamas funding comes from Saudi Arabia despite increasing
calls from President Bush to the kingdom to halt that funding. The
Saudi Arabian government reportedly pays $5,333 to each family of what
they call martyrs killed trying to murder Israelis. And in the spring
of 2002, U.S. troops in Sarajevo found in the office of the Saudi High
Commission for Relief of Bosnia documents that proved Saudi funding of
the Hamas terrorist group to enable it to produce a short-range missile
called the Qassam. We also know that increasingly it has become clear
that there are Saudi connections to 9/11. Far from being a force to
help us crack down on those that committed this crime, we all know,
frankly, that it took the Saudis more than a month to even freeze Osama
bin Laden's assets to fund his terrorist network.
A known Saudi intelligence agent, Omar al-Bayoumi, hosted two of the
9/11 hijackers, Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, during the summer
of 2000. Al-Bayoumi met the two men in Los Angeles and directed them to
a Muslim community in San Diego and even wrote a check for their
apartment deposits. The wife of the Saudi ambassador to the United
States transferred $15,000 in 1998 and then $2,000 a month to a Saudi
resident, Osama Bassnan. During the same period, Mr. Bassnan and
another man apparently were receiving Saudi financial support providing
financial support for two of the hijackers on September 11.
I would also say that it is very clear that on many occasions when
the Saudi Arabian government had a chance to offer true help to the
United States of America, they have not done it. We know their record
in the investigation after the 1996 Khobar bombing attack. Assistant
FBI Director Robert Bryant said at the time that the Saudi government
had prevented the FBI investigators from interviewing any civilians who
witnessed or may have been involved in the Khobar Towers bombing.
In 1995, the Saudi government prevented us, the United States, from
apprehending a Hezbollah leader by preventing us from intercepting a
plane that he was on.
Some will argue here today, and I have heard it frankly continuously
over the course of the last decade, that now the Saudi Arabia that we
see is a different one, they have changed, they have come around. Now
they really, really want to help us. In fact, the Department of State,
Assistant Secretary Burns, writes a letter today to the gentlewoman
from New York (Mrs. Lowey) talking about how Saudi Arabia was among the
first countries to condemn the September 11 attack. Is that not just
terrific given how closely tied they were to that attack itself?
I do not need to remind anyone here that 15 of the 19 bombers of my
city, attackers that killed over 2,800 people, were Saudis. I do not
need to tell you how they have been exporting terrorism to the Middle
East again and again and are doing it today. But yet we still hear from
the State Department, maybe if we give them one more chance. Well, I
agree. Let us give them one more chance. Let us give them more than
that. But there should not be one dime of U.S. aid going for any reason
to Saudi Arabia.
So what is in this bill? I believe it is a very small amount, perhaps
the chairman could tell me, I think it is $25,000. That is all. What
does that money do? It defrays the cost for Saudi intelligence officers
to come here and work with our officers in our academies and in our
intelligence-gathering community. That is terrific. Let us keep doing
that. Let us try to bring them around. But let us not be fooled. Let
them pay their own freight for that until they start to act like a
nation that truly is going to work to end terrorism rather than to
spread it.
It is a shame that we should be providing any funding here. I defy
any of my colleagues to come to this floor and articulate a record,
even William Burns, the Assistant Secretary of State, arguing so
fervently against this amendment, I do not know what the French for
chutzpah is, has it that Saudi Arabia has been helpful on issues,
including the pursuit of Palestinian-Israeli peace. I would ask the
chairman and just inform the House that if he insists on the point of
order, I plan to offer the exact same language that the full section
has at the appropriate place in the bill, or we can make this the sum
and substance of my presentation.
Point of Order
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the
amendment. The amendment does add a limitation to a general
appropriation bill. Under clause 2 of rule XXI, such amendments are not
in order during the reading of a general appropriations bill.
Mr. Chairman, the rule states in part:
``Except as provided in paragraph (d), an amendment proposing a
limitation not specifically contained or authorized in existing law for
the period of the limitation shall not be in order during consideration
of a general appropriation bill.''
Mr. Chairman, the amendment adds a limitation and is not specifically
contained or authorized in existing law, has been offered during the
reading and therefore is in violation of clause 2(c) of rule XXI.
I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from New York wish to be heard on
the point of order?
Mr. WEINER. I do, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. WEINER. I would argue, Mr. Chairman, that this is not in fact a
limiting amendment. The language that limits is already in the bill. It
says none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available
pursuant to this act shall be obligated or expended, that is limiting
language I have read so far, to finance directly any assistance or
reparations to Cuba, Libya, North Korea, Iran or Syria, and then it
goes on to say ``provided.'' I am not adding any more limitations than
the committee has already added. All I am doing is adding another
nation that comes under that limitation. The limiting language, I would
argue, is already in the base bill.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I would insist on my point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule.
The amendment amends a limitation in the bill and thus is in the form
of a further limitation. Under clause 2(c) of rule XXI, an amendment in
that form is not in order until the entire bill has been read.
The point of order is, therefore, sustained and the amendment is not
in order at this time.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
military coups
Sec. 508. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended
to finance directly any assistance to the government of any
country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by
decree or military coup: Provided, That assistance may be
resumed to such government if the President determines and
certifies to the Committees on Appropriations that subsequent
to the termination of assistance a democratically elected
government has taken office: Provided further, That the
provisions of this section shall not apply to assistance to
promote democratic elections or public participation in
democratic processes: Provided further, That funds made
available pursuant to the previous provisos shall be subject
to the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.
transfers
Sec. 509. (a)(1) Limitation on Transfers Between
Agencies.--None of the funds made available by this Act may
be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States Government, except pursuant to a
transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act
or any other appropriation Act.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), in addition to transfers
made by, or authorized elsewhere in, this Act, funds
appropriated by this Act to carry out the purposes of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be allocated or
transferred to agencies of the United States Government
pursuant to the provisions of sections 109, 610, and 632 of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
(b) None of the funds made available by this Act may be
obligated under an appropriation account to which they were
not appropriated, except for transfers specifically provided
for in this Act, unless the President, not less than five
days prior to the exercise of any authority contained in the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to transfer funds,
[[Page H7418]]
consults with and provides a written policy justification to
the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate.
(c) Any agreement for the transfer or allocation of funds
appropriated by this Act, or prior Acts, entered into between
the United States Agency for International Development and
another agency of the United States Government under the
authority of section 632(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 or any comparable provision of law, shall expressly
provide that the Office of the Inspector General for the
agency receiving the transfer or allocation of such funds
shall perform periodic program and financial audits of the
use of such funds: Provided, That funds transferred under
such authority may be made available for the cost of such
audits.
commercial leasing of defense articles
Sec. 510. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations, the authority of section 23(a)
of the Arms Export Control Act may be used to provide
financing to Israel, Egypt and NATO and major non-NATO allies
for the procurement by leasing (including leasing with an
option to purchase) of defense articles from United States
commercial suppliers, not including Major Defense Equipment
(other than helicopters and other types of aircraft having
possible civilian application), if the President determines
that there are compelling foreign policy or national security
reasons for those defense articles being provided by
commercial lease rather than by government-to-government sale
under such Act.
availability of funds
Sec. 511. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation after the
expiration of the current fiscal year unless expressly so
provided in this Act: Provided, That funds appropriated for
the purposes of chapters 1, 8, 11, and 12 of part I, section
667, chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, as amended, section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act,
and funds provided under the heading ``Assistance for Eastern
Europe and the Baltic States'', shall remain available for an
additional four years from the date on which the availability
of such funds would otherwise have expired, if such funds are
initially obligated before the expiration of their respective
periods of availability contained in this Act: Provided
further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Act, any funds made available for the purposes of chapter 1
of part I and chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 which are allocated or obligated for cash
disbursements in order to address balance of payments or
economic policy reform objectives, shall remain available
until expended.
limitation on assistance to countries in default
Sec. 512. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be used to furnish assistance to the government of
any country which is in default during a period in excess of
one calendar year in payment to the United States of
principal or interest on any loan made to the government of
such country by the United States pursuant to a program for
which funds are appropriated under this Act unless the
President determines, following consultations with the
Committees on Appropriations, that assistance to such country
is in the national interest of the United States.
commerce and trade
Sec. 513. (a) None of the funds appropriated or made
available pursuant to this Act for direct assistance and none
of the funds otherwise made available pursuant to this Act to
the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation shall be obligated or expended to finance any
loan, any assistance or any other financial commitments for
establishing or expanding production of any commodity for
export by any country other than the United States, if the
commodity is likely to be in surplus on world markets at the
time the resulting productive capacity is expected to become
operative and if the assistance will cause substantial injury
to United States producers of the same, similar, or competing
commodity: Provided, That such prohibition shall not apply to
the Export-Import Bank if in the judgment of its Board of
Directors the benefits to industry and employment in the
United States are likely to outweigh the injury to United
States producers of the same, similar, or competing
commodity, and the Chairman of the Board so notifies the
Committees on Appropriations.
(b) None of the funds appropriated by this or any other Act
to carry out chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 shall be available for any testing or breeding
feasibility study, variety improvement or introduction,
consultancy, publication, conference, or training in
connection with the growth or production in a foreign country
of an agricultural commodity for export which would compete
with a similar commodity grown or produced in the United
States: Provided, That this subsection shall not prohibit--
(1) activities designed to increase food security in
developing countries where such activities will not have a
significant impact on the export of agricultural commodities
of the United States; or
(2) research activities intended primarily to benefit
American producers.
surplus commodities
Sec. 514. The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the
United States Executive Directors of the International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development, the International
Development Association, the International Finance
Corporation, the Inter-American Development Bank, the
International Monetary Fund, the Asian Development Bank, the
Inter-American Investment Corporation, the North American
Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, the African Development Bank, and the African
Development Fund to use the voice and vote of the United
States to oppose any assistance by these institutions, using
funds appropriated or made available pursuant to this Act,
for the production or extraction of any commodity or mineral
for export, if it is in surplus on world markets and if the
assistance will cause substantial injury to United States
producers of the same, similar, or competing commodity.
notification requirements
Sec. 515. For the purposes of providing the executive
branch with the necessary administrative flexibility, none of
the funds made available under this Act for ``Child Survival
and Health Programs Fund'', ``Development Assistance'',
``International Organizations and Programs'', ``Trade and
Development Agency'', ``International Narcotics Control and
Law Enforcement'', ``Andean Counterdrug Initiative'',
``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States'',
``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet
Union'', ``Economic Support Fund'', ``Peacekeeping
Operations'', ``Capital Investment Fund'', ``Operating
Expenses of the United States Agency for International
Development'', ``Operating Expenses of the United States
Agency for International Development Office of Inspector
General'', ``Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and
Related Programs'', ``Millennium Challenge Account'' (by
country only), ``Foreign Military Financing Program'',
``International Military Education and Training'', ``Peace
Corps'', and ``Migration and Refugee Assistance'', shall be
available for obligation for activities, programs, projects,
type of materiel assistance, countries, or other operations
not justified or in excess of the amount justified to the
Committees on Appropriations for obligation under any of
these specific headings unless the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress are previously
notified 15 days in advance: Provided, That the President
shall not enter into any commitment of funds appropriated for
the purposes of section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act for
the provision of major defense equipment, other than
conventional ammunition, or other major defense items defined
to be aircraft, ships, missiles, or combat vehicles, not
previously justified to Congress or 20 percent in excess of
the quantities justified to Congress unless the Committees on
Appropriations are notified 15 days in advance of such
commitment: Provided further, That this section shall not
apply to any reprogramming for an activity, program, or
project for which funds are appropriated under Title II of
this Act of less than 10 percent of the amount previously
justified to the Congress for obligation for such activity,
program, or project for the current fiscal year: Provided
further, That the requirements of this section or any similar
provision of this Act or any other Act, including any prior
Act requiring notification in accordance with the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations,
may be waived if failure to do so would pose a substantial
risk to human health or welfare: Provided further, That in
case of any such waiver, notification to the Congress, or the
appropriate congressional committees, shall be provided as
early as practicable, but in no event later than 3 days after
taking the action to which such notification requirement was
applicable, in the context of the circumstances necessitating
such waiver: Provided further, That any notification provided
pursuant to such a waiver shall contain an explanation of the
emergency circumstances.
limitation on availability of funds for international organizations and
programs
Sec. 516. Subject to the regular notification procedures of
the Committees on Appropriations, funds appropriated under
this Act or any previously enacted Act making appropriations
for foreign operations, export financing, and related
programs, which are returned or not made available for
organizations and programs because of the implementation of
section 307(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, shall
remain available for obligation until September 30, 2005.
independent states of the former soviet union
Sec. 517. (a) None of the funds appropriated under the
heading ``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former
Soviet Union'' shall be made available for assistance for a
government of an Independent State of the former Soviet
Union--
(1) unless that government is making progress in
implementing comprehensive economic reforms based on market
principles, private ownership, respect for commercial
contracts, and equitable treatment of foreign private
investment; and
(2) if that government applies or transfers United States
assistance to any entity for the purpose of expropriating or
seizing ownership or control of assets, investments, or
ventures.
[[Page H7419]]
Assistance may be furnished without regard to this subsection
if the President determines that to do so is in the national
interest.
(b) None of the funds appropriated under the heading
``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet
Union'' shall be made available for assistance for a
government of an Independent State of the former Soviet Union
if that government directs any action in violation of the
territorial integrity or national sovereignty of any other
Independent State of the former Soviet Union, such as those
violations included in the Helsinki Final Act: Provided, That
such funds may be made available without regard to the
restriction in this subsection if the President determines
that to do so is in the national security interest of the
United States.
(c) None of the funds appropriated under the heading
``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet
Union'' shall be made available for any state to enhance its
military capability: Provided, That this restriction does not
apply to demilitarization, demining or nonproliferation
programs.
(d) Funds appropriated under the heading ``Assistance for
the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union'' for the
Russian Federation, Armenia, Georgia, and Ukraine shall be
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.
(e) Funds made available in this Act for assistance for the
Independent States of the former Soviet Union shall be
subject to the provisions of section 117 (relating to
environment and natural resources) of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961.
(f) Funds made available for Enterprise Funds shall be
expended at the minimum rate necessary to make timely payment
for projects and activities.
(g) In issuing new task orders, entering into contracts, or
making grants, with funds appropriated in this Act or prior
appropriations Acts under the heading ``Assistance for the
Independent States of the Former Soviet Union'' and under
comparable headings in prior appropriations Acts, for
projects or activities that have as one of their primary
purposes the fostering of private sector development, the
Coordinator for United States Assistance to the New
Independent States and the implementing agency shall
encourage the participation of and give significant weight to
contractors and grantees who propose investing a significant
amount of their own resources (including volunteer services
and in-kind contributions) in such projects and activities.
PROHIBITION ON FUNDING FOR ABORTIONS AND INVOLUNTARY STERILIZATION
Sec. 518. None of the funds made available to carry out
part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may
be used to pay for the performance of abortions as a method
of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to
practice abortions. None of the funds made available to carry
out part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended,
may be used to pay for the performance of involuntary
sterilization as a method of family planning or to coerce or
provide any financial incentive to any person to undergo
sterilizations. None of the funds made available to carry out
part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may
be used to pay for any biomedical research which relates in
whole or in part, to methods of, or the performance of,
abortions or involuntary sterilization as a means of family
planning. None of the funds made available to carry out part
I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may be
obligated or expended for any country or organization if the
President certifies that the use of these funds by any such
country or organization would violate any of the above
provisions related to abortions and involuntary
sterilizations.
export financing transfer authorities
Sec. 519. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation
other than for administrative expenses made available for
fiscal year 2004, for programs under title I of this Act may
be transferred between such appropriations for use for any of
the purposes, programs, and activities for which the funds in
such receiving account may be used, but no such
appropriation, except as otherwise specifically provided,
shall be increased by more than 25 percent by any such
transfer: Provided, That the exercise of such authority shall
be subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.
special notification requirements
Sec. 520. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall
be obligated or expended for Liberia, Sudan, Zimbabwe, the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, or Cambodia except as
provided through the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.
definition of program, project, and activity
Sec. 521. For the purpose of this Act, ``program, project,
and activity'' shall be defined at the appropriations Act
account level and shall include all appropriations and
authorizations Acts earmarks, ceilings, and limitations with
the exception that for the following accounts: Economic
Support Fund and Foreign Military Financing Program,
``program, project, and activity'' shall also be considered
to include country, regional, and central program level
funding within each such account; for the development
assistance accounts of the United States Agency for
International Development ``program, project, and activity''
shall also be considered to include central, country,
regional, and program level funding, either as: (1) justified
to the Congress; or (2) allocated by the executive branch in
accordance with a report, to be provided to the Committees on
Appropriations within 30 days of the enactment of this Act,
as required by section 653(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961.
child survival and health activities
Sec. 522. Up to $13,500,000 of the funds made available by
this Act for assistance under the heading ``Child Survival
and Health Programs Fund'', may be used to reimburse United
States Government agencies, agencies of State governments,
institutions of higher learning, and private and voluntary
organizations for the full cost of individuals (including for
the personal services of such individuals) detailed or
assigned to, or contracted by, as the case may be, the United
States Agency for International Development for the purpose
of carrying out activities under that heading: Provided, That
up to $3,500,000 of the funds made available by this Act for
assistance under the heading ``Development Assistance'' may
be used to reimburse such agencies, institutions, and
organizations for such costs of such individuals carrying out
other development assistance activities: Provided further,
That funds appropriated by this Act that are made available
for child survival activities or disease programs including
activities relating to research on, and the prevention,
treatment and control of, HIV/AIDS may be made available
notwithstanding any other provision of law except for the
provisions under the heading ``Child Survival and Health
Programs Fund'', section 515 of this Act, and sections
104(c), 104A, 104B, and 104C of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961: Provided further, That funds appropriated under titles
II and III of this Act may be made available pursuant to
section 301 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 if a
primary purpose of the assistance is for child survival and
related programs.
afghanistan
Sec. 523. Of the funds appropriated by titles II and III of
this Act, not less than $600,000,000 shall be made available
for humanitarian, reconstruction, and related assistance for
Afghanistan: Provided, That of the funds made available
pursuant to this section, not less than $150,000,000 should
be from funds appropriated under the heading ``Economic
Support Fund''.
NOTIFICATION ON EXCESS DEFENSE EQUIPMENT
Sec. 524. Prior to providing excess Department of Defense
articles in accordance with section 516(a) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, the Department of Defense shall
notify the Committees on Appropriations to the same extent
and under the same conditions as are other committees
pursuant to subsection (f) of that section: Provided, That
before issuing a letter of offer to sell excess defense
articles under the Arms Export Control Act, the Department of
Defense shall notify the Committees on Appropriations in
accordance with the regular notification procedures of such
Committees if such defense articles are significant military
equipment (as defined in section 47(9) of the Arms Export
Control Act) or are valued (in terms of original acquisition
cost) at $7,000,000 or more, or if notification is required
elsewhere in this Act for the use of appropriated funds for
specific countries that would receive such excess defense
articles: Provided further, That such Committees shall also
be informed of the original acquisition cost of such defense
articles.
usaid overseas program
Sec. 525. Funds appropriated by this and subsequent
appropriations Acts to carry out the provisions of Part I of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, including funds
appropriated under the heading ``Assistance for Eastern
Europe and the Baltic States'', may be made available to
employ individuals overseas on a limited appointment basis
pursuant to the authority of sections 308 and 309 of the
Foreign Service Act of 1980: Provided, That in fiscal year
2004 the authority of this section may be used to employ not
more than 85 individuals.
tibet
Sec. 526. Notwithstanding any other provision of law not to
exceed $3,000,000 of the funds appropriated by this Act to
carry out the provisions of chapter 4 of part II of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be made available to
United States nongovernmental organizations located outside
the People's Republic of China to support activities which
preserve cultural traditions and promote sustainable
development and environmental conservation in Tibetan
communities in Tibet: Provided, That funds made available for
programs, projects, and activities for the Peoples's Republic
of China shall be subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.
prohibition on bilateral assistance to terrorist countries
Sec. 527. (a) Funds appropriated for bilateral assistance
under any heading of this Act and funds appropriated under
any such heading in a provision of law enacted prior to the
enactment of this Act, shall not be made available to any
country which the President determines--
(1) grants sanctuary from prosecution to any individual or
group which has committed an act of international terrorism;
or
(2) otherwise supports international terrorism.
