[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.

                          ____________________