[[Page H7420]]
(b) The President may waive the application of subsection
(a) to a country if the President determines that national
security or humanitarian reasons justify such waiver. The
President shall publish each waiver in the Federal Register
and, at least 15 days before the waiver takes effect, shall
notify the Committees on Appropriations of the waiver
(including the justification for the waiver) in accordance
with the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.
DEBT-FOR-DEVELOPMENT
Sec. 528. In order to enhance the continued participation
of nongovernmental organizations in debt-for-development and
debt-for-nature exchanges, a nongovernmental organization
which is a grantee or contractor of the United States Agency
for International Development may place in interest bearing
accounts local currencies which accrue to that organization
as a result of economic assistance provided under title II of
this Act and any interest earned on such investment shall be
used for the purpose for which the assistance was provided to
that organization.
SEPARATE ACCOUNTS
Sec. 529. (a) Separate Accounts for Local Currencies.--(1)
If assistance is furnished to the government of a foreign
country under chapters 1 and 10 of part I or chapter 4 of
part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 under
agreements which result in the generation of local currencies
of that country, the Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development shall--
(A) require that local currencies be deposited in a
separate account established by that government;
(B) enter into an agreement with that government which sets
forth--
(i) the amount of the local currencies to be generated; and
(ii) the terms and conditions under which the currencies so
deposited may be utilized, consistent with this section; and
(C) establish by agreement with that government the
responsibilities of the United States Agency for
International Development and that government to monitor and
account for deposits into and disbursements from the separate
account.
(2) Uses of Local Currencies.--As may be agreed upon with
the foreign government, local currencies deposited in a
separate account pursuant to subsection (a), or an equivalent
amount of local currencies, shall be used only--
(A) to carry out chapter 1 or 10 of part I or chapter 4 of
part II (as the case may be), for such purposes as--
(i) project and sector assistance activities; or
(ii) debt and deficit financing; or
(B) for the administrative requirements of the United
States Government.
(3) Programming accountability.--The United States Agency
for International Development shall take all necessary steps
to ensure that the equivalent of the local currencies
disbursed pursuant to subsection (a)(2)(A) from the separate
account established pursuant to subsection (a)(1) are used
for the purposes agreed upon pursuant to subsection (a)(2).
(4) Termination of assistance programs.--Upon termination
of assistance to a country under chapter 1 or 10 of part I or
chapter 4 of part II (as the case may be), any unencumbered
balances of funds which remain in a separate account
established pursuant to subsection (a) shall be disposed of
for such purposes as may be agreed to by the government of
that country and the United States Government.
(5) Reporting requirement.--The Administrator of the United
States Agency for International Development shall report on
an annual basis as part of the justification documents
submitted to the Committees on Appropriations on the use of
local currencies for the administrative requirements of the
United States Government as authorized in subsection
(a)(2)(B), and such report shall include the amount of local
currency (and United States dollar equivalent) used and/or to
be used for such purpose in each applicable country.
(b) Separate Accounts for Cash Transfers.--(1) If
assistance is made available to the government of a foreign
country, under chapter 1 or 10 of part I or chapter 4 of part
II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as cash transfer
assistance or as nonproject sector assistance, that country
shall be required to maintain such funds in a separate
account and not commingle them with any other funds.
(2) Applicability of other provisions of law.--Such funds
may be obligated and expended notwithstanding provisions of
law which are inconsistent with the nature of this assistance
including provisions which are referenced in the Joint
Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference
accompanying House Joint Resolution 648 (House Report No. 98-
1159).
(3) Notification.--At least 15 days prior to obligating any
such cash transfer or nonproject sector assistance, the
President shall submit a notification through the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations,
which shall include a detailed description of how the funds
proposed to be made available will be used, with a discussion
of the United States interests that will be served by the
assistance (including, as appropriate, a description of the
economic policy reforms that will be promoted by such
assistance).
(4) Exemption.--Nonproject sector assistance funds may be
exempt from the requirements of subsection (b)(1) only
through the notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.
enterprise fund restrictions
Sec. 530. Prior to the distribution of any assets resulting
from any liquidation, dissolution, or winding up of an
Enterprise Fund, in whole or in part, the President shall
submit to the Committees on Appropriations, in accordance
with the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations, a plan for the distribution of the assets of
the Enterprise Fund.
burma
Sec. 531. Of the funds appropriated under the heading
``Economic Support Fund'', not less than $6,000,000 should be
made available to support democracy activities along the
Burma-Thailand border, for activities of Burmese student
groups and other organizations located outside Burma, and for
the purpose of supporting the provision of humanitarian
assistance to displaced Burmese along Burma's borders:
Provided, That of this amount $500,000 should be made
available to support newspapers, publications, and other
media activities promoting democracy inside Burma: Provided
further, That funds made available under this heading may be
made available notwithstanding any other provision of law:
Provided further, That funds made available by this section
shall be subject to the regular notification procedures of
the Committees on Appropriations.
authorities for the peace corps, inter-american foundation and african
development foundation
Sec. 532. Unless expressly provided to the contrary,
provisions of this or any other Act, including provisions
contained in prior Acts authorizing or making appropriations
for foreign operations, export financing, and related
programs, shall not be construed to prohibit activities
authorized by or conducted under the Peace Corps Act, the
Inter-American Foundation Act or the African Development
Foundation Act. The agency shall promptly report to the
Committees on Appropriations whenever it is conducting
activities or is proposing to conduct activities in a country
for which assistance is prohibited.
impact on jobs in the united states
Sec. 533. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
obligated or expended to provide--
(a) any financial incentive to a business enterprise
currently located in the United States for the purpose of
inducing such an enterprise to relocate outside the United
States if such incentive or inducement is likely to reduce
the number of employees of such business enterprise in the
United States because United States production is being
replaced by such enterprise outside the United States; or
(b) assistance for any program, project, or activity that
contributes to the violation of internationally recognized
workers rights, as defined in section 507(4) of the Trade Act
of 1974, of workers in the recipient country, including any
designated zone or area in that country: Provided, That the
application of section 507(4)(D) and (E) of such Act should
be commensurate with the level of development of the
recipient country and sector, and shall not preclude
assistance for the informal sector in such country, micro and
small-scale enterprise, and smallholder agriculture.
special authorities
Sec. 534. (a) Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon, Montenegro,
Victims of War, Displaced Children, and Displaced Burmese.--
Funds appropriated by this Act that are made available for
assistance for Afghanistan may be made available
notwithstanding section 512 of this Act and any similar
provision of law and section 660 of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, and funds appropriated in titles I and II of
this Act that are made available for Lebanon, Montenegro,
Pakistan, and for victims of war, displaced children, and
displaced Burmese, and to assist victims of trafficking in
persons and, subject to the regular notification procedures
of the Committees on Appropriations, to combat such
trafficking, may be made available notwithstanding any other
provision of law.
(b) Tropical Forestry and Biodiversity Conservation
Activities.--Funds appropriated by this Act to carry out the
provisions of sections 103 through 106, and chapter 4 of part
II, of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be used,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the purpose
of supporting tropical forestry and biodiversity conservation
activities and energy programs aimed at reducing greenhouse
gas emissions: Provided, That such assistance shall be
subject to sections 116, 502B, and 620A of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961.
(c) Personal Services Contractors.--Funds appropriated by
this Act to carry out chapter 1 of part I, chapter 4 of part
II, and section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
and title II of the Agricultural Trade Development and
Assistance Act of 1954, may be used by the United States
Agency for International Development to employ up to 20
personal services contractors in the United States,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the purpose
of providing direct, interim support for new or expanded
overseas programs and activities managed by the agency until
permanent direct hire personnel are hired and trained:
Provided, That
[[Page H7421]]
not more than 7 of such contractors shall be assigned to any
bureau or office: Provided further, That such funds
appropriated to carry out the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
may be made available for personal services contractors
assigned only to the Office of Procurement; the Bureau for
Africa; and the Bureau for Asia and the Near East: Provided
further, That such funds appropriated to carry out title II
of the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of
1954, may be made available only for personal services
contractors assigned to the Office of Food for Peace.
(d)(1) Waiver.--The President may waive the provisions of
section 1003 of Public Law 100-204 if the President
determines and certifies in writing to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the
Senate that it is important to the national security
interests of the United States.
(2) Period of application of waiver.--Any waiver pursuant
to paragraph (1) shall be effective for no more than a period
of 6 months at a time and shall not apply beyond 12 months
after the enactment of this Act.
(e) Small Business.--In entering into multiple award
indefinite-quantity contracts with funds appropriated by this
Act, the United States Agency for International Development
may provide an exception to the fair opportunity process for
placing task orders under such contracts when the order is
placed with any category of small or small disadvantaged
business.
(f) Shipment of Humanitarian Assistance.--During fiscal
year 2004 and each fiscal year thereafter, of the amounts
made available by the United States Agency for International
Development to carry out the provisions of section 123(b) of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, funds may be made
available to nongovernmental organizations for administrative
costs necessary to implement a program to obtain available
donated space on commercial ships for the shipment of
humanitarian assistance overseas.
(g) Reconstituting Civilian Police Authority.--In providing
assistance with funds appropriated by this Act under section
660(b)(6) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, support for
a nation emerging from instability may be deemed to mean
support for regional, district, municipal, or other sub-
national entity emerging from instability, as well as a
nation emerging from instability.
(h) National Endowment for Democracy.--Funds appropriated
by this Act that are provided to the National Endowment for
Democracy may be provided notwithstanding any other provision
of law or regulation.
arab league boycott of israel
Sec. 535. It is the sense of the Congress that--
(1) the Arab League boycott of Israel, and the secondary
boycott of American firms that have commercial ties with
Israel, is an impediment to peace in the region and to United
States investment and trade in the Middle East and North
Africa;
(2) the Arab League boycott, which was regrettably
reinstated in 1997, should be immediately and publicly
terminated, and the Central Office for the Boycott of Israel
immediately disbanded;
(3) the three Arab League countries with diplomatic and
trade relations with Israel should return their ambassadors
to Israel, should refrain from downgrading their relations
with Israel, and should play a constructive role in securing
a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Arab conflict;
(4) the remaining Arab League states should normalize
relations with their neighbor Israel;
(5) the President and the Secretary of State should
continue to vigorously oppose the Arab League boycott of
Israel and find concrete steps to demonstrate that opposition
by, for example, taking into consideration the participation
of any recipient country in the boycott when determining to
sell weapons to said country; and
(6) the President should report to Congress annually on
specific steps being taken by the United States to encourage
Arab League states to normalize their relations with Israel
to bring about the termination of the Arab League boycott of
Israel, including those to encourage allies and trading
partners of the United States to enact laws prohibiting
businesses from complying with the boycott and penalizing
businesses that do comply.
administration of justice activities
Sec. 536. Of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act or any subsequent Act for ``Economic
Support Fund'', assistance may be provided to strengthen the
administration of justice in countries in Latin America and
the Caribbean and in other regions consistent with the
provisions of section 534(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, except that programs to enhance protection of
participants in judicial cases may be conducted
notwithstanding section 660 of that Act. Funds made available
pursuant to this section may be made available
notwithstanding section 534(c) and the second and third
sentences of section 534(e) of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961.
eligibility for assistance
Sec. 537. (a) Assistance Through Nongovernmental
Organizations.--Restrictions contained in this or any other
Act with respect to assistance for a country shall not be
construed to restrict assistance in support of programs of
nongovernmental organizations from funds appropriated by this
Act to carry out the provisions of chapters 1, 10, 11, and 12
of part I and chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, and from funds appropriated under the heading
``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States'':
Provided, That before using the authority of this subsection
to furnish assistance in support of programs of
nongovernmental organizations, the President shall notify the
Committees on Appropriations under the regular notification
procedures of those committees, including a description of
the program to be assisted, the assistance to be provided,
and the reasons for furnishing such assistance: Provided
further, That nothing in this subsection shall be construed
to alter any existing statutory prohibitions against abortion
or involuntary sterilizations contained in this or any other
Act.
(b) Public Law 480.--During fiscal year 2004, restrictions
contained in this or any other Act with respect to assistance
for a country shall not be construed to restrict assistance
under the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act
of 1954: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated to
carry out title I of such Act and made available pursuant to
this subsection may be obligated or expended except as
provided through the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.
(c) Exception.--This section shall not apply--
(1) with respect to section 620A of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 or any comparable provision of law prohibiting
assistance to countries that support international terrorism;
or
(2) with respect to section 116 of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 or any comparable provision of law prohibiting
assistance to the government of a country that violates
internationally recognized human rights.
reservations of funds
Sec. 538. (a) Funds appropriated by this Act which are
earmarked may be reprogrammed for other programs within the
same account notwithstanding the earmark if compliance with
the earmark is made impossible by operation of any provision
of this or any other Act: Provided, That any such
reprogramming shall be subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: Provided
further, That assistance that is reprogrammed pursuant to
this subsection shall be made available under the same terms
and conditions as originally provided.
(b) In addition to the authority contained in subsection
(a), the original period of availability of funds
appropriated by this Act and administered by the United
States Agency for International Development that are
earmarked for particular programs or activities by this or
any other Act shall be extended for an additional fiscal year
if the Administrator of such agency determines and reports
promptly to the Committees on Appropriations that the
termination of assistance to a country or a significant
change in circumstances makes it unlikely that such earmarked
funds can be obligated during the original period of
availability: Provided, That such earmarked funds that are
continued available for an additional fiscal year shall be
obligated only for the purpose of such earmark.
ceilings and earmarks
Sec. 539. Ceilings and earmarks contained in this Act shall
not be applicable to funds or authorities appropriated or
otherwise made available by any subsequent Act unless such
Act specifically so directs. Earmarks or minimum funding
requirements contained in any other Act shall not be
applicable to funds appropriated by this Act.
prohibition on publicity or propaganda
Sec. 540. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within
the United States not authorized before the date of the
enactment of this Act by the Congress: Provided, That not to
exceed $750,000 may be made available to carry out the
provisions of section 316 of Public Law 96-533.
prohibition of payments to united nations members
Sec. 541. None of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act for carrying out the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, may be used to pay in whole or in part any
assessments, arrearages, or dues of any member of the United
Nations or, from funds appropriated by this Act to carry out
chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
the costs for participation of another country's delegation
at international conferences held under the auspices of
multilateral or international organizations.
nongovernmental organizations--documentation
Sec. 542. None of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to this Act shall be available to a nongovernmental
organization which fails to provide upon timely request any
document, file, or record necessary to the auditing
requirements of the United States Agency for International
Development.
Prohibition on Assistance to Foreign Governments that Export Lethal
Military Equipment to Countries Supporting International Terrorism
Sec. 543. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by this Act may be available to any foreign
government which provides lethal military equipment to a
country the government of which the Secretary of State has
determined is a terrorist
[[Page H7422]]
government for purposes of section 6(j) of the Export
Administration Act. The prohibition under this section with
respect to a foreign government shall terminate 12 months
after that government ceases to provide such military
equipment. This section applies with respect to lethal
military equipment provided under a contract entered into
after October 1, 1997.
(b) Assistance restricted by subsection (a) or any other
similar provision of law, may be furnished if the President
determines that furnishing such assistance is important to
the national interests of the United States.
(c) Whenever the waiver authority of subsection (b) is
exercised, the President shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees a report with respect to the
furnishing of such assistance. Any such report shall include
a detailed explanation of the assistance to be provided,
including the estimated dollar amount of such assistance, and
an explanation of how the assistance furthers United States
national interests.
withholding of assistance for parking fines owed by foreign countries
Sec. 544. (a) In General.--Of the funds appropriated under
this Act that are made available for a foreign country under
part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, an amount
equivalent to 110 percent of the total unpaid fines
determined to be owed under the parking programs in the
District of Columbia and New York City, New York by such
country as of September 30, 2003 that were incurred after the
first day of the fiscal year preceding the current fiscal
year shall be withheld from obligation for such country until
the Secretary of State certifies and reports in writing to
the appropriate congressional committees that such fines and
penalties are fully paid to the governments of the District
of Columbia and New York City, New York.
(b) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
``appropriate congressional committees'' means the Committee
on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of
the Senate and the Committee on International Relations and
the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives.
limitation on assistance for the plo for the west bank and gaza
Sec. 545. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
obligated for assistance for the Palestine Liberation
Organization for the West Bank and Gaza unless the President
has exercised the authority under section 604(a) of the
Middle East Peace Facilitation Act of 1995 (title VI of
Public Law 104-107) or any other legislation to suspend or
make inapplicable section 307 of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 and that suspension is still in effect: Provided,
That if the President fails to make the certification under
section 604(b)(2) of the Middle East Peace Facilitation Act
of 1995 or to suspend the prohibition under other
legislation, funds appropriated by this Act may not be
obligated for assistance for the Palestine Liberation
Organization for the West Bank and Gaza.
war crimes tribunals drawdown
Sec. 546. If the President determines that doing so will
contribute to a just resolution of charges regarding genocide
or other violations of international humanitarian law, the
President may direct a drawdown pursuant to section 552(c) of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, of up to
$30,000,000 of commodities and services for the United
Nations War Crimes Tribunal established with regard to the
former Yugoslavia by the United Nations Security Council or
such other tribunals or commissions as the Council may
establish or authorize to deal with such violations, without
regard to the ceiling limitation contained in paragraph (2)
thereof: Provided, That the determination required under this
section shall be in lieu of any determinations otherwise
required under section 552(c): Provided further, That the
drawdown made under this section for any tribunal shall not
be construed as an endorsement or precedent for the
establishment of any standing or permanent international
criminal tribunal or court: Provided further, That funds made
available for tribunals other than Yugoslavia or Rwanda shall
be made available subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.
landmines
Sec. 547. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
demining equipment available to the United States Agency for
International Development and the Department of State and
used in support of the clearance of landmines and unexploded
ordnance for humanitarian purposes may be disposed of on a
grant basis in foreign countries, subject to such terms and
conditions as the President may prescribe.
restrictions concerning the palestinian authority
Sec. 548. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
obligated or expended to create in any part of Jerusalem a
new office of any department or agency of the United States
Government for the purpose of conducting official United
States Government business with the Palestinian Authority
over Gaza and Jericho or any successor Palestinian governing
entity provided for in the Israel-PLO Declaration of
Principles: Provided, That this restriction shall not apply
to the acquisition of additional space for the existing
Consulate General in Jerusalem: Provided further, That
meetings between officers and employees of the United States
and officials of the Palestinian Authority, or any successor
Palestinian governing entity provided for in the Israel-PLO
Declaration of Principles, for the purpose of conducting
official United States Government business with such
authority should continue to take place in locations other
than Jerusalem. As has been true in the past, officers and
employees of the United States Government may continue to
meet in Jerusalem on other subjects with Palestinians
(including those who now occupy positions in the Palestinian
Authority), have social contacts, and have incidental
discussions.
prohibition of payment of certain expenses
Sec. 549. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act under the heading ``International
Military Education and Training'' or ``Foreign Military
Financing Program'' for Informational Program activities or
under the headings ``Child Survival and Health Programs
Fund'', ``Development Assistance'', and ``Economic Support
Fund'' may be obligated or expended to pay for--
(1) alcoholic beverages; or
(2) entertainment expenses for activities that are
substantially of a recreational character, including but not
limited to entrance fees at sporting events, theatrical and
musical productions, and amusement parks.
restrictions on voluntary contributions to united nations agencies
Sec. 550. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
made available to pay any voluntary contribution of the
United States to the United Nations (including the United
Nations Development Program) if the United Nations implements
or imposes any taxation on any United States persons.
haiti
Sec. 551. The Government of Haiti shall be eligible to
purchase defense articles and services under the Arms Export
Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), for the Coast Guard.
limitation on assistance to the palestinian authority
Sec. 552. (a) Prohibition of Funds.--None of the funds
appropriated by this Act to carry out the provisions of
chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
may be obligated or expended with respect to providing funds
to the Palestinian Authority.
(b) Waiver.--The prohibition included in subsection (a)
shall not apply if the President certifies in writing to the
Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro
tempore of the Senate that waiving such prohibition is
important to the national security interests of the United
States.
(c) Period of Application of Waiver.--Any waiver pursuant
to subsection (b) shall be effective for no more than a
period of 6 months at a time and shall not apply beyond 12
months after the enactment of this Act.
limitation on assistance to security forces
Sec. 553. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be provided to any unit of the security forces of a foreign
country if the Secretary of State has credible evidence that
such unit has committed gross violations of human rights,
unless the Secretary determines and reports to the Committees
on Appropriations that the government of such country is
taking effective measures to bring the responsible members of
the security forces unit to justice: Provided, That nothing
in this section shall be construed to withhold funds made
available by this Act from any unit of the security forces of
a foreign country not credibly alleged to be involved in
gross violations of human rights: Provided further, That in
the event that funds are withheld from any unit pursuant to
this section, the Secretary of State shall promptly inform
the foreign government of the basis for such action and
shall, to the maximum extent practicable, assist the foreign
government in taking effective measures to bring the
responsible members of the security forces to justice.
FOREIGN MILITARY TRAINING REPORT
Sec. 554. The annual foreign military training report
required by section 656 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
shall be submitted by the Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of State to the Committees on Appropriations of the
House of Representatives and the Senate by the date specified
in that section.
korean peninsula energy development organization
Sec. 555. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
made available for assistance to the Korean Peninsula Energy
Organization (KEDO).
palestinian statehood
Sec. 556. (a) Limitation on Assistance.--None of the funds
appropriated by this Act may be provided to support a
Palestinian state unless the Secretary of State determines
and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees
that--
(1) a new leadership of a Palestinian governing entity has
been democratically elected through credible and competitive
elections;
(2) the elected governing entity of a new Palestinian
state--
(A) has demonstrated a firm commitment to peaceful co-
existence with the State of Israel;
(B) is taking appropriate measures to counter terrorism and
terrorist financing in
[[Page H7423]]
the West Bank and Gaza, including the dismantling of
terrorist infrastructures;
(C) is establishing a new Palestinian security entity that
is fully cooperative with appropriate Israeli and other
appropriate security organizations; and
(3) the Palestinian Authority (or the governing body of a
new Palestinian state) is working with other countries in the
region to vigorously pursue efforts to establish a just,
lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East that will
enable Israel and an independent Palestinian state to exist
within the context of full and normal relationships, which
should include--
(A) termination of all claims or states of belligerency;
(B) respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty,
territorial integrity, and political independence of every
state in the area through measures including the
establishment of demilitarized zones;
(C) their right to live in peace within secure and
recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
(D) freedom of navigation through international waterways
in the area; and
(E) a framework for achieving a just settlement of the
refugee problem.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the newly elected governing entity should enact a
constitution assuring the rule of law, an independent
judiciary, and respect for human rights for its citizens, and
should enact other laws and regulations assuring transparent
and accountable governance.
(c) Waiver.--The President may waive subsection (a) if he
determines that it is vital to the national security
interests of the United States to do so.
(d) Exemption.--The restriction in subsection (a) shall not
apply to assistance intended to help reform the Palestinian
Authority and affiliated institutions, or a newly elected
governing entity, in order to help meet the requirements of
subsection (a), consistent with the provisions of section 552
of this Act (``Limitation on Assistance to the Palestinian
Authority'').
COLOMBIA
Sec. 557. (a) Determination and Certification Required.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds
appropriated by this Act that are available for assistance
for the Colombian Armed Forces, may be made available as
follows:
(1) Up to 75 percent of such funds may be obligated prior
to a determination and certification by the Secretary of
State pursuant to paragraph (2).
(2) The balance of such funds may be obligated only after
the Secretary of State certifies and reports to the
appropriate congressional committees that:
(A) The Commander General of the Colombian Armed Forces is
suspending from the Armed Forces those members, of whatever
rank, who have been credibly alleged to have committed gross
violations of human rights, including extra-judicial
killings, or to have aided or abetted paramilitary
organizations.
(B) The Colombian Government is prosecuting those members
of the Colombian Armed Forces, of whatever rank, who have
been credibly alleged to have committed gross violations of
human rights, including extra-judicial killings, or to have
aided or abetted paramilitary organizations, and is punishing
those members of the Colombian Armed Forces found to have
committed such violations of human rights or to have aided or
abetted paramilitary organizations.
(C) The Colombian Armed Forces are cooperating with
civilian prosecutors and judicial authorities in such cases
(including providing requested information, such as the
identity of persons suspended from the Armed Forces and the
nature and cause of the suspension, and access to witnesses,
relevant military documents, and other requested
information).
(D) The Colombian Armed Forces are severing links
(including denying access to military intelligence, vehicles,
and other equipment or supplies, and ceasing other forms of
active or tacit cooperation) at the command, battalion, and
brigade levels, with paramilitary organizations.
(E) The Colombian Armed Forces are executing orders for
capture of leaders of paramilitary organizations that
continue armed conflict.
(b) Consultative Process.--At least 10 days prior to making
the certification required by subsection (a), the Secretary
of State shall consult with internationally recognized human
rights organizations regarding progress in meeting the
conditions contained in that subsection.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Aided or abetted.--The term ``aided or abetted'' means
to provide any support to paramilitary groups, including
taking actions which allow, facilitate, or otherwise foster
the activities of such groups.
(2) Paramilitary groups.--The term ``paramilitary groups''
means illegal self-defense groups and illegal security
cooperatives.
ILLEGAL ARMED GROUPS
Sec. 558. (a) Denial of Visas to Supporters of Colombian
Illegal Armed Groups.--Subject to subsection (b), the
Secretary of State shall not issue a visa to any alien who
the Secretary determines, based on credible evidence--
(1) has willfully provided any support to the Revolutionary
Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the National Liberation Army
(ELN), or the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC),
including taking actions or failing to take actions which
allow, facilitate, or otherwise foster the activities of such
groups; or
(2) has committed, ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise
participated in the commission of gross violations of human
rights, including extra-judicial killings, in Colombia.
(b) Waiver.--Subsection (a) shall not apply if the
Secretary of State determines and certifies to the
appropriate congressional committees, on a case-by-case
basis, that the issuance of a visa to the alien is necessary
to support the peace process in Colombia or for urgent
humanitarian reasons.
PROHIBITION ON ASSISTANCE TO THE PALESTINIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
Sec. 559. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used to provide equipment,
technical support, consulting services, or any other form of
assistance to the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation.
west bank and gaza program
Sec. 560. (a) Oversight.--For fiscal year 2004, 30 days
prior to the initial obligation of funds for the bilateral
West Bank and Gaza Program, the Secretary of State shall
certify to the appropriate committees of Congress that
procedures have been established to assure the Comptroller
General of the United States will have access to appropriate
United States financial information in order to review the
uses of United States assistance for the Program funded under
the heading ``Economic Support Fund'' for the West Bank and
Gaza.
(b) Vetting.--Prior to the obligation of funds appropriated
by this Act under the heading ``Economic Support Fund'' for
assistance for the West Bank and Gaza, the Secretary of State
shall take all appropriate steps to ensure that such
assistance is not provided to or through any individual or
entity that the Secretary knows or has reason to believe
advocates, plans, sponsors, engages in, or has engaged in,
terrorist activity. The Secretary of State shall, as
appropriate, establish procedures specifying the steps to be
taken in carrying out this subsection.
(c) Audits.--(1) The Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development shall ensure that
Federal or non-Federal audits of all contractors and
grantees, and significant subcontractors and subgrantees,
under the West Bank and Gaza Program, are conducted at least
on an annual basis to ensure, among other things, compliance
with this section.
(2) Of the funds appropriated by this Act under the heading
``Economic Support Fund'' that are made available for
assistance for the West Bank and Gaza, up to $1,000,000 may
be used by the Office of the Inspector General of the United
States Agency for International Development for audits,
inspections, and other activities in furtherance of the
requirements of this subsection. Such funds are in addition
to funds otherwise available for such purposes.
contributions to united nations population fund
Sec. 561. (a) Limitations on Amount of Contribution.--Of
the amounts made available under ``International
Organizations and Programs'', $25,000,000 for fiscal year
2004 shall be available for the United Nations Population
Fund (hereafter in this section referred to as the ``UNFPA'')
subject to subsection (c).
(b) Prohibition on Use of Funds in China.--None of the
funds made available under ``International Organizations and
Programs'' may be made available for the UNFPA for a country
program in the People's Republic of China.
(c) Conditions on Availability of Funds.--Amounts made
available under ``International Organizations and Programs''
for fiscal year 2004 for the UNFPA may not be made available
to the UNFPA unless--
(1) the UNFPA maintains amounts made available to the UNFPA
under this section in an account separate from other accounts
of the UNFPA;
(2) the UNFPA does not commingle amounts made available to
the UNFPA under this section with other sums;
(3) the UNFPA does not fund abortions; and
(4) the UNFPA does not provide any funding for the State
Planned-Birth Commission (Jihua Shengyu Weiyuanhui) or its
regional affiliates in the People's Republic of China.
(d) Report to the Congress and Withholding of Funds.--
(1) Not later than February 15, 2004, the Secretary of
State shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional
committees indicating the amount of funds that the UNFPA is
budgeting for the year in which the report is submitted for a
country program in the People's Republic of China.
(2) If a report under paragraph (1) indicates that the
UNFPA plans to spend funds for a country program in the
People's Republic of China in the year covered by the report,
then the amount of such funds that the UNFPA plans to spend
in the People's Republic of China shall be deducted from the
funds made available to the UNFPA after March 1 for
obligation for the remainder of the fiscal year in which the
report is submitted.
procurement and financial management reform
Sec. 562. (a) Funding Conditions.--Of the funds made
available under the heading
[[Page H7424]]
``International Financial Institutions'' in this Act, 10
percent of the United States portion or payment to such
International Financial Institution shall be withheld by the
Secretary of the Treasury, until the Secretary certifies to
the Committees on Appropriations that, to the extent
pertinent to its lending programs, the institution is--
(1) implementing procedures for conducting annual audits by
qualified independent auditors for all new investment
lending;
(2) implementing procedures for annual independent external
audits of central bank financial statements for countries
making use of International Monetary Fund resources under new
arrangements or agreements with the Fund;
(3) taking steps to establish an independent fraud and
corruption investigative organization or office;
(4) implementing a process to assess a recipient country's
procurement and financial management capabilities including
an analysis of the risks of corruption prior to initiating
new investment lending; and
(5) taking steps to fund and implement programs and
policies to improve transparency and anti-corruption programs
and procurement and financial management controls in
recipient countries.
(b) Definitions.--The term ``International Financial
Institutions'' means the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, the International Development
Association, the International Finance Corporation, the
Inter-American Development Bank, the Inter-American
Investment Corporation, the Enterprise for the Americas
Multilateral Investment Fund, the Asian Development Bank, the
Asian Development Fund, the African Development Bank, the
African Development Fund, the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, and the International
Monetary Fund.
WAR CRIMINALS
Sec. 563. (a)(1) None of the funds appropriated or
otherwise made available pursuant to this Act may be made
available for assistance, and the Secretary of the Treasury
shall instruct the United States executive directors to the
international financial institutions to vote against any new
project involving the extension by such institutions of any
financial or technical assistance, to any country, entity, or
municipality whose competent authorities have failed, as
determined by the Secretary of State, to take necessary and
significant steps to implement its international legal
obligations to apprehend and transfer to the International
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (the
``Tribunal'') all persons in their territory who have been
indicted by the Tribunal and to otherwise cooperate with the
Tribunal.
(2) The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to
humanitarian assistance or assistance for democratization.
(b) The provisions of subsection (a) shall apply unless the
Secretary of State determines and reports to the appropriate
congressional committees that the competent authorities of
such country, entity, or municipality are--
(1) cooperating with the Tribunal, including access for
investigators to archives and witnesses, the provision of
documents, and the surrender and transfer of indictees or
assistance in their apprehension; and
(2) are acting consistently with the Dayton Accords.
(c) Not less than 10 days before any vote in an
international financial institution regarding the extension
of any new project involving financial or technical
assistance or grants to any country or entity described in
subsection (a), the Secretary of the Treasury, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, shall provide to
the Committees on Appropriations a written justification for
the proposed assistance, including an explanation of the
United States position regarding any such vote, as well as a
description of the location of the proposed assistance by
municipality, its purpose, and its intended beneficiaries.
(d) In carrying out this section, the Secretary of State,
the Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development, and the Secretary of the Treasury
shall consult with representatives of human rights
organizations and all government agencies with relevant
information to help prevent indicted war criminals from
benefiting from any financial or technical assistance or
grants provided to any country or entity described in
subsection (a).
(e) The Secretary of State may waive the application of
subsection (a) with respect to projects within a country,
entity, or municipality upon a written determination to the
Committees on Appropriations that such assistance directly
supports the implementation of the Dayton Accords.
(f) Definitions.--As used in this section--
(1) Country.--The term ``country'' means Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia.
(2) Entity.--The term ``entity'' refers to the Federation
of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro and the
Republika Srpska.
(3) Municipality.--The term ``municipality'' means a city,
town or other subdivision within a country or entity as
defined herein.
(4) Dayton accords.--The term ``Dayton Accords'' means the
General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and
Herzegovina, together with annexes relating thereto, done at
Dayton, November 10 through 16, 1995.
User Fees
Sec. 564. The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the
United States Executive Director at each international
financial institution (as defined in section 1701(c)(2) of
the International Financial Institutions Act) and the
International Monetary Fund to oppose any loan, grant,
strategy or policy of these institutions that would require
user fees or service charges on poor people for primary
education or primary healthcare, including prevention and
treatment efforts for HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, and
infant, child, and maternal well-being, in connection with
the institutions' financing programs.
funding for serbia
Sec. 565. (a) Funds appropriated by this Act may be made
available for assistance for Serbia after March 1, 2004, if
the President has made the determination and certification
contained in subsection (c).
(b) After March 1, 2004, the Secretary of the Treasury
should instruct the United States executive directors to the
international financial institutions to support loans and
assistance to the Government of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia (or a government of a successor state) subject to
the conditions in subsection (c): Provided, That section 576
of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related
Programs Appropriations Act, 1997, as amended, shall not
apply to the provision of loans and assistance to the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia (or a successor state) through
international financial institutions.
(c) The determination and certification referred to in
subsection (a) is a determination by the President and a
certification to the Committees on Appropriations that the
Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (or a
government of a successor state) is--
(1) cooperating with the International Criminal Tribunal
for the former Yugoslavia including access for investigators,
the provision of documents, and the surrender and transfer of
indictees or assistance in their apprehension;
(2) taking steps that are consistent with the Dayton
Accords to end Serbian financial, political, security and
other support which has served to maintain separate Republika
Srpska institutions; and
(3) taking steps to implement policies which reflect a
respect for minority rights and the rule of law, including
the release of political prisoners from Serbian jails and
prisons.
(d) This section shall not apply to Montenegro, Kosovo,
humanitarian assistance or assistance to promote democracy in
municipalities.
Community-Based Police Assistance
Sec. 566. (a) Authority.--Funds made available by this Act
to carry out the provisions of chapter 1 of part I and
chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
may be used, notwithstanding section 660 of that Act, to
enhance the effectiveness and accountability of civilian
police authority in Jamaica and El Salvador through training
and technical assistance in human rights, the rule of law,
strategic planning, and through assistance to foster civilian
police roles that support democratic governance including
assistance for programs to prevent conflict and foster
improved police relations with the communities they serve.
(b) Notification.--Assistance provided under subsection (a)
shall be subject to the regular notification procedures of
the Committees on Appropriations.
trade capacity building
Sec. 567. Of the funds appropriated by this Act, under the
headings ``Trade and Development Agency'', ``Development
Assistance'', ``Transition Initiatives'', ``Economic Support
Fund'', ``International Affairs Technical Assistance'', and
``International Organizations and Programs'', not less than
$517,000,000 should be made available for trade capacity
building assistance.
special debt relief for the poorest
Sec. 568. (a) Authority to Reduce Debt.-The President may
reduce amounts owed to the United States (or any agency of
the United States) by an eligible country as a result of--
(1) guarantees issued under sections 221 and 222 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961;
(2) credits extended or guarantees issued under the Arms
Export Control Act; or
(3) any obligation or portion of such obligation, to pay
for purchases of United States agricultural commodities
guaranteed by the Commodity Credit Corporation under export
credit guarantee programs authorized pursuant to section 5(f)
of the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act of June 29,
1948, as amended, section 4(b) of the Food for Peace Act of
1966, as amended (Public Law 89-808), or section 202 of the
Agricultural Trade Act of 1978, as amended (Public Law 95-
501).
(b) Limitations.--
(1) The authority provided by subsection (a) may be
exercised only to implement multilateral official debt relief
and referendum agreements, commonly referred to as ``Paris
Club Agreed Minutes''.
(2) The authority provided by subsection (a) may be
exercised only in such amounts or to such extent as is
provided in advance by appropriations Acts.
(3) The authority provided by subsection (a) may be
exercised only with respect to countries with heavy debt
burdens that are eligible to borrow from the International
Development Association, but not from the
[[Page H7425]]
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development,
commonly referred to as ``IDA-only'' countries.
(c) Conditions.--The authority provided by subsection (a)
may be exercised only with respect to a country whose
government--
(1) does not have an excessive level of military
expenditures;
(2) has not repeatedly provided support for acts of
international terrorism;
(3) is not failing to cooperate on international narcotics
control matters;
(4) (including its military or other security forces) does
not engage in a consistent pattern of gross violations of
internationally recognized human rights; and
(5) is not ineligible for assistance because of the
application of section 527 of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995.
(d) Availability of Funds.--The authority provided by
subsection (a) may be used only with regard to funds
appropriated by this Act under the heading ``Debt
Restructuring''.
(e) Certain Prohibitions Inapplicable.--The authority
provided by subsection (a) may be exercised notwithstanding
section 620(r) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 or
section 321 of the International Development and Food
Assistance Act of 1975.
authority to engage in debt buybacks or sales
Sec. 569. (a) Loans Eligible for Sale, Reduction, or
Cancellation.--
(1) Authority to sell, reduce, or cancel certain loans.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the President
may, in accordance with this section, sell to any eligible
purchaser any concessional loan or portion thereof made
before January 1, 1995, pursuant to the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, to the government of any eligible country as
defined in section 702(6) of that Act or on receipt of
payment from an eligible purchaser, reduce or cancel such
loan or portion thereof, only for the purpose of
facilitating--
(A) debt-for-equity swaps, debt-for-development swaps, or
debt-for-nature swaps; or
(B) a debt buyback by an eligible country of its own
qualified debt, only if the eligible country uses an
additional amount of the local currency of the eligible
country, equal to not less than 40 percent of the price paid
for such debt by such eligible country, or the difference
between the price paid for such debt and the face value of
such debt, to support activities that link conservation and
sustainable use of natural resources with local community
development, and child survival and other child development,
in a manner consistent with sections 707 through 710 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, if the sale, reduction, or
cancellation would not contravene any term or condition of
any prior agreement relating to such loan.
(2) Terms and conditions.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the President shall, in accordance with
this section, establish the terms and conditions under which
loans may be sold, reduced, or canceled pursuant to this
section.
(3) Administration.--The Facility, as defined in section
702(8) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, shall notify
the administrator of the agency primarily responsible for
administering part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 of
purchasers that the President has determined to be eligible,
and shall direct such agency to carry out the sale,
reduction, or cancellation of a loan pursuant to this
section. Such agency shall make an adjustment in its accounts
to reflect the sale, reduction, or cancellation.
(4) Limitation.--The authorities of this subsection shall
be available only to the extent that appropriations for the
cost of the modification, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, are made in advance.
(b) Deposit of Proceeds.--The proceeds from the sale,
reduction, or cancellation of any loan sold, reduced, or
canceled pursuant to this section shall be deposited in the
United States Government account or accounts established for
the repayment of such loan.
(c) Eligible Purchasers.--A loan may be sold pursuant to
subsection (a)(1)(A) only to a purchaser who presents plans
satisfactory to the President for using the loan for the
purpose of engaging in debt-for-equity swaps, debt-for-
development swaps, or debt-for-nature swaps.
(d) Debtor Consultations.--Before the sale to any eligible
purchaser, or any reduction or cancellation pursuant to this
section, of any loan made to an eligible country, the
President should consult with the country concerning the
amount of loans to be sold, reduced, or canceled and their
uses for debt-for-equity swaps, debt-for-development swaps,
or debt-for-nature swaps.
(e) Availability of Funds.--The authority provided by
subsection (a) may be used only with regard to funds
appropriated by this Act under the heading ``Debt
Restructuring''.
Cambodia
Sec. 570. The Secretary of the Treasury should instruct the
United States executive directors of the international
financial institutions to use the voice and vote of the
United States to oppose loans to the Central Government of
Cambodia, except loans to support basic human needs.
Cuba
Sec. 571. None of the funds appropriated by this Act under
the heading ``International Narcotics Control and Law
Enforcement'' may be made available for assistance to the
Government of Cuba.
Competition in Contracting
Sec. 572. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none
of the funds appropriated by this Act to carry out sections
103 through 106 and chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 that are made available for assistance
for Iraq, and none of the funds appropriated in Public Law
108-11 under the heading ``Iraq Relief and Reconstruction
Fund'', may be made available to enter into any Federal
contract or follow-on contract through the use of other than
full and open competitive procedures: Provided, That this
section shall be applicable to contracts and follow-on
contracts entered into after the date of enactment of this
Act.
Disaster Surge Capacity
Sec. 573. Funds appropriated by this Act to carry out part
I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be used, in
addition to funds otherwise available for such purposes, for
the cost (including the support costs) of individuals
detailed to or employed by the United States Agency for
International Development whose primary responsibility is to
carry out programs to address natural or manmade disasters or
programs under the heading ``Transition Initiatives''.
Authorization
Sec. 574. The Secretary of the Treasury may, to fulfill
commitments of the United States, contribute on behalf of the
United States to the sixth replenishment of the resources of
the International Fund for Agricultural Development. The
following amount is authorized to be appropriated without
fiscal year limitation for payment by the Secretary of the
Treasury: $45,000,000 for the International Fund for
Agricultural Development.
clarification of role of usaid
Sec. 575. (a) Status of USAID.--The Administrator of the
United States Agency for International Development shall
report to the President through, and operate under the
foreign policy authority and direction of, the Secretary of
State. The United States Agency for International Development
shall be administered under the supervision and operational
direction of the Administrator of the Agency.
(b) Functions of USAID.--The United States Agency for
International Development is authorized--
(1) to receive appropriated funds;
(2) to be the United States Government agency primarily
responsible for administering sections 103 through 108 (other
than section 104A), 214, and 491 of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, the ``Child Survival and Health Programs Fund'',
and other United States economic assistance as directed in
writing by the President or the Secretary of State, or as
otherwise provided by law;
(3) to provide assistance to a country currently ineligible
for assistance from the Millennium Challenge Corporation in
order that it may become eligible for such assistance; and
(4) upon the request of the Chief Executive Officer of the
Millennium Challenge Corporation and with the concurrence of
the Administrator, to assist in the evaluation, execution or
oversight of a Millennium Challenge Contract.
(c) Section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2292) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``assistance for the
relief and rehabilitation of'' and inserting ``relief,
rehabilitation, and reconstruction assistance for'';
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``relief and
rehabilitation'' and inserting ``relief, rehabilitation, and
reconstruction''; and
(3) in subsection (c), by striking ``relief and
rehabilitation'' and inserting ``relief, rehabilitation, and
reconstruction assistance''.
Philippine Education and Health Infrastructure
Sec. 576. Of the funds appropriated under ``Economic
Support Fund'' for the Philippines in Public Law 108-11, the
Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003,
$600,000 shall be available only for upgrading education and
health infrastructure in the Sulu Archipelago.
Basic Education
Sec. 577. Of the funds appropriated by title II of this
Act, not less than $350,000,000 shall be made available for
basic education: Provided, That of the funds made available
pursuant to this section, not less than $91,500,000 should be
from funds appropriated under the heading ``Economic Support
Fund'': Provided further, That the Secretary of State, in
consultation with the Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development (USAID), shall submit a
report not later than 120 days after enactment of this Act
articulating a strategy for the use of basic education funds
in Africa, East Asia and the Pacific, the Near East, South
Asia, and the Western Hemisphere (excluding the United
States) to include:
(1) country strategies and brief project descriptions of
the uses and proposed uses of all U.S. Government resources
for basic education overseas;
(2) a detailed description of the administrative structure
currently in place to manage strategic coordination
undertaken among the State Department, USAID and other
agencies involved in international basic education
activities; and
(3) a description of actions being taken to expand the
administrative capacity of both
[[Page H7426]]
USAID and the State Department to deliver effective expanded
basic education programs.
Mr. KOLBE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the remainder of the bill through page 122, line 2, be considered
as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Arizona?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any points of order to this section of the
bill?
points of order
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Chairman, I rise to make a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Chairman, it is with no small amount of regret that I
rise to make a point of order against the distinguished chairman of
this subcommittee who has worked very hard and is so capable in this
area, but on behalf of Chairman Goodlatte of the Committee on
Agriculture, I must rise to make a point of order against section
568(a)(3) in that it violates House rule XXI, clause 2, by changing
existing law and inserting legislative language in an appropriation
bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Arizona wish to be heard on the
point of order?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, while I regret very much that this is being
done because at least in one instance these objections here are for
something that is very vital, I concede the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentlewoman from New York wish to be heard on
the point of order?
Mrs. LOWEY. I rise to be heard on the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am wondering if the gentleman has any
idea what the effect of this point of order is. This authority to allow
for the rescheduling of bilateral agriculture debt has been carried in
the foreign operations bill for at least 5 years. If it is removed, the
administration will be unable to pursue bilateral debt rescheduling.
This authority is a crucial tool in helping poor countries. It has been
used recently to help critical allies in the war on terrorism, such as
Pakistan and Indonesia.
We also just used the authority to help the Democratic Republic of
Congo with the horrible mess they are in. We did not fund the $300
million request to forgive their debt. The least we can do is
reschedule their debt. So I am mystified as to why the gentleman would
raise this point of order.
I might ask whether he knows of any plans in the Committee on
Agriculture to enact a bill containing this authority. I would like to
yield to the gentleman.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman may not yield to another member while
under recognition on a point of order and is constrained to limit her
remarks to the point of order made by the gentleman from Florida. If
the gentlewoman is finished with her remarks, then the Chair is
prepared to rule on the point of order.
The Chair finds that this provision includes language conferring
authority. The provision, therefore, constitutes legislation in
violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained and
the provision is stricken from the bill.
Are there further points of order?
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Chairman, I regret that I must rise again and raise
yet another point of order against section 572 entitled, ``Competition
in Contracting,'' on the grounds that this session changes existing law
in violation of clause 2(b) of House rule XXI and is therefore
legislation included in a general appropriations bill.
{time} 2300
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) wish to be
heard on the point of order?
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard to state, while I
will concede the point of order, that I find this really astonishing.
One of the more difficult things we have had in Iraq has been the issue
of competitiveness of contracts, and I hope the gentleman is aware that
what he is doing is he is saying he is against competition of contracts
in Iraq, and that is exactly what this language has done. We have had a
lot of controversy about that. I am glad to see that the chairman of
the committee has arrived here to defend his position, but I concede
the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of
order?
The gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) is recognized.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to ask the gentleman
again if he is against competition in awarding contracts in Iraq. I am
trying to figure out what he is trying to do with the point of order.
Mr. PUTNAM. If the gentlewoman would yield.
Mrs. LOWEY. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman may not yield when arguing a point of
order to the Chair.
Does the gentlewoman wish to be heard any further?
Mrs. LOWEY. No, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) wish
to be heard on the point of order?
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. First of all, they concede the point of
order. What they are doing is legislating on an appropriation bill
without any consultation with the committee of jurisdiction. We offered
to work out language on this, and we were rebuffed and therefore we are
going to keep our point of order. We hope that in the future if you
have concerns, you will speak with the authorizing committee.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule.
The chairman of the subcommittee has conceded the point of order.
This provision explicitly supersedes existing law. It constitutes
legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.
The point of order is conceded and sustained, and the provision is
stricken from the bill.
Are there further points of order?
point of order
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Chairman, again rising to raise a point of order and
certainly not reflecting on the policy contained therein but rather the
process and asserting the jurisdiction of the authorizing committees, I
must rise a third time to make a point of order against section 575 on
the grounds that it is changing existing law in violation of clause 2
of House rule XXI. By its very terms, this section changes current law
and specifically says ``The United States Agency for International
Development is authorized.'' This is a clear violation of the rule.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of
order?
The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) is recognized.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I again concede the point of order. This is
a piece of legislation that was added to clarify and improve the
language and we have worked it out previously, but now apparently it is
not acceptable. I concede the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained, and the
provision is stricken from the bill.
Are there any amendments to this section of the bill?
Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Nadler
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 15 offered by Mr. Nadler:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
limitation on contributions to unrwa
Sec. ____. Of the amount made available in this Act for
contributions to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency
(UNRWA), one-third of such amount shall be withheld from
obligation and expenditure unless and until the President
determines and certifies to Congress that the UNRWA has
established a program (including a timetable for
implementation of the program) for the resettlement of
refugees under their authority in the host countries or
territories of such refugees and replaces textbooks and
educational materials used in the UNRWA educational system
that promote anti-Semitism, denial of the existence and the
right to exist of the state of Israel, and exacerbate
stereotypes and tensions between the Palestinians and
Israelis.
[[Page H7427]]
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I am not asking in this amendment to shift
priorities within this bill. I am asking to set priorities for an
agency that has failed miserably in its 53-year history. The United
Nations Relief and Works Agency, otherwise known as UNRWA, is spending
over $300 million a year to house, educate and provide social services
to 3.9 million Palestinian refugees, 1.2 million of whom still live in
refugee camps.
The amendment is very simple. It would withhold a third of the United
States contribution to UNRWA until such time as the President certifies
that UNRWA has established a program for the resettlement of the
refugees under its authority. It also would require UNRWA to replace
textbooks and educational materials that promote anti-Semitism, deny
the existence of Israel and exacerbate stereotypes and tensions between
the Palestinians and Israelis.
What is shocking is that the United Nations through UNRWA has allowed
and indeed compelled these camps to exist for more than 50 years. No
other refugees in the modern era have had to sustain such a long
existence in refugee camps before being resettled and absorbed. The
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, charged with dealing
with all refugees in the world other than the Palestinians, has
overseen the resettlement and absorption of more than 200 million
refugees since World War II. Only the 600,000 Palestinian refugees and
their descendants have languished in refugee camps for three
generations, refused resettlement and normal lives for the specific
purpose of being used as political pawns and recruitment assets for
terrorists groups opposed to the existence of Israel.
In March of 1976, 27 years ago, Mahmoud Abbas, who is now the new
Palestinian Prime Minister, wrote: ``The Arab armies entered Palestine
to protect Palestinians from the Zionist Tyranny, but instead they
abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland,
imposed upon them a political and ideological blockade and threw them
into prisons similar to the ghettos in which Jews used to live in
Eastern Europe.''
This statement underscores the fact that UNRWA has been used and
abused for over 50 years to further the political goals of a radical
political Palestinian leadership with the goal of eliminating a
sovereign state. With a new leadership and renewed hope for peace in
the Middle East today, these abuses must end.
The United Nations has not only failed to resettle the refugees, it
has fostered and promoted anti-Semitic and anti-Western propaganda in
the schools. The education system run by UNRWA with United States money
does not recognize Israel, indoctrinates children into Jihad,
contributing to the fact that the refugee camps have become notorious
breeding grounds for suicide bombers and other terrorists.
At roughly the same time, Mr. Speaker, that 600,000 Palestinians
became refugees, more than 900,000 Jews were forced out of Arab
countries in the Middle East and North Africa where they had lived for
hundreds or even thousands of years. These refugees were not herded
into refugee camps and American taxpayers have not supported them for
50 years. Israel absorbed 600,000 of these refugees from the
surrounding Arab countries, building them homes and providing education
and social services so that they could sustain themselves and become
productive citizens, as they have. Another 300,000 fled to the United
States and Canada. None became burdens on international refugee
agencies and on American taxpayers.
By contrast, UNRWA and Israel's Arab neighbors have refused to allow
the absorption or resettlement of the Palestinian refugees. Instead
they have compelled them to suffer for more than 50 years in camps that
provide no future and no hope and breed only hatred and violence.
It is time for the United Nations and UNRWA to stand up and take
responsibility for the 1.2 million people under its charge. Most of
these Palestinian refugees were born in these camps and will die there
as well unless UNRWA is forced to reform. The United States will
contribute an estimated $91 million to UNRWA this year, almost a third
of its budget. I believe that it as the main financial supporter of an
agency that has kept millions of people in squalid camps for
generations and that has allowed and even encouraged the camps to
become breeding grounds for anti-Semitic and anti-American feelings and
training grounds for terrorists, it is our responsibility to force
change on that agency through withholding funds until they start to
change and to give hope and life to these refugees to establish a plan
and a mechanism for their resettlement and their absorption.
I would urge my colleagues to support this amendment so that we may
start on that goal.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I will not take 5 minutes given the hour of the evening
here, and I will not debate the merits of this except to say that at
this moment with what we are doing in the Middle East with the peace
process and the roadmap, this would be a very inappropriate amendment
at this time.
Point of Order
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I will just make my point of order against
the amendment because it does propose to change existing law,
constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates
clause 2 of rule XXI. That rule states in part: ``An amendment to a
general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing
law . . . '' It imposes additional duties. This does impose additional
duties, and I would ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentlewoman from New York wish to be heard on
point of order?
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to thank the gentleman for bringing
this important issue to the floor today. During this time of great hope
in the Middle East peace process, it is critical that we take a step
back to recognize that the roots of tolerance and coexistence must be
planted in our young people early in order for peace to truly take
hold.
I have long shared the gentleman's concern about the danger of anti-
Semitic, anti-Israel and anti-Western propaganda in the Arab world.
Nowhere is this propaganda more insidious than in school textbooks,
where it has the capacity to poison the minds of the children who
should be the region's best hope for peace.
One of the greatest obstacles to peace in the Middle East has been
the consistent refusal of Arab regimes to prepare their people for
coexistence with Israel. Instead, they have used the Palestinian-
Israeli conflict as a pressure valve for their citizens to vent
frustrations that otherwise might be directed at the ruling regimes
themselves. It has been in many of these leaders' best interests to
perpetuate the stereotypes and canards that make peaceful coexistence
impossible. If we are ever to realize our goal of a peaceful Middle
East this practice must end. The amendment the gentleman raises today
raises this point, and I think it is one that needs to be made by
Congress and heeded by Israel's Arab neighbors.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) wish to
be heard on the point of order?
Mr. NADLER. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I thank the gentlewoman for
her kind remarks about this amendment. But secondly, I think in
commenting on the distinguished chairman's point of order and on the
remarks he made in making that point of order, I think that now with
the peace talks about to begin hopefully in the Middle East, it is
precisely the time when this is not inappropriate but is very
appropriate because we know, we know from the Camp David experience,
that at the end of the day when everything else is agreed upon someone
is going to raise the issue of the so-called right of return of these
refugees to Israel and that we had better have dealt with that and have
started to solve that problem if we expect a successful conclusion
later. I think the biggest mistake we have all made in the last
probably 20 years of seeking peace in the Middle East is trying to put
off this problem to the end hoping it will go away. We
[[Page H7428]]
must deal with it before the last moment, and that is the purpose of
this amendment.
I understand the gentleman's point of order, a limitation amendment,
and as a technical point I think that it is a limitation amendment, and
I think that the point of it now and the point of raising this now is
to put people on notice. We will be back with this amendment when the
point of order will not stand against it and hopefully, though, it will
not be necessary because UNRWA and the State Department will start
taking notice and start dealing with these problems and dismantling
these camps and enabling these people, 1.2 million people to start
being resettled and absorbed and have decent lives instead of being
kept in these squalid camps at a cost to the American taxpayer so far
for 53 years.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule. The Chair finds that
this amendment includes language imposing a legislative condition. The
amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of
rule XXI.
The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is not in order.
Amendment Offered by Mrs. Biggert
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mrs. Biggert:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
participation in the thirteenth replenishment of the resources of the
international development association
Sec. ____. The International Development Association Act
(22 U.S.C. 284-284s) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``SEC. 22. THIRTEENTH REPLENISHMENT.
``(a) Contribution Authority.--
``(1) In general.--The United States Governor of the
Association may contribute on behalf of the United States an
amount equal to the amount appropriated under subsection (b),
pursuant to the resolution of the Association entitled
`Additions to IDA Resources: Thirteenth Replenishment'.
``(2) Subject to appropriations.--Any commitment to make
the contribution authorized by paragraph (1) shall be
effective only to such extent or in such amounts as are
provided in advance in appropriations Acts.
``(b) Limitations on Authorization of Appropriations.--For
the contribution authorized by subsection (a), there are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
for payment by the Secretary of the Treasury, without fiscal
year limitation.''.
administrative provisions related to multilateral development
institutions
Sec. ____. Title XV of the International Financial
Institutions Act (22 U.S.C. 262o--262o-2) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 1504. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.
``(a) Achievement of Certain Policy Goals.--The Secretary
of Treasury should instruct the United States Executive
Director at each multilateral development institution to
inform the institution of the following United States policy
goals, and to work toward achieving the goals at the
institution before June 30, 2005:
``(1) No later than 60 calendar days after the Board of
Directors of the institution approves the minutes of a Board
meeting, the institution shall post on its website an
electronic version of the minutes, with material deemed too
sensitive for public distribution redacted.
``(2) The institution shall keep a written transcript or
electronic recording of each meeting of its Board of
Directors and preserve the transcript or recording for at
least 10 years after the meeting.
``(3) All public sector loan documents, country assistance
strategies, sector strategies, and sector policies prepared
by the institution and presented for endorsement or approval
by its Board of Directors, with materials deemed too
sensitive for public distribution redacted or withheld, shall
be made available to the public 15 calendar days before
consideration by the Board or, if not then available, when
the documents are distributed to the Board.
``(4) The institution shall post on its website an annual
report containing statistical summaries and case studies of
the fraud and corruption cases pursued by its investigations
unit.
``(5) The institution shall require that any health,
education, or poverty-focused loan, credit, grant, document,
policy, or strategy prepared by the institution includes
specific outcome and output indicators to measure results,
and that the indicators and results be published periodically
during the execution, and at the completion, of the project
or program.
``(b) Publication of Written Statements Regarding
Inspection Mechanism Cases.--No later than 60 calendar days
after a meeting of the Board of Directors of a multilateral
development institution, the Secretary of the Treasury should
provide for publication on the website of the Department of
the Treasury of any written statement presented at the
meeting by the United States Executive Director at the
institution concerning--
``(1) a project on which a claim has been made to the
inspection mechanism of the institution; or
``(2) a pending inspection mechanism case.
``(c) Congressional Briefings.--At the request of the
Committee on Financial Services of the House of
Representatives or the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate, the Secretary of the Treasury or the designee of the
Secretary should brief the requesting committee on the steps
that have been taken by the United States Executive Director
at any multilateral development institution, and by any such
institution, to implement the measures described in this
section.
``(d) Publication of `No' Votes and Abstentions by the
United States.--Each month, the Secretary of the Treasury
should provide for posting on the website of the Department
of the Treasury of a record of all `no' votes and abstentions
made by the United States Executive Director at any
multilateral development institution on any matter before the
Board of Directors of the institution.
``(e) Multilateral Development Institution Defined.--In
this section, the term `multilateral development institution'
shall have the meaning given in section 1701(c)(3).''.
participation in the seventh replenishment of the resources of the
asian development fund
Sec. ____. The Asian Development Bank Act (22 U.S.C. 285-
285aa) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 31. ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTION TO SPECIAL FUNDS.
``(a) Contribution Authority.--
``(1) In general.--The United States Governor of the Bank
may contribute on behalf of the United States an amount equal
to the amount appropriated under subsection (b), pursuant to
the resolution of the Bank entitled `Seventh Replenishment of
the Asian Development Fund'.
``(2) Subject to appropriations.--Any commitment to make
the contribution authorized by paragraph (1) shall be
effective only to such extent or in such amounts as are
provided in advance in appropriations Acts.
``(b) Limitations on Authorization of Appropriations.--For
the contribution authorized by subsection (a), there are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
for payment by the Secretary of the Treasury, without fiscal
year limitation.''.
participation in the ninth replenishment of the resources of the
african development fund
Sec. ____. The African Development Fund Act (22 U.S.C.
290g--290g-15) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 217. NINTH REPLENISHMENT.
``(a) Contribution Authority.--
``(1) In general.--The United States Governor of the Fund
may contribute on behalf of the United States an amount equal
to the amount appropriated under subsection (b), pursuant to
the resolution of the Fund entitled `The Ninth General
Replenishment of Resources of the African Development Fund'.
``(2) Subject to appropriations.--Any commitment to make
the contribution authorized by paragraph (1) shall be
effective only to such extent or in such amounts as are
provided in advance in appropriations Acts.
``(b) Limitations on Authorization of Appropriations.--For
the contribution authorized by subsection (a), there are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
for payment by the Secretary of the Treasury, without fiscal
year limitation.''.
Mrs. BIGGERT (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman
from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would allow the continued
U.S. participation in and contributions to the World Bank's
International Development Association, the Asian Development Fund and
the African Development Fund, three key institutions for which funding
has been adequately provided in the underlying bill.
Requested by the Treasury Department, my amendment would enable the
U.S. to deliver on its international commitments and continue the flow
of crucial resources to the world's poorest countries. It enjoys the
bipartisan support of the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Oxley) and the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), ranking member, of the
Committee on Financial Services. And I thank the gentleman from Arizona
(Chairman Kolbe) and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey),
ranking member, of this subcommittee for working with us on this
amendment.
I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
As noted, this is accepted. This is proposed by both the chairman of
the
[[Page H7429]]
authorizing committee and the ranking member, and I accept it and I
strongly support it.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the
requisite number of words.
I want to express my appreciation to the gentleman from Arizona and
the gentlewoman from Illinois. I just want to reaffirm what has been
said. This comes from the authorizing committee. It is a very important
piece of legislation that very appropriately accompanies this bill, and
it allows us to meet our commitments to multilateral institutions in a
very progressive way, and I thank all concerned for the fact that I
hope we are about to adopt it.
{time} 2315
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
efforts by north korea relating to the proliferation of nuclear weapons
Sec. ____. It is the sense of Congress that the President
should utilize all diplomatic options to ensure that the
Government of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea does
not engage in efforts relating to the proliferation of
nuclear weapons.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed
in the Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to discuss a very
serious issue, but I may not need to continue my discussion if I could
get the attention of the chairman. I might place my remarks in the
Record if the Chair would speak with reference to the matter.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, although a point of order could be made
against this amendment, I think it certainly does no harm to restate
what is clearly the position of the United States, so I am prepared to
accept this amendment.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to discuss a very
serious issue--the failure of North Korea to comply with a number of
non-proliferation treaties and agreements, and the failure of the
President to effectively resolve the escalating tension between the
United States and North Korea. So far, little has been achieved and
Pyongyang continues its race to manufacture nuclear weapons.
The existence of a North Korean nuclear weapons program poses a real
and imminent threat to the populations of South Korea, Japan, and North
Korea, and to the U.S. Armed Forces stationed in that region. But most
importantly, it poses a threat to global security interests.
Given the escalating tensions with North Korea, I have introduced an
amendment to the Foreign Operations Bill that urges the President to
work towards a peaceful resolution to this impasse before the situation
escalates any further.
My amendment simply says, ``It is the sense of Congress that the
President of the United States is called upon to utilize all diplomatic
options to redirect North Korean efforts away from nuclear weapons
proliferation.''
I know that most Members of Congress deeply believe that engagement,
be it bilateral or multilateral, with North Korea is needed to defuse
the tension between the two countries, and prevent the proliferation of
nuclear weapons. It will take a concerted effort to transform the
conflict, engaging many different parts of the system simultaneously,
over a period of time.
A diplomatic track could pave the way to North Korea ending its
nuclear program. Engaging rhetoric, alliance building, diplomatic
efforts aimed at halting North Korea's nuclear program are all options
to successfully redirect North Korean efforts away from nuclear weapons
proliferation.
My amendment calls on the President to use coalitions, arms-control
accords, and weapons inspections because these are methods of conflict
resolution he has often ignored. If we don't incorporate all available
nonproliferation tools to redirect North Korean efforts away from
nuclear weapons, then military intervention will again be the only
national security policy at our disposal.
Unless we do develop a plan, this standoff will continue until
tensions soar even further. Now is the time for resolute diplomacy that
sends a clear message against nuclear proliferation; now is the time
for the President to actively engage in renewed dialogue.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 10 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
participation of women in international peace efforts
Sec. ____. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to prohibit projects in which agencies promote the
participation of women in international peace efforts,
specifically peace efforts in Africa and the Middle East.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona reserves a point of order
against the amendment.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I say thank you to the
ranking member and the chairman of this committee and will try to give
a very brief scenario on why I am recommending and presenting this
amendment. I would hope that the chairman would see the necessity or
the value of a waiver of the point of order because I think that there
is value in this amendment, and that is the utilization of more women
in the peace negotiating process, both in the Middle East and in
Africa.
It is clear that there are many incidents of conflict around the
world. In a recent visit that I made to Oslo, Norway, participating in
the Global Peace Initiative of Women, Religious and Spiritual Leaders,
there was a gathering of women from Palestine and from Israel. At the
beginning of the meeting, there seemed to be no opportunity for a
meeting of the minds; and yet as we proceeded, we found that because
women understood the loss of life, disruptiveness to families and the
overall horror of war, that more often than not they were able to come
together around the preservation of family and the raising of children.
Women leaders are frequently, however, left out of international
peace efforts. In fact, I am told there is a United Nations Peace
Commission that has not yet had women members appointed to it.
My amendment will simply prohibit any funding being utilized to
prohibit any agencies that may be interested in encouraging the
international participation of women in international peace efforts.
This will ensure that the input and wisdom of women are utilized in our
efforts to achieve a world peace.
As we watch the horror of many conflicts around the world, as we
watch the crisis in Liberia, knowing the value of the work and the
understanding of African women on issues dealing with Rwanda, the Congo
and other places, I would hope that as we proceed in foreign policy
that we will utilize our good advocacies to encourage the United
Nations to appoint members to the United Nations Peace Commission for
Women and that we too would encourage the utilization of women in the
international peace process.
Mr. Chairman, I propose this amendment to the Foreign Operations
Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2004, and I ask the Rules Committee
to make my amendment in order.
This amendment says, ``None of the funds made available in this Act
may be used to prohibit projects in which agencies promote the
participation of women in international peace efforts, specifically
peace efforts in Africa, and the Middle East.''
I recently visited Oslo, Norway and participated in The Global Peace
Initiative of Women Religious & Spiritual Leaders. This uplifting
initiative gathered leading women from across the globe to discuss the
peace efforts across the globe and in particular in the Middle East. At
this initiative Israeli and Palestinian women sat at the same table and
discussed the mutual horror of seeing their children killed in
[[Page H7430]]
armed conflicts and senseless acts of violence. There were often
differences between these women, but invariably all women wanted the
violence to end and for peace and harmony to stand in its place.
Women leaders are frequently left out of international peace efforts.
My amendment will simply prohibit funding for any project that seeks to
include women from international peace efforts. This will ensure that
the input and the wisdom of women are utilized in our efforts to
achieve world peace.
Mr. Chairman, as we all watch in horror as American soldiers are
killed in Iraq and civil unrest erupts in Liberia, it is clear that we
need new methods to promote world peace. It is important to include
women in those efforts. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Point of Order
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order under clause 2 of
rule XXI against the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is creative, but the amendment offered
by the gentlewoman invokes a textual ``double-negative.'' As a result,
it constitutes an affirmative direction or statement of affirmative
intent in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.
I ask for a ruling of the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, the chairman makes a very
valid point on the double negative, and we worked very hard to try to
structure this as a limitation.
Mr. Chairman, let me just simply say this: I would hope that the
distinguished chairman would waive the point of order. But, in any
event, I would hope the distinguished chairman might offer in some way
a comment on the value of women being utilized in the peace process. We
did work very hard to try to structure this without a point of order,
but clearly wanted to ensure that no funds in the appropriations bill
would be used to prevent any of our agencies who would be so encouraged
to use women in the peace process.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule on the point of order,
unless the gentleman from Arizona wishes to be heard further on the
point of order.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, just to simply respond to the gentlewoman. I
would simply say, obviously, nothing in our bill does prohibit this. I
would say this is out of the scope of our bill, but the gentlewoman is
correct that we do not attempt to do that. But I do insist on the point
of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule on the point of order.
The gentleman from Arizona makes a point of order that the amendment
offered by the gentlewoman from Texas changes existing law in violation
of clause 2 of rule XXI.
The amendment is in the form of a limitation and proposes to restrict
funding to prohibit or limit certain actions.
As stated in section 1044 of the House Rules and Manual, the burden
is on the proponent of an amendment to prove that language offered as a
limitation does not change existing law.
The Chair finds that limitation amendments that involve textual
``double-negatives'' are suspect and may result in an affirmative
prescription or affirmative statement of intent that constitutes
legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. This is consistent
with the Chair's ruling of September 23, 1993, and the
Parliamentarian's note found in Deschler's Precedents, volume 8,
chapter 26, section 51.15.
In the opinion of the Chair, in order to carry the burden of proof on
an amendment proposing a double-negative, a Member must be able to show
that the object of the double-negative is specifically contemplated by
existing law.
On the basis of argument heard by the Chair, the gentlewoman from
Texas has failed to carry her burden to show that the amendment does
not change existing law.
The point of order is sustained.
Are there further amendments?
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Ryun of Kansas
Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 12 offered by Mr. Ryun of Kansas:
Page 122, after line 2, insert the following:
limitation on assistance for countries that materially hindered the
united states-led coalition's efforts to liberate the iraqi people
Sec. ____. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act
under title II or III may be used to provide assistance for
any country which the Secretary of State determines
materially hindered the United States-led coalition's efforts
to liberate the Iraqi people.
(b) The President may waive the application of subsection
(a) with respect to a country if the President determines
that national security or humanitarian reasons justify such
waiver. The President shall notify in writing the Speaker of
the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of
the Senate with respect to the exercise of each waiver under
the preceding sentence.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman reserves a point of order against the
amendment.
Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I understand this amendment will
not be considered in order under the rules of the House. Therefore, I
intend to withdraw my amendment at the end of my remarks.
I want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee for allowing me to
speak on this important issue. Additionally, I want to thank the
gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) for his fine leadership on
international development issues. His dedication and compassion on
issues of poverty, famine, and the HIV/AIDS epidemic, among other
things, is greatly appreciated throughout this House and the developing
world.
This amendment is quite simple. It would deny bilateral economic
assistance and military assistance to any country which the Secretary
of State deemed to have materially hindered the U.S.-led efforts in
Iraq.
The purpose of this amendment is to encourage the realignment of
America's overarching foreign policy with our international development
agenda. It deeply concerns me that American taxpayers have spent
billions of dollars on foreign aid to various countries, but during one
of our Nation's difficult moments, several of these same countries
actively hindered our efforts.
Obviously, foreign aid recipients do not exchange their sovereignty
for food or medical aid. At the same time, I cannot accept that these
countries would actively strive to hinder the United States from taking
action it deemed necessary and justified in defense of this Nation's
interests. And, therefore, I cannot in good conscience support
providing aid to such countries.
Like the rest of the budget, our international developing budget is
limited. We must make wise and prudent choices, choices that work to
promote our foreign policy agenda and not hinder it.
Therefore, although this amendment cannot be part of the bill, I hope
Secretary Powell and Administrator Natsios will use the utmost of
discretion and institute the policy objectives found in this amendment.
The American people should not be forced to support those countries
that will not support us.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Kansas?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments?
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 8 offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
independent commission on weapons of mass destuction in iraq
Sec. ____. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to prohibit the establishment of an independent
commission to study the basis of the determination of the
existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, including
any written or oral statements as to the recent purchase by
Iraq of uranium in Africa.
[[Page H7431]]
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona reserves a point of order
against the amendment.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I do wish to pose a question
before I address my amendment, if I could, to the ranking member of the
committee.
Previously, I had mentioned the importance of involving women in the
international peace process. I would like to yield to the gentlewoman
from New York on the question of women in the international peace
process. I had mentioned that the United Nations had a peace commission
established for the purpose of appointing women to that commission. It
has not been implemented, to my knowledge. But my general question is
the value of encouraging and utilizing women in international peace
negotiations around the world.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to respond to the gentlewoman,
because I think this is an absolutely critical point to be made. In
countries where women are more involved, where there are more women in
government, there clearly is a greater effort towards peace, towards
collaboration to avoiding the horrors of war. So I want to applaud the
gentlewoman for her initiative and for her focus on women and peace,
and I do hope that we can work together to ensure that these kinds of
efforts around the world are supported. I thank the gentlewoman.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I am
gratified by the response I have gotten from the ranking member of the
Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related
Programs of the Committee on Appropriations; and I am very pleased that
we might be able to work on that.
The amendment that I wish to discuss very briefly is in the backdrop
or on the eve of the announcement of the 9/11 commission's report
dealing with the horrific tragedy of 9/11.
It seems somewhat questioning that this body would not want to
support the creation of a commission to deal with the weapons of mass
destruction, simply finding out the truth. I do realize that, as we
speak, there is an ongoing investigation by the intelligence
committees, I believe both in the House and the other body; but it is
true that soldiers now are still dying, even after the war was declared
over in Iraq. It is also true that the American people deserve the
truth, and that the question dealing with the purchase of uranium from
Africa in the State of the Union address by the President is not the
only question on the issue of intelligence gathering.
All of the world's eyes were on Secretary of State Powell's
presentation before the United Nations utilized to encourage the United
Nations Security Council to vote for, if you will, a preemptive attack
against Iraq on the basis of the existence of weapons of mass
destruction. I believe this is not a question of ``gotcha,'' it is not
a question of one-upmanship, it is not a question of partisanship. It
is simply a question of telling the truth to the American people.
There were commissions and investigatory bodies that investigated the
assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the assassination of Martin
Luther King, the incident into the China satellite question, Watergate,
Whitewater, if you will. All of these warranted investigations by this
government.
It seems to me less than disingenuous to be able to deny the right of
the American people to find out the entire truth about the decision to
use a preemptive strike against Iraq on the basis that the United
States of America was about to be under imminent attack.
This debate on a commission has nothing to do with the wrongness of
Saddam Hussein and the collective opinion that Saddam Hussein was a
despotic and horrific leader.
{time} 2330
This is nothing to do with the idea of whether or not our brave young
men and women are willing to put themselves on the front line to defend
this Nation. All it has to do with is for this body to recognize the
importance of an independent commission.
I would say that this commission should not be implemented until the
completion of the work of the intelligence committees of both bodies
and then, ultimately, when a final report should be rendered. But I do
believe that it is extremely important that we have a submission on the
weapons of mass destruction and their existence and the paper trail, if
you will, and who said what, and what oversight there was with respect
to the whole question of the attack on Iraq. There was no declaration
of war under the United States Constitution article I, section 8; and
because of that, I believe the American people are owed a thorough and
full investigation on this question.
Mr. Chairman, I propose this amendment to the Foreign Operations
Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2004, and I urge my colleagues in
the House of Representatives to support this amendment.
This amendment says, ``None of the funds made available in this Act
may be used to prohibit the establishment of an independent commission
to study the basis of the determination of the existence of weapons of
mass destruction in Iraq, including any written or oral statements as
to the recent purchase by Iraq of uranium in Africa.''
This is a simple limiting amendment that will ensure that no funds
are utilized to prevent the Members of this Congress and the American
people from learning the truth about weapons of mass destruction in
Iraq. This amendment prevents the use of funds to prohibit or impede
congressional efforts to learn the truth about weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq, and the accuracy of United States intelligence
sources on the issue of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
The events that give rise to this amendment have been well
documented. On January 28, 2003, President Bush delivered his State of
the Union Address. In that address President Bush said that Saddam
Hussein attempted to buy uranium in Africa. The intelligence report
that President Bush relied on to make that allegation was proven to be
fraudulent. There were also credible indications that the Bush
administration had reason to know the intelligence report was
fraudulent before the State of the Union Address was delivered.
All of these allegations raise questions, and show the need for an
investigation into U.S. intelligence methods and the use of that
intelligence report by the Bush administration. This amendment ensures
that no funds will be spent to create unnecessary obstacles that
prevent such an investigation from taking place. Specifically, this
amendment ensures that no funds will be used to prevent the
establishment of an independent commission to study the allegations of
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the credibility of U.S.
intelligence reports, and the Bush administration's use of those
intelligence reports. These issues affect every American citizen and it
is important to every Member of Congress's constituents that the truth
be known.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is important for learning the truth
about the justifications for which the United States went to war. As of
yesterday at 5 p.m., over 150 brave young American men and women have
lost their lives fighting in Operation Iraqi Freedom. These courageous
soldiers made the ultimate sacrifice to bring peace to the people of
Iraq and the world. It is important that we learn before another
soldier loses his or her life if our justifications for war were
accurate. My amendment will prevent funds from being used to prevent a
full inquiry. I urge all of my colleagues to support this important
amendment.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I will not take 5 minutes. I just want to say before I
make my point of order that, once again, I appreciate the amendment of
the gentlewoman. The one she was talking about, I had it in front of me
before. Our bill has nothing in any way, shape, or form, or touches,
impinges, deals with in any way, shape, or form on an independent
commission to study the existence of weapons of mass destruction in
Iraq. Ours is a foreign assistance bill; it has nothing to do with a
commission here in the United States. So it would be absolutely
impossible that we would have anything in here that would prohibit
this.
point of order
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order under clause 2 of
rule XXI against the amendment which the gentlewoman from Texas has
offered.
The amendment offered, once again, invokes a textual ``double-
negative.''
[[Page H7432]]
As a result, it constitutes an affirmative direction or statement of
affirmative intent which would be in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI,
and I ask for a ruling of the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentlewoman from Texas wish to be heard on the
point of order?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, yes, I would. I had hoped the
esteemed gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) would waive the point
of order in his discussion. However, let me say that the clarification
on the record was very helpful, that nothing in this bill would
prohibit the establishment of a commission investigating the weapons of
mass destruction. I would argue on the basis only of hoping or wishing
or asking that the chairman waive the point of order so that this
amendment could go forward to be sure that there is no such language to
prohibit the establishment of a weapons of mass destruction
investigatory commission.
But I will only say that if that is not the case, then I will yield
back to the distinguished Chairman, saying that the clarification has
been made.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule.
For the reasons stated by the Chair earlier today, the amendment
offered by the gentlewoman from Texas employs a double-negative that
effectively proposes to change law in violation of clause 2 of rule
XXI. The point of order is, therefore, sustained; and the amendment is
not in order.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Kolbe
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Kolbe:
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. . None of the funds appropriated in this Act to
support the programs of the United States Agency for
International Development in Iraq and none of the funds
appropriated in Public Law 108-11 under the heading ``Iraq
Relief and Reconstruction Fund'' may be made available to
enter into any contract or follow-on contract that uses other
than full and open competitive contracting procedures as
defined in 41 U.S.C. 403(6).
Mr. KOLBE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Arizona?
There was no objection.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, this is an amendment which deals with the
operating procedures for USAID and simply clarifies some of those
procedures. I believe it is acceptable to the minority for this
amendment to be agreed to, and I yield to the gentlewoman from New
York.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I accept the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Sanders
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Sanders:
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 make an application under section 501 of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C.
1861) for an order requiring the production of library
circulation records, library patron lists, library Internet
records, bookseller sales records, or bookseller customer
lists.
Mr. SANDERS (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Vermont?
There was no objection.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise tonight to offer an amendment on a
very important issue, namely, the government's authority under section
215 of the USA PATRIOT Act to access library circulation records,
library patron lists, library Internet records, book seller sales
records, or book seller customer lists. Specifically, this amendment
bars the State Department from providing support for an application
under section 215 to get library and book seller records.
Mr. Chairman, this is a version of the amendment that I attempted to
offer yesterday and am offering it tonight.
Mr. Chairman, in the United States today, there is a great concern
about terrorism. All of us are concerned about terrorism. Our country
suffered a dastardly and horribly destructive attack on September 11,
2001; and every Member of this body is determined to do all that we can
to fight terrorism and to apprehend those people who are at war against
our country.
But many of us believe that that fight against terrorism must be
waged in a way that does not undermine the basic constitutional rights
and protections that have made us a great and free country. The very
good news that I bring to my colleagues tonight is that all across the
United States, more and more citizens, including thousands of
librarians and book sellers, are speaking out against the extremely
antidemocratic elements of the USA PATRIOT Act legislation that was
hastily passed in the wake of the September 11 attack. And just
yesterday, in an amendment offered by the gentleman from Idaho (Mr.
Otter), this House overwhelmingly said that we will deal with that
issue piece by piece. I am proud of the effort that the gentleman from
Idaho (Mr. Otter) and many of us made to say, yes, we will fight
terrorism; but we will do it in a way that protects our Constitution.
Mr. Chairman, specifically, under section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act,
the government can get a search warrant for any tangible thing. They
can go into a library and say, we are doing an investigation on
international terrorism. And having said that, a judge in a secret FISA
court is obliged to give them a warrant to go into a library, to go
into the bookstore, so that they can secure the reading habits, the
books taken out, the books being purchased by any American. All of us
want to support law enforcement going after terrorism, but we do not
want to give the FBI the opportunity to go into a fishing expedition.
Mr. Chairman, all across this country, people are saying ``no'' to
this aspect, section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act. The underlying
legislation that I have introduced has 129 bipartisan cosponsors, some
of the most conservative Members of the House, some of the most
progressive Members of the House: Democrats, Republicans, Independent.
This concept has been supported by 20 newspapers, major newspapers: the
Los Angeles Times, the Detroit Free Press, the Christian Science
Monitor, the Honolulu Advertiser, and on and on. This legislation, this
concept has the support of librarians all across the country, including
the American Library Association. It has the support of book sellers
all across this country, including the American Book Sellers
Association.
The bottom line here, Mr. Chairman, is that 129 Members of this House
have said, yes, we will fight terrorism; but, no, we will not undermine
the basic constitutional rights that make us a free country. Over 125
communities, large cities, small towns, have come on board this issue.
Libraries in California and elsewhere have been forced to put up signs
saying: library patron, we cannot protect your privacy.
So, Mr. Chairman, I believe that I speak for the majority of the
Members of this House who say, yes, let us fight terrorism; but let us
do it in a way that keeps our country free, that does not have the
United States Government and the FBI looking over our shoulders as we
take our books from the library or purchase books in a bookstore.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to accept this amendment. I have been
scratching my head trying to look at this thing. I noticed as it was
purported or given to the desk there, it refers to the bill that we had
yesterday. So this is another bill that it was dealing with.
Our bill has nothing to do with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act, whatever; so I do not know what the application of this is at all
to our bill. But, Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to accept this, and we
will consider to try and digest it and understand it and deal with it
appropriately in the conference.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentleman from Vermont.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. I do understand,
[[Page H7433]]
the gentleman is quite right. This is not the cleanest way to address
the issue. I would have preferred to do it yesterday; but as the
gentleman knows, because of an agreement that was reached, a number of
Republicans and those of us on this side were unable to offer the
amendments that we wanted to offer.
I think there may be a few other speakers who would like to speak to
this issue, and I thank the chairman very much for his support.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I will not take the 5 minutes, but I do want to correct
something that was just said by the gentleman from Vermont. The reason
that amendment was not in order yesterday was not because there was
some agreement between the two sides that prevented the amendment from
being offered. The reason the amendment was not in order yesterday was
that the amendment was drafted wrongly. That is why it was not in
order. And I think it is important to understand that distinction if we
are going to work with each other around here.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Vermont.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, if I understand it, my friend, the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) has agreed to accept this amendment.
I thank the gentleman very much for doing that and I appreciate it.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I do not have any
objection to this amendment being accepted, but I do want it understood
that yesterday was not because of some arrangement between the two
political parties that this amendment was not in order. It was simply
drafted wrongly, and that is not the responsibility of either the
Republicans or the Democrats in this House.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Sanders amendment.
This amendment eliminates one of the serious threats to individual
liberty contained in the misnamed ``Patriot Act''--the section allowing
Federal officials to conduct broad searches of bookstores and libraries
without demonstrating probable cause. This law erodes the First
Admendment rights of those who patronize libraries and bookstores. It
even forbids librarians and bookstore owners from telling their patrons
that their records have been searched. Librarians and booksellers
across the country have expressed vehement opposition to this measure,
as have defenders of individual liberty across the political spectrum.
This amendment could degrade informed political debate and discussion
among the American people. Knowing that the Federal Government could
snoop into their reading material choices could cause people to refrain
from investigating views on political, social, or historical topics
considered ``out of the mainstream.'' People may even be reluctant to
seek out material critical of the government's policies. Considering
the history of administrations of both parties using the IRS and FBI to
harass political opponents, it is clear that Americans should be
concerned about the Federal Government's new powers.
One does not need to revive the phantoms of Richard Nixon and J.
Edgar Hoover to justify concerns over these new powers. Americans are
right now being investigated for the ``crime'' of reading material that
questions government policies. For example, I ask my colleagues to
consider the case of Mark Schultz of Atlanta. As detailed in the
independent newspaper Creative Loafing, Mr. Schultz was questioned by
two agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for reading
``suspicious material.'' The ``suspicious material'' in question was an
article critical of the major media's coverage of the Iraqi war;
apparently critics of Rupert Murdock are now considered potential
terrorists!
This provision not only threatens the liberties of Americans, its
effectiveness as a terrorism fighting measure is highly dubious, to say
the least. After all, how likely is it that a terrorist will go to the
local public library and check out ``how to'' books on hijacking and
bioterrorism? Instead of investigating Americans whose reading list do
not meet the approval of the FBI, the Federal Government should
effectively fight terrorism by reforming our Nation's immigration
policies to restrict immigration from terrorist sponsoring countries. I
have introduced legislation, the Terrorist Immigration Elimination Act
(H.R. 488), to do just that.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to protect the
First Amendment rights of innocent Americans to use public libraries
and bookstores without fear of government harassment by voting for the
Sanders amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Hefley
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Hefley:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. ____. Total appropriations made in this Act (other
than appropriations required to be made by a provision of
law) are hereby reduced by $171,000,000.
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise again today to offer an amendment to
cut the level of funding in this appropriations bill by 1 percent. The
amount equals $171 million.
This is the fourth time that I have offered such an amendment in
recent times. I understand the appropriators have a difficult time
narrowing down the requests from Members and the administration for
money. However, we have to draw a line somewhere. And I feel strongly
that the projected deficit for next year, $475 billion, that the bills
we are currently working on are simply too large.
We can do something about the deficit. We can do it right now. By
voting for my amendment, Members are stating for the record that the
budget deficit is too large and that the American taxpayers should not
be burdened in the future because we cannot control our spending today.
It is important to offer amendments of this type, I think, and have
votes for the record stating clearly who in this body believes in
fiscal discipline.
I have no doubt that there are good programs. In fact, there are good
programs, many good programs in this bill. In many respects, Mr.
Chairman, these committees have done a good job on this bill. But some
of these good programs will take a cut. While this is unfortunate, our
budget should be no different from the taxpayers' budgets at home. When
we have less money, we simply spend less money. It is really that
simple.
What we are talking about, again, Mr. Chairman, is we are talking
about saving one cent on the dollar. I urge support of the Hefley
amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment which
would cut funding below the already inadequate allocation we have for
this bill. Foreign assistance is a critical component of our national
security strategy, and it would be a mistake to cut it further.
I would like to take a moment to mention just a few of the vital
parts of this bill that will suffer if the gentleman's amendment is
adopted.
The Middle East is at a critical juncture right now, and as we work
towards peace and stability in that region, our support is absolutely
essential to the process. I believe it would be a grave error to cut
this funding.
We are all well aware of the devastation HIV/AIDS has caused, is
causing, and will cause for years to come. Our only answer is to fight,
and we cannot possibly do that with reduced funds.
The funding we are providing now is not enough, and the gentleman's
amendment will cut it further.
{time} 2345
I am especially proud of the funding this bill provides for basic
education. Education is the basis of economic growth in developing
societies. This amendment would curtail our ability to provide more of
the world's poorest children with the opportunity for a better life.
There are many other issues which I could raise, but I think the point
is clear. Right now we need more resources in this bill, not less, and
I would like to remind the gentleman that the President requested $18.8
billion for foreign aid. This House provided $17.1 billion, so we are
already below the President's request.
So I strongly urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendments.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I will be brief. I do rise in opposition to the
gentleman's amendment and I appreciate very much his fiscal
responsibility. He has been a
[[Page H7434]]
watchdog of fiscal prudence in this House and we need Members like
that. But I really do believe that this appropriations bill is a
fiscally responsible bill. Not only have we stayed with the allocation
but we are at a level that is $1.8 billion less than the President's
request. That is 10 percent less than the President's requested in this
area in this account. So we have made some choices in order to fund
some, but not all of the President's priorities.
I would note that we have provided less in our bill than the
President requested in 24 accounts. We have only provided more funds
than the President requested in four accounts in the bill. We have had
some significant discussion about those tonight like the HIV/AIDS
account. But in 24 of the accounts we have under what the President
actually requested.
I know that $171 million seems like a lot of money to most folks in
America. When we around here deal with the kind of dollars we deal with
and some of the size of the appropriations bills we deal with, $171
million may not seem like a lot, but it is when you come to the context
of foreign assistance. In fact, it is more than the entire sum of
assistance programs for all but a very small number of countries that
are included in our bill.
Mr. Chairman, I would say while I appreciate what the gentleman is
attempting to do I think it is the wrong approach and I would oppose
the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of the Hefley
Amendment to reduce IMET funding for Indonesia. Mr. Hefley has
recounted the tragic story of brutal ambush last August, that resulted
in the brutal murders of Edwin Burgon and Ricky Lynn Spier, two
American school teachers in Indonesia. Eight other Americans were
injured in this attack, including a six-year-old child.
The Indonesian Police, human rights NGOs, and independent journalists
have all concluded that it is very likely Indonesian military personnel
were involved in this brutal ambush. With this case still unresolved
after almost a year, now is not the time to reward Indonesia with IMET
funding. The perpetrators of these brutal crimes still have not been
brought to justice.
We know that possible involvement in killing of Americans is not the
only instance of involvement by the TNI, Indonesia's military, in the
killing of innocent civilians. This is a corrupt and troubled military
with a very poor human rights record that we should not legitimize
through IMET funding.
On May 19, the Indonesian government launched its largest military
offensive since the 1975 invasion of East Timor with a declaration of
martial law in Aceh. The ongoing brutal TNI military operation in Aceh,
has been marked by reports of extrajudicial executions, torture, rape,
and mass displacement of civilians. Thousands of civilians have been
forced by the military into camps, where they face threats, inadequate
rations and poor health care. Civilians reportedly ``disappear'' in the
camps on a nightly basis.
International humanitarian and human rights organizations, as well as
foreign journalists, have been denied access to Aceh. U.S. journalist
William Nessen has been detained and faces a possible five-year
sentence for ``visa violations.'' When Nessen originally tried to
surrender to military forces, they reportedly shot at him. Human rights
monitors and defenders have also been targeted by TNI-sponsored militia
thugs.
The people of Papua have also suffered greatly at the hands of the
Indonesian military. Sweeps by the TNI and their feared militias have
forced thousands of villagers in Papua to flee to the forests. The TNI
has reportedly prevented Christian pastors from bringing food and
medicine to these villagers.
The attacks in Papua and Ache are very much reminiscent of the brutal
violence carried out against the people of East Timor in 1999. The TNI
has thus far successfully evaded accountability for crimes against
humanity committed in East Timor. The Indonesian Ad Hoc Human Rights
Court for East Timor has been characterized by poorly drawn
indictments, inadequate witness protection, an intimidating courtroom
atmosphere and distortions of events that took place in 1999. The
alleged masterminds of the 1999 scorched earth campaign have not been
prosecuted by Indonesia. As of now, the court has acquitted 12 and
convicted five, delivering light sentences. Four of the five sentences
are actually less than the legal minimum under Indonesian law and those
convicted remain free pending appeal.
We know that human rights concerns are brushed aside by this regime.
In a recent article, Indonesia's Defense Minister Matori was quoted as
saying, ``Of course, it's all right to think about human rights but the
more important thing is to think about the territorial integrity of the
Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia.''
It is also important to note that we know that less than a third of
the TNI's budget is provided by the government in Jakarta. Additional
income comes from legal and illegal ventures, including the extortion
of U.S.-based corporations operating in Indonesia. TNI business
activities also include illegal and environmentally devastating
logging, drug production and trafficking, and prostitution.
The questions my colleagues must ask themselves are: do we really
want to finance a military with such a horrendous human rights record?
Do we really want to finance a military that may have been involved in
the killing of Americans when such a serious case is still unresolved?
I strongly urge my colleagues to support the Hefley amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley)
will be postponed.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Otter
Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Otter:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the
following:
limitation on assistance for the Palestinian Authority or the
Palestinian people
Sec. ____. (a) General Prohibition on Funds.--None of the
funds appropriated by this Act may be obligated and expended
for assistance for the Palestinian Authority (or any other
Palestinian entity) or for the Palestinian people during a
quarter of fiscal year 2004 if the Secretary of State
determines that the Palestinian Authority has provided
support for acts of international terrorism during the prior
3-month period.
(b) Limitation on Rate of Obligation and Expenditure.--Of
the total amount of funds appropriated by this Act that are
available for assistance for the Palestinian Authority (or
any other Palestinian entity) or for the Palestinian people,
not more than 25 percent of such amount may be obligated and
expended during each quarter of fiscal year 2004.
Mr. OTTER (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Idaho?
There was no objection.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his indulgence.
Mr. Chairman, this Congress has a dual fiduciary area responsibility
when we spend taxpayers' money. One is to get the absolute best deal
that we can for our money and the other one is to spend the least
amount that we can in order to get that deal. The United States is not
obligated to offer foreign aid to any nation, especially those that are
antagonistic to the principles of democracy and American values. And
yet we continue to dole out indiscriminately, as if it were required,
to those who use it against us, other nations, and our allies, and who
teach their children and their citizens to hate Americans and her
allies.
Foreign aid is a privileged gift and it should be based upon
demonstrated willingness to support U.S. ideas and aspirations for the
regions to which that money goes. When we offer aid to a country we
should be able to see a marked change in behavior. Our tax dollars are
worse than wasted if benefitting nations from the generosity of the
United States continue to work against our friends and with our
enemies.
All of the efforts we put into promoting peace and cooperation is
meaningless without requiring accountability from the recipients of our
assistance. Infusing foreign aid with common sense and accountability
requires an attitude shift on our part here in Congress. This amendment
is the first step towards reforming that attitude.
President Bush has recommended giving foreign aid to the Palestinian
Authority for the first time in almost a decade as part of his Roadmap
to Peace. If this aid is to advance the realistic goals that the
President has set forth in the Middle East, it must be subjected to
high expectations and provide a powerful incentive to discourage
[[Page H7435]]
terrorism and encourage good faith participation in the peace process.
The amendment states simply that no more than 25 percent of the
appropriated funds would be available to the Palestinians during any
fiscal quarter. That means that the United States would retain
authority to withhold those funds should the State Department determine
that the Palestinians had participated in or supported acts of
international terrorism during the previous 3 months. Everything goes
well for 3 months, no acts of terrorism, they get one-fourth of the
allocated funds. Such a common sense approach to accountability would
provide a powerful incentive to the Palestinians to discourage
violence. It would also enable the United States to put hard earned
dollars of American taxpayers to work for peace in this generation and
peace in this world.
I applaud the President's efforts to achieve lasting peace in the
region. Discord and violence have plagued the world for almost a
century now, resulting in countless deaths and endless disruption of
lives. The President has addressed the issue realistically and in good
faith, but our approach to foreign aid must change, and what better
time to implement a responsibility-based attitude than now? It is a
golden opportunity to assist in the peace process by making sure that
our assistance has weight.
Mr. Chairman, I have engrossed in a letter these very ideas to the
subcommittee chairman, had the opportunity to meet with the committee
many times on this, and before the underlying legislation that we are
now considering was ever drafted. I had hoped that those ideas of
wrapping our foreign aid assistance around demands for behavioral
change would have been included in the final draft of the legislation
that we now have before us; however, that is not the case. So it is my
hope that such a responsible concept as I have suggested will become
part of the appropriate title of the legislation which we will be
considering a year from now.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Idaho?
There was no objection.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Weiner
Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Weiner:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
prohibition against direct funding for certain countries
Sec. ____. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended
to finance directly any assistance or reparations to Cuba,
Libya, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Syria.
Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I believe this is the last of the
amendments. Let me conclude by offering my thanks to the chairman and
ranking member of the subcommittee for some very fine work.
For those Members who heard the recitation of the amendment and heard
that none of the funds shall be appropriated or otherwise made
available for Cuba, Libya, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia or Syria,
you might say, how could there possibly be any controversy in that?
Frankly, the question is should Saudi Arabia be included in that
list? And I think, frankly, like the previous two speakers, the
argument is not why should money be struck, the argument should always
be made why should we be providing funding?
You are going to hear from opponents of this amendment that, well,
the Secretary of State and the Department of State feel sure, certain,
that after years and years of Saudi Arabia exporting terrorism, after
clear links to September 11, after connections with them exploiting
Wahabism, after efforts continually stymied by the United States to get
the Saudis to stop this behavior, we still should provide them some
funding because maybe, just maybe they will get better later on.
We have this desire, and it is a fervent one, to find a player in the
Middle East that will turn out to be a true ally. We have it in Israel
and perhaps some at the State Department believe they have it in Saudi
Arabia. But the record is simply different. The record shows that over
50 percent of the funding for Hamas comes from Saudi Arabia. The record
shows that the Saudi Arabian government provides cash awards of over
$5,000 for terrorists in Israel.
The record shows that terrorists who recently massacred 38 civilians
on a Tel Aviv highway were found to be armed with rifles bearing Saudi
army markings and serial numbers.
We know, of course, in recent months, thanks to some of the fine work
of our Intelligence Community that there are strong connections between
the Saudi government and what happened on September 11. We all know
that 15 of the 19 bombers came from Saudi Arabia. But we have now also
learned that the wife of the Saudi ambassador was providing cash grants
to two of the suicide bombers in the months leading up. We now know
that a Saudi intelligence agent had been hosting 2 of the 9/11
hijackers. We also know as a matter of fact, absolute fact, for more
than a month after September 11, the Saudi government refused to freeze
Osama bin Laden's accounts where so many of his assets were kept.
Yet the Department of State sent a letter today saying that Saudi
Arabia is one of the first countries to condemn the September 11
attacks.
We have to learn the lesson about Saudi Arabia. We cannot watch what
they say. They do a brilliant job saying things to us, millions of
dollars in lobbyists each year. We will go home tonight and there will
be ads on our TV here in Washington what a great country Saudi Arabia
is, all while they fund terrorism. No one needs to be told that in our
districts back home. It is something that we all understand.
The audacity of Mr. Burns, the Assistant Secretary of State, to say
that my amendment might undermine Saudi Arabia's cooperation in dealing
with Israeli-Palestinian peace. They are the foremost, number one
funder of terrorist bombings in Israel.
I have one final point. Why are we giving money to one of the richest
nations on Earth for anything? It is simply insane. So this is actually
a very easy vote and I would encourage my colleague, the chairman, to
accept this amendment. All it does is does what is intuitive to all of
us. Let us judge nations by how they act.
If the Saudis do turn over a new leaf, if they stop saying the right
thing when they come visit Crawford and then going and do fund-raisers
for suicide bombers on television, then maybe we can come back later
and decide whether we want to give some of our taxpayer dollars to the
perhaps richest nation on God's Earth.
To do it today is simply wrong. We have to begin to learn the lessons
of some of these nations in the Middle East. They are simply
duplicitous. This is our opportunity, and I would point out to my
colleagues, this is our opportunity to tell the Saudi Arabian
government we expect a change in behavior.
{time} 0000
This is our only opportunity to tell our colleagues at the State
Department, stop looking for the unicorn, start looking at reality; and
the reality is that the Government of Saudi Arabia, the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia that we all know oppresses its people, we all know that is
among the exporters of the worst types of Muslim teaching that
encourages the death of Christians and Jews, let us tell them with this
small message that we are not going to have it anymore.
For those of my colleagues who think there are hundreds and billions
and millions of dollars in the bill, it is $105,000 in two programs.
The two programs are to permit the Saudi government to purchase
military training in the United States, something I am sure they can
afford, and to provide IMET to Saudi Arabia to ensure continued high
level of Saudi attendance at those military things.
I urge a ``yes'' vote.
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, let us be very clear about this. The gentleman has said
himself that it is not a great deal of money that is involved. This is
not at all about the money. This is about a statement that the
gentleman is proposing making, and that statement is that we would add
our ally, Saudi Arabia, to a list of outlaw nations: North
[[Page H7436]]
Korea, Libya, Iran, Syria, and Cuba. Those are the nations that are now
on the terrorist list. That would add Saudi Arabia to that list. It
would prohibit any assistance to Saudi Arabia, antiterrorism
assistance, which is all that we really give, military assistance,
virtually anything. So I strongly oppose this amendment.
We have serious differences with Saudi Arabia. We have serious
concerns about how good Saudi Arabia has been in pursuing terrorists
since 9/11, but let us not make any mistake about it. Overall, Saudi
Arabia has been a good friend to the United States. It was certainly
above all other countries in the Gulf War a decade and more ago. It was
the strongest supporter of the United States and made assistance
available, its soil, its air bases available to us. It has supported
U.S. policy vis-a-vis Iran. They are a major partner in the current
peace efforts in the Middle East, and they were there with President
Bush, with King Abdullah, with Prime Minister Sharon, with Prime
Minister Abbas, and President Mubarak in the Sinai.
Our law enforcement and intelligence agencies have benefited
significantly from the cooperation that we have had with Saudi Arabia
in providing information, intelligence on different individuals and
organizations that we know to be terrorist organizations in the Middle
East; and I would note that since September 11 of 2001, the Saudis have
arrested over 400 terrorist suspects.
Saudi Arabia, Mr. Chairman, has been itself a victim of terrorism, as
we are. It has been a victim of terrorism as it has been an ally in the
war on terrorism. They suffered very destructive bombing attacks on May
12. They have uncovered a plot to detonate a bomb in Mecca, the holiest
of cities in Islam. The Saudis recently killed three chief al Qaeda
operatives.
Saudi Arabia, as we know, has been a pillar of stability in the
international oil and financial markets. It is a customer of U.S. goods
and services. We exported $4.8 billion in goods and services in 2002,
including $267 million in agriculture and food exports and $2.8 billion
in machinery and transportation equipment.
Mr. Chairman, as I said earlier, this is not about money. This is a
matter of Saudi military officials who are trained in the United States
military and operate U.S.-made weapons systems. The relationship
between our militaries are very close. This amendment would prohibit,
absolutely prohibit antiterrorism assistance which the U.S. is now
providing to Saudi Arabia and is absolutely essential as we struggle to
try and defeat this terrorist threat in the Middle East.
The amendment, I would reiterate again, proposes to treat Saudi
Arabia instead as a state like those five that I mentioned earlier that
we have designated as outlaw states, as terrorist states: North Korea,
Libya, Iran, Syria, Cuba. To do so, Mr. Chairman, is simply wrong.
Adoption of this amendment would be bad policy. It would do
irreparable harm to U.S. relations in the Arab world and the Middle
East.
We just received a letter from Assistant Secretary of State Burns
who, of course, has responsibility for the Middle East; and I would
like to quote just one paragraph from this letter which was sent this
evening to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and myself and to the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the gentlewoman from New York
(Mrs. Lowey).
This third paragraph says the following: ``The administration
strongly opposes efforts to add the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to this
list of state sponsors of terrorism and urges that the House reject the
amendment offered by Representative Weiner, which would severely
undermine our counter-terrorism cooperation with Saudi Arabia at
precisely the moment when it is moving to a new level of effectiveness.
This amendment would also undermine our important interests in
cooperating with Saudi Arabia on other critical issues in the region,
including the pursuit of Palestinian-Israeli peace.''
Mr. Chairman, we know how delicate the road map for peace is in the
Middle East. This is not just a peripheral issue. It is very much
involved with that, and I would urge my colleagues to think with their
heads and not with their hearts and reject this amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I agree with the gentleman that for far too long the
Saudi Government looked the other way as the roots of global terrorism
drew stronger and stronger within its borders. Most of the 9/11
terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. U.S. troops and nationals have
repeatedly been attacked by terrorists on Saudi soil. Saudi Arabia has
been identified time and time again as a major source and transit point
for terrorist financing. Enough is enough.
We simply cannot stand by silently as Saudi Arabia continues to
poison the minds of its children with anti-Israel and anti-Western
canards; as it continues to legitimize Yasser Arafat even as Abu Mazen
tries to lead his people on the path toward peace; as it allows
telethons on its airwaves raising funds for families of suicide
bombers. This amendment will not solve all of these problems, but it
will send the message that Congress has had enough.
It is time for Saudi Arabia to show some leadership, to take the
first step to reform its education system, to reflect the realities of
the peace process it professes to support. It is time for Saudi Arabia
to strengthen the transparency and accountability of its financial
systems to close the loopholes that let terrorist financing slip
through and to stop passing off as charity payments to terrorists and
their organizations.
It is time for Saudi Arabia to live up to its commitments to bolster
the newly elected Palestinian leadership instead of continuing to
strengthen the old guard that remains fixated on using terror as a
negotiating tactic.
However, I do have some serious concerns about the effects this
amendment could have on U.S.-Saudi cooperation to apprehend terrorist
suspects and stop the flow of financing to terrorist organizations. It
could also slow or stop the flow of Saudi intelligence to our own law
enforcement agencies and may stymie State Department plans to help the
Saudis professionalize their counterterrorism efforts by opening a
training facility in that country.
I agree that we must be clear about our dissatisfaction with Saudi
Arabia, but I am very concerned that this amendment may hurt our
efforts to fight terrorism more than it will hurt the Saudis.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, the Saudis drive me nuts. They drive me to absolute
distraction. I think they have a spectacular record of being
disingenuous. I think they have played both sides of so many issues
that I run out fingers counting them through the years, and I think
that they have been incredibly gutless and obsequious in dealing with
the terrorist threat, and they have allowed these right wing
fundamentalist schools to poison the minds of thousands and thousands
of children against the West, in general, and certainly against Israel.
I have very little confidence in virtually anything that the Saudi
Government says. I want to be very clear about that. I visited their
country a number of times, but the issue tonight is not whether or not
we like the Saudis. The issue is whether or not this amendment at this
time will assist or hinder the administration in its efforts to seek
peace in the Middle East and to pursue a tough war against terrorists.
I talked to Assistant Secretary Burns tonight, and I told him flatly,
I said, look, if this is a minor inconvenience, I do not want you
bugging us because this is a tough vote to explain, but if this is a
real problem for you, then I want to know it and I want you to let us
know it; and they sent a letter which says that it is a real problem.
I take them at their word, and I note that since May 12, when al
Qaeda bombed Riyadh, that the Saudis have sort of gotten religion, so
to speak, on the issue of al Qaeda, and they have been, the
administration tells me, much tougher in arresting terrorists and even
killing some of them. I welcome that.
I am perfectly willing to do my duty tonight and support the
administration on this, provided that I am not going to be taken for a
sucker in the process.
As I said, well, I did not say this yet, but I want to. I have told
every President going back to President Nixon
[[Page H7437]]
that when it comes to the Middle East, I would back whatever play they
made and I would do whatever was necessary to prevent their hands from
being tied as they pursued peace in that very difficult region, and
there are many times when I have done that to considerable
consternation of some of my friends on the floor.
And as I say, I am willing to do my duty as a member of the loyal
opposition; and as a member of the loyal opposition I think I am
required to oppose the President when I think he is wrong and support
him when I think he is right, and so since I have no reason to think
that he is wrong on this issue, I intend to support him, but I cannot
in good conscience ask other Members of my party to do the same unless
both parties are in this tonight together, because I have seen in the
past on foreign policy issues, where we have supported a Republican
administration, only to turn around and have the Republican Party's own
campaign organization run ads against us for doing so. And you know the
old saying: fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
I have no reason to believe that we are not going to be played
straight with tonight by our Republican friends, and I am going to vote
against this amendment because I do think all this amendment really
does is cut off $105,000. That to the Saudis is nothing; but if it
does, as Assistant Secretary Burns says, if it does severely undermine
the administration's counterterrorism cooperation with Saudi Arabia, at
precisely the moment when it is moving to a new level of effectiveness,
and I am quoting from the letter, if it does that, then it is not worth
it. I mean, $100,000 or so is not worth it if it puts the
administration efforts at risk.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) has
expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Obey was allowed to proceed for 2
additional minutes.)
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, so I intend to vote with the administration,
but I intend to ask other members of my party to watch the board. If we
have Republican votes go up there along with ours, then fine, I think
we have an obligation to do our duty and support the administration in
this request; but if we see a significant number of the President's own
party running in the other direction, then my message to people on this
side of the aisle is you do not owe the President of the United States
any more support than people of his own party.
So tonight, let us find out if we are real. Let us deal with each
other on a real basis. I have no reason to think that that will not be
the case, and I do think we have an obligation, on both sides of the
aisle, to listen to what the administration says when it says this will
get in the way of the peace process.
But I have one message to the Saudi embassy: get your act together
because there are very few people on this House floor who believe your
words because of the weakness and the duplicity of your past actions.
So this is a case, in my view, where we have to vote with our minds and
not our spleens; and with that, I thank the House for the courtesy of
the extra 2 minutes.
{time} 0015
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the
requisite number of words.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. I have a great deal
of respect for the thoughtful consideration that the gentleman from
Wisconsin gives to a wide range of issues. I have a couple of
differences with him here.
One, I think he will understand if at this point I am less inclined
to be credulous when the State Department tells me things than I have
been from time to time in the past. Their record on accuracy with
regard to the Middle East has not been so great lately, and I expect
the State Department to say that I am unpersuaded.
Beyond that, I think, and I acknowledge what has been said, that this
is not about the money. This is, I hope, a chance to express to the
government of Saudi Arabia the profound unhappiness that this House has
with virtually everything they do.
Now, I understand that they are cooperating with regard to terrorism,
and it was said particularly since May 12. Yes, once they got bombed
themselves they were prepared to cooperate with us. Whether it is
selling us oil or fighting terrorism, let us understand they are doing
us no favors. The Saudi Arabians need the United States a lot more than
we need them. Think about confronting hostile forces in the world. If
you are America, Saudi Arabia might be helpful. If you are Saudi
Arabia, America is essential.
I do not want them to stop cooperating, but I do not think we are
buying their cooperation with $100,000. I think they are cooperating
now out of self-interest, and I think they will continue to do so. To
the extent there is cooperation, that is fine, but I do think we should
tell them how unhappy we are.
I agree with one point my friend from Arizona made. They do not
belong on the same list with those other countries, and I would make a
recommendation to him. If this amendment passes, as I hope it does,
when you get to conference, reconfigure this. Give the Saudis a
paragraph unto themselves. You will have the ability to do that. We
should not be giving them money. I agree they should not be in there
with Libya or Cuba. You have the compositional right to give them a
separate place.
On the other hand, when you look at Saudi Arabia and that list, some
things are not that different. I do not believe there is a more
consistent violator of human rights in the world than the government of
Saudi Arabia. This is a government that not only violates the human
rights of their own people, but when American military personnel go
over there, they have been subjected to sexual and religious
discrimination of a sort that we would tolerate nowhere else.
The Saudis have not been terribly constructive with the Middle East
peace process. I support what the President is doing with regards to
the Middle East peace process. I was a supporter of the roadmap, and I
will continue to be. I do not think the Saudis have been a very
relevant piece of that.
And, yes, I think it is very worthwhile for us to say to the Saudis,
we recognize you have an interest and you want to cooperate with us,
and to the extent that we can cooperate together in finding these
terrorists we will do that. But cutting off this money is a way to
express to them, as I said, the profound revulsion that people here
feel about the practices of that government.
And so I think the gentleman's amendment is a very thoughtful one. I
do not think it will for a minute, let us think about it now, if this
amendment passes, the Saudis are now going to say, okay, no more
cooperation on terrorism? I do not think they are doing that as a favor
to us. They are doing it out of self-interest. They need to sell the
oil more than we need to buy it.
So we have one way now, I think we have apparently have agreement
here in the House about how badly the Saudis have behaved in virtually
every way, and the question is do we need them enough so that we have
to worry about their feelings? I think the answer is that it is
important for us to send them precisely this kind of very angry
message, not about the money but about the message. And I believe the
cooperation will not only survive but it may, if there is any
rationality there, improve. Because I think it is important for them to
understand how unhappy people are.
And I must say, with respect to all my friends who have, and nearly
everybody here has condemned the Saudis, but I think simply condemning
them while continuing the status quo will not have any impact. I think
the amendment of the gentleman from New York is an essential piece of
trying to change things.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment also, and let me
begin by saying that this letter from the Assistant Secretary of State
reveals a profound misunderstanding of the amendment. In the very
language that the distinguished chairman read, which says, ``The
administration strongly opposes efforts to add the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia to this list of state sponsors of terrorism,'' then he says that
``doing so would severely undermine
[[Page H7438]]
our counter-terrorism cooperation with Saudi Arabia,'' that is not what
the amendment does.
The amendment says, and I will read it in its entirety because it is
one sentence. It says: None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available pursuant to this act shall be obligated or expended to
finance directly any assistance or reparations to a list of countries,
including Saudi Arabia.
Now, those countries may be some of the same countries on the State
Department terrorism list, but this does not affect the terrorism list.
Only the Secretary of State can add or subtract a country from a
terrorism list. So this letter from the Assistant Secretary of State
simply means he did not read the amendment or did not understand it if
he did and we should disregard it.
The fact is my colleague from New York who offered this amendment,
for which we ought to be grateful, recited a whole list of actions by
Saudi Arabia in supporting terrorism. Now, someone said that they have
looked the other way at terrorism for a long time. They have not looked
the other way. They have supported it, they have funded it, they have
trained people for it, they have paid for it, and they have been the
source of most of the terrorism in the world.
Mr. Chairman, some of us supported the decision to go into Iraq, some
did not. I did not at the time in the way that it was done. But the
fact is if Iraq is an enemy, Saudi Arabia is a more dangerous enemy.
The major danger this country faces today in the world is the war
launched against us by the Islamic terrorists, by Osama bin Laden, al-
Qaeda, Islamic Jihad, and a dozen different organizations. They want us
all dead. They have killed 3,000 of our people. They would kill 3
million if they could.
The biggest danger we face is that they may get nuclear weapons. The
second biggest danger we face is that they recruit more and more
people. There is a civil war going on within one of the world's great
religions, Islam. And that civil war pits, hopefully, the majority of
the adherents of that religion in the world today, I will call
moderates, versus the Wahabi extremists, who believe that they have a
religious obligation to essentially kill all the Christians and all the
Jews.
And where is that Wahabi missionary work coming from? Who is
supporting and funding sending out missionaries and tape cassettes to
Indonesia, Nigeria, and every country in the Muslim world? Saudi
Arabia. That is where the money has been coming from for the last 30
years. It started in the 1960s, to send out these missionaries to say
your Imams here in Nigeria, your Imams in Iraq, your Imams in Indonesia
and Malaysia, they are sellouts. They do not preach the true religion.
The true religion means we have to kill all the Christians and the
Jews, and certainly the United States.
That is what is emanating from Saudi Arabia. That is why 15 of the 19
hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. If we look at the funding for any of
the madrasas in Afghanistan that gave rise to the Taliban in Pakistan
and all these other countries that were poisoning the minds of
generations of poor students because they pay for the education, where
is the money coming from? Saudi Arabia. They thought for a while they
would buy off these people. Now they understand it is going to
boomerang on them too, maybe.
This money is not the object, the $105,000. The object is to send
them a strong message, that we are on to them. It is not a question of
their looking the other way and not actively participating with us. It
is a question of their funding the enemy, supporting the enemy, and
generating the enemy. And if I have a major criticism of the
administration it is that it is not really fighting the source of the
enemy. The enemy is emanating from Saudi Arabia, from this Wahabi sect
that is spreading all over the Muslim world and saying if you want to
go to heaven you have to kill Christians and Jews and especially
Americans.
That is what is fundamentally emanating from this, and we ought to
rise to the nature of what is going on. There is a civil war in Islam
today. We ought to be having Radio Free Islam, we ought to be
supporting the moderates and opposing this poisonous doctrine which is
at the root of the terrorism aimed against us and at our friends, which
comes essentially from Saudi Arabia.
So I support this amendment as a first statement of maybe waking up
the American people and seeing where the problem really comes from.
Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from New York who just spoke mentioned
that he voted against the use of force resolution. I voted for it. It
was the right decision then, it is the right decision still. I have
been supportive of what the President has tried to do. I think he had
led this country down an incredibly significant path in terms of
fighting terrorism, which is really truly the challenge of our decade,
the challenge for this generation.
But I think this debate on the floor, even though it is after
midnight, in many ways is the most important debate this Congress might
be having this session, because this is really a debate about what path
this country will take. It is not about $105,000, but it is about
speaking truth to power. Speaking truth to power. Because,
unfortunately, as supportive as I have been in terms of the efforts of
the President in the greatest challenge of this generation, the
approach of this administration and, with all due respect, the State
Department and Mr. Burns, they are just absolutely dead wrong about
their attitude towards Saudi Arabia.
What this institution has the ability to do, and what we as
individual Members have the ability to do, and hopefully we are going
to do this tonight, and hopefully very shortly, is speak truth to
power. It is as simple as that.
The truth is that the Saudis are not what the administration wants
them to be, that they have been involved in terrorism. Absolutely.
Those are the facts, and we know they are the facts. We know that those
are the facts. We wish it were not the case because of all sorts of
issues, related to the fact that they control the largest reserve of
oil in the world. Absolutely, they do. But that does not change the
facts that they are involved in terrorist activities, that they are in
fact the world's leading funder of terrorism. Terrorism.
As has been pointed out, they are the world's leading funder, over 50
percent of the funds, that go to different terrorist organizations,
different groups. And, again, we can go back and forth in terms of
that, but they are funding them.
So we have an opportunity tonight on a bipartisan basis to make that
statement, to hopefully help shift an ill-fated approach that has
predated even this administration, that has occurred under Democratic
administrations, unfortunately. Had this Congress done this prior to 9/
11, maybe that would not have happened. Had we spoken truth to power
before that date, maybe that would not have happened.
If we are able to do this tonight, my hope is that in fact we will
stop some of the funding of terrorism and terrorist organizations that
support that infrastructure and actually prevent the types of horrible
and unthinkable things that we know are the challenges. I urge my
colleagues to support the amendment.
Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, the Saudis have been bad, bad, bad, but this amendment
makes everything worse, worse, worse, and I urge my colleagues to
oppose it.
There seems to be a lot of confusion because there is an array of
speakers we have seen who are usually on the same side on these issues.
And I have to tell you what the real problem is. The real problem is
that there are two Saudi Arabias. One is the Wahabi fanatics, who are
prone to terrorism, and the other is the government and the royal
family that is holding on by their very rich, and sometimes greedy,
claws to the tenets of power and making money.
{time} 0030
It is in their interest to control the terrorists and to eliminate
the terrorists. If you had to put your money down on one of these
players, which one would you pick? The answer is, and my bet for a
lousy $100,000 goes with the government. This list that we would put
the Saudis on, every other nation on that list is a government sponsor
of terrorism. The Saudis have terrorism, but it is not sponsored by
[[Page H7439]]
the government. Osama bin Laden's number one enemy is not the United
States, it is not Israel, it is their own government of Saudi Arabia.
This wicked genius that did such damage to our country and to my city
picked 14 Saudis to be on those planes for a specific reason, because
he knew what it would do to the reputation of the country that has
outlawed him, that has banned him, that has taken away his citizenship.
They do not need our bucks. What they need is a little bit of
encouragement, a little bit of encouragement when they do do the right
thing, which is not very often. But they are trying, too, to rid
themselves and the rest of the world of this terrorist threat that
promises to topple their government and then some others.
This money that we are talking about is to bring some people in the
military from Saudi Arabia here to join with our military people to
teach them how to deal with these terrorists, how to cooperate with us.
Anybody who knows anything about the intelligence on this issue,
anybody who has studied it in depth knows that the names and addresses
of so many of the terrorists that have been picked up in the Middle
East and other places in the world have been provided to us by the
Saudi Government. They cannot proudly stand up and say that because it
would threaten them more than it does right now.
This amendment is the amendment to bite your nose to spite your face.
Sure, we want to kick the Saudis around; sure, they have done some
terrible things. But if we want to help those in Saudi Arabia who want
to correct it, the right vote on this is ``no'' on this amendment. Let
us not pander, let us not trip over each other to show our
reasonableness on antiterrorism. Let us think this issue through and do
the right thing, the right thing for America, the right thing for the
world, the right thing for the international community, and the right
thing for all those people who want to end terrorism. Let our military
and our intelligence people have the benefit of meeting with those
people from Saudi Arabia that want to help in this situation.
Vote ``no'' on this amendment.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment and in agreement
with the gentleman from New York who has just spoken. I also want to
compliment the chairman of the subcommittee for his very factual and
very precise statement in opposition to this amendment. The Saudis have
helped the United States in the first Gulf War, and while they may not
have been out in front in the latest attempt to dislodge Saddam
Hussein, they certainly did not get in America's way. So I hope those
that were supportive of the war in this body will recall that the
Saudis did not in any way put themselves out to hurt America's efforts
in the latest Iraq war.
I also support President Bush's road map to peace. I think he will
show the same courage in enacting this road map to peace that he showed
in dislodging Saddam Hussein. The actions of this body often send
messages across the world. The gentleman from Arizona is perfectly
right and several of my other colleagues. It is not about money. This
amendment is not about money. It is about the message that this body
sends. I have been one like many of my colleagues that have traveled
the Middle East rather extensively, but I perhaps have spoken out on
this floor more often than not for a more balanced policy in the Middle
East, for what is in America's best interest in that region, which
sometimes gets overlooked, in my opinion, when it comes to votes of
this nature.
This amendment would send the wrong message today. It would send a
wrong message for those that support a peace in the Middle East, a just
and comprehensive peace. The Saudis have been targeted for all the
debate thus far; but as I heard the amendment explained by the
gentleman from New York, there are other countries on this list as
well. I think I heard Syria mentioned.
Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. RAHALL. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. WEINER. The only state that is being added is Saudi Arabia. The
other ones were already in the bill.
Mr. RAHALL. I stand corrected. Anyway, the effort to fight the true
terrorists, al Qaeda, would be harmed by the passage of this amendment.
The Saudis have helped us, as have the Syrians; and that is the reason
I brought up the other countries I thought were targeted as well, have
helped us especially, since 9/11, in the fight against the true
terrorists, al Qaeda. These countries get the message. They do not need
the Congress to pass amendments of this nature or resolutions that go
out that are nothing more than chest-thumping measures. These countries
are getting the message already. They have gotten it since 9/11. For us
to go out and to humiliate them publicly, as this amendment would do to
the Saudis, is only going to cause them to become more stubborn. That
is human nature. Any of us in this body if we are attacked publicly,
are we likely to succumb the next moment, the next day and agree to
that public trashing? I think not. We rather become more stubborn. That
is part of human nature. That is what we are dealing with here.
I believe this administration and their opposition to this amendment
is on the right track. I also happen to agree with the gentleman from
Wisconsin: let us make sure that the majority party has their votes on
the board in opposition to this amendment, in support of their
President, in support of the fight against terrorism, the true
terrorists, al Qaeda. Let us make sure that we are in this together, in
opposition to this amendment, because we are in the fight against
terrorism together, wherever, by whomever it occurs. And if we want to
see a comprehensive peace truly stand a chance in the Middle East, let
us give this administration, let us give this President the tools with
which to fight, the tools with which to show the participants in the
area, to show all the players, friends and foes alike, that America
means business about a comprehensive peace and that we are not going to
take actions in this body that would undermine those efforts of this
administration.
I urge opposition to the gentleman from New York's amendment.
Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, it is late, I understand that; and I will not take the
full 5 minutes. I simply want to say this. We have heard it stated
repeatedly that this is not about $105,000, and it is not about
$105,000. It is about the line that President Bush drew in the sand
when he came to this Chamber after 9/11/2001. He said that this
struggle was between democracy and dictatorship, between liberty and
tyranny, between education and indoctrination, between schools that
teach people how to put things together and schools that teach people
how to blow things apart. For that reason, the gentleman's amendment
ought to be passed in this Chamber.
Mr. Chairman, I was reading tonight an important book called
``Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global
Terrorism.'' It is by a former ambassador to the United Nations, Dore
Gold. I want to share very briefly, in a minute or less, some important
excerpts from that book. Ambassador Gold points out that a third of the
prisoners that the United States held from the war against bin Laden's
al Qaeda organization were Saudi nationals. He talks about a Rand
Corporation analysis who told the Defense Policy Board in July 2002
that the Saudis were active, quote, ``at every level of the terror
chain.''
And if you do not want to listen to Members of Congress on this floor
and if you do not want to accept the words of others, let me suggest
that we understand the words of activists and leaders in the Middle
East. Let me share the words of Mohamed Charfi, a former Minister of
Education in Tunisia who wrote in the New York Times:
``Osama bin Laden, like the 15 Saudis who participated in the
criminal operations of Sept. 11, seems to have been the pure product of
his schooling. While Saudi Arabia is officially a moderate state allied
with America, it has also been one of the main supporters of Islamic
fundamentalism because of its financing of schools following the
intransigent Wahhabi doctrine. Saudi-
[[Page H7440]]
backed madrasas in Pakistan and Afghanistan have played significant
roles in the strengthening of radical Islam in those countries.''
Or the words in December 2001 of Sahr Muhammad Hatem, a doctor in
Riyadh, who bravely wrote a letter to a London-based Arabic newspaper
in which she said:
``The mentality of each of us in Saudi Arabia was programmed upon
entering school as a child. Anyone who is not a Muslim in Saudi schools
is our enemy and that the West means enfeeblement, lack of values. We
all focus on bin Laden and his ilk, but we have yet to focus on the
more dangerous people, and I mean those who fill our heads with this
rhetoric in the schools, the mosques and the media, who disseminate
words without hesitation, without considering the consequences or even
understanding that in this era the entire world hears what is said.''
Mr. Chairman, it makes little sense to fund the people who are
funding terrorism. It makes no sense whatsoever. Until the Saudi
Government stops funding terrorism, stops supporting violence against
Israel, stops teaching hatred in its schools, starts teaching tolerance
and starts digging up the roots of ideological hatred against the West,
any amount of money, even $105,000, is just too much.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner)
will be postponed.
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
(Mr. PORTMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to congratulate the chairman on the
substance of H.R. 2800 but also on the way he has conducted the debate
this evening. We have seen it in the latest example here with this
amendment. We have also seen it in the example, I believe, Mr.
Chairman, of his inclusion in the legislation of adequate funding for
the Tropical Forest Conservation Act, a very important conservation
bill which uses market forces. It is working. It has the strong support
of the Bush administration and bipartisan support here in Congress.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the
underlying bill, H.R. 2800. Again, the chairman has done a good job in
putting together a balanced bill. He deserves our support.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my support for H.R. 2800, and I want
to thank Chairman Kolbe and Ranking Member Lowey for including $20
million in the bill for the Tropical Forest Conservation Act.
The United States has a significant national interest in protecting
tropical forests in developing countries. Tropical forests provide a
wide range of benefits. They harbor 50-90 percent of the Earth's
terrestrial biodiversity. They act as ``carbon sinks,'' absorbing
massive quantities of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which help
reduce greenhouse gases. They help regulate rainfall on which
agriculture and coastal resources depend, and they are important to
regional and global climate. Furthermore, tropical forests are breeding
grounds for new medicines. Fully one quarter of prescription drugs come
from tropical forests. Of the more than 3,000 plants the United States
National Cancer Institute has identified, plants that are active
against cancer, seventy percent of them can be found in tropical
forests.
Regrettably, these tropical forests are rapidly disappearing at an
alarming rate of 38 million acres a year. The heavy debt burden of many
countries with these forests is a contributing factor because often
they must resort to exploitation of their natural resources
(particularly the extraction of timber, oil, and precious metals) to
generate revenue to service their external debt. At the same time, poor
governments tend to have few resources available to set aside and
protect tropical forests.
In 1998, I introduced the Tropical Forest Conservation Act, TFCA, to
address these economic pressures. This bipartisan legislation
authorizes the President to allow eligible countries to engage in debt
swaps, buybacks or restructuring in exchange for protecting threatened
tropical forests on a sustained basis.
Under this innovative debt treatment program, we have entered into
agreements with Bangladesh, Belize, El Salvador, Panama, Peru, and the
Philippines, which will generate over $60 million for tropical forest
conservation in these countries.
Three of the six agreements have included contributions from U.S.
based non-government organizations, which augment debt reduction funds.
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) contributed $1 million to the Belize
agreement and, together with the World Wildlife Fund and Conservation
International, $1.1 million to the Peru deal. TNC also contributed $1.2
million to the Panama agreement.
Other agreements are in the pipeline with Colombia and Jamaica and
negotiations will soon begin with Sri Lanka. And, I am delighted to
report that many other countries, including Guatemala, Ecuador, Costa
Rica and Paraguay have expressed interest in participating in the
program.
TFCA is a worthy program that is working well. The Bush
Administration is a strong proponent of the Tropical Forest
Conservation Act, and it has bipartisan support in the Congress. I
again thank the leadership for providing the funding in this bill that
will allow TFCA to continue to protect some of the world's most
threatened natural resources.
Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will
now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were
postponed, in the following order: an amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick), amendment No. 5 offered by
the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), amendment No. 1
offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley), and an amendment
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).
The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote.
Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes.
Amendment Offered by Ms. Kilpatrick
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms.
Kilpatrick) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The Clerk designated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. 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 192,
noes 228, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 425]
AYES--192
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Ballance
Becerra
Bell
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Case
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
[[Page H7441]]
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOES--228
Akin
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bereuter
Biggert
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boucher
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole
Collins
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
English
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Janklow
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McCotter
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Stenholm
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Upton
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--15
Aderholt
Berkley
Bishop (UT)
Clay
Dooley (CA)
Ferguson
Ford
Hyde
Jenkins
Kind
Matsui
Meeks (NY)
Pastor
Sullivan
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). The Chair reminds Members there are 2
minutes remaining to vote.
{time} 0101
Mr. SHAYS changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. SPRATT and Mr. BLUMENAUER changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Announcement By The Chairman
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, the remainder of
this series will be conducted as 5-minutes votes.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. McGovern
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
McGovern) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195,
noes 226, not voting 14, as follows:
[Roll No. 426]
AYES--195
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Ballance
Becerra
Bell
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Case
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Ehlers
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Frost
Gephardt
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Hulshof
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Petri
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Rohrabacher
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOES--226
Aderholt
Akin
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bereuter
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole
Collins
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (FL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Delahunt
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dooley (CA)
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Emerson
English
Everett
Feeney
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Granger
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Harris
Hart
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Holden
Hostettler
Houghton
Hunter
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Janklow
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
Marshall
McCotter
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Menendez
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Schrock
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Stenholm
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner (OH)
Upton
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
[[Page H7442]]
NOT VOTING--14
Berkley
Bishop (UT)
Clay
Ferguson
Ford
Graves
Hyde
Jenkins
Kind
Matsui
Pastor
Saxton
Sullivan
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised 2 minutes are
remaining in this vote.
{time} 0108
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Mr. GRAVES. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 426 I was inadvertently
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Hefley
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 110,
noes 309, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 427]
AYES--110
Akin
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bilirakis
Blackburn
Brady (TX)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Cannon
Capuano
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Collins
Costello
Cox
Crane
Cunningham
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, M.
Duncan
Emerson
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Gibbons
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hall
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Hulshof
Isakson
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Manzullo
McCotter
McInnis
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Norwood
Otter
Paul
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Smith (MI)
Smith (WA)
Stearns
Tancredo
Tanner
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thornberry
Toomey
Turner (TX)
Walden (OR)
Wamp
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
NOES--309
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Ballance
Ballenger
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Burns
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Carter
Case
Castle
Clyburn
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Tom
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Harris
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Houghton
Hoyer
Hunter
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Janklow
Jefferson
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kleczka
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murphy
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Nunes
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Simmons
Simpson
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sweeney
Tauscher
Tauzin
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner (OH)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walsh
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--15
Berkley
Bishop (UT)
Clay
Ferguson
Ford
Gephardt
Hyde
Istook
Jenkins
Kind
LaTourette
Matsui
Pastor
Sullivan
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are reminded there are 2
minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 0115
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Weiner
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner) on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The Clerk designated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 191,
noes 231, not voting 13, as follows:
[Roll No. 428]
AYES--191
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Ballance
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Berman
Berry
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boozman
Boswell
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burton (IN)
Camp
Cantor
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Chabot
Chocola
Clyburn
Coble
Collins
Conyers
Costello
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
DeFazio
DeLauro
DeMint
Deutsch
Dicks
Doggett
Duncan
Edwards
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Farr
Feeney
Filner
Forbes
Frank (MA)
Garrett (NJ)
Goode
Goodlatte
Graves
Green (TX)
Gutknecht
Hall
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Hinchey
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Honda
Hostettler
Hoyer
Israel
Janklow
Johnson (IL)
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy (RI)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kirk
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
LaTourette
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lofgren
Lynch
Majette
Markey
Matheson
McCotter
McDermott
McInnis
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran (KS)
Musgrave
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norwood
Nussle
Ortiz
Ose
Otter
Owens
Pallone
Paul
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Ramstad
[[Page H7443]]
Rangel
Renzi
Reyes
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ross
Rothman
Royce
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Souder
Stark
Stearns
Strickland
Stupak
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (NC)
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Upton
Wamp
Waters
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Wexler
Whitfield
Wolf
Wu
Wynn
NOES--231
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Akin
Bachus
Ballenger
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Biggert
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Buyer
Calvert
Cannon
Capito
Capps
Carter
Case
Castle
Cole
Cooper
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Cunningham
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLay
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Dooley (CA)
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Ehlers
English
Evans
Fattah
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gonzalez
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harris
Hart
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hill
Hinojosa
Hobson
Holt
Hooley (OR)
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Inslee
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Kanjorski
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
King (NY)
Kleczka
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Lantos
Larson (CT)
Latham
Leach
Lee
Lewis (CA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Maloney
Manzullo
Marshall
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McGovern
McHugh
McKeon
Mica
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mollohan
Moran (VA)
Murphy
Murtha
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Osborne
Oxley
Pascrell
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rogers (KY)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sandlin
Saxton
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stenholm
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Watson
Watt
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Woolsey
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--13
Berkley
Bishop (UT)
Clay
Ferguson
Ford
Gephardt
Hyde
Jenkins
Kind
Matsui
Pastor
Sullivan
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in this
vote.
{time} 0123
Ms. HARMAN, Mr. GRAVES, Mr. ROYCE, and Mr. MORAN of Kansas changed
their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The CHAIRMAN. If there are no further amendments, the Clerk will read
the last lines of the bill.
The Clerk read as follows:
This Act may be cited as the ``Foreign Operations, Export
Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2004''.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Gillmor) having assumed the chair, Mr. Thornberry, Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2800)
making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, and
related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for
other purposes, pursuant to House Resolution 327, he reported the bill
back to the House with sundry amendments adopted by the Committee of
the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment? If not, the Chair will
put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a
third time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 370,
nays 50, not voting 14, as follows:
[Roll No. 429]
YEAS--370
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Ballance
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berman
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Carter
Case
Castle
Chocola
Clyburn
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gonzalez
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Harris
Hart
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hensarling
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Houghton
Hoyer
Hunter
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Janklow
Jefferson
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
King (NY)
Kingston
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
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Nunes
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sweeney
Tauscher
Tauzin
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
[[Page H7444]]
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (FL)
NAYS--50
Akin
Bartlett (MD)
Berry
Chabot
Coble
Collins
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal (GA)
Duncan
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Forbes
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Goode
Goodlatte
Graves
Gutknecht
Hall
Hayes
Hefley
Herger
Hostettler
Hulshof
Jones (NC)
King (IA)
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McInnis
Miller (FL)
Musgrave
Norwood
Otter
Paul
Petri
Pitts
Pombo
Rahall
Rohrabacher
Ryun (KS)
Sensenbrenner
Smith (MI)
Stearns
Tancredo
Tanner
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Toomey
NOT VOTING--14
Berkley
Bishop (UT)
Clay
Ferguson
Ford
Gephardt
Hyde
Jenkins
Kind
Matsui
Pastor
Sullivan
Waters
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gillmor) (during the vote). Members are
advised that 2 minutes remain in the vote.
{time} 0141
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________