[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 25 (Tuesday, March 2, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H742-H748]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         PROTECT HAITIAN LIVES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Blackburn). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers) is recognized for 60 minutes.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, this Special Order is taken in a spirit 
of deep sadness and regret about the events that are going on in the 
nation of Haiti. We have come here this evening to recommit ourselves 
to the proposition that the United States has a responsibility to 
prevent the loss of life and the continued deterioration of the nation 
of Haiti. The present administration's inaction has undermined 
democracy and security in Haiti, and it is our responsibility to make 
sure that this does not get any worse.
  So we, Members of Congress, call upon the administration to protect 
Haitian lives by restoring order, upholding the rule of law and 
disarmament across the country. The current state of affairs in Haiti 
is chaos. The rebels who were empowered by our inaction must be held 
accountable and not allowed to benefit from their violence. 
Humanitarian aid must flow to Haiti immediately. A humanitarian 
corridor with supplies of food and water and medical equipment must be 
established to provide assistance to the beleaguered Haitian people. 
Humanitarian aid must flow to Haiti immediately. We must support the 
formulation of a donor conference so the people of Haiti can finally 
get the kind of assistance that they so desperately need and so 
properly deserve.
  This administration is misinterpreting and failing to honor the 
spirit of the Haitian constitution. Where is Article 149 in the 
transitional government talks?
  So we as Members of Congress call upon this administration to follow 
the rule of law and the Haitian constitution. In it, Article 149 of the 
1987 Haitian constitution clearly outlines the process by which the 
interim president is appointed and it includes the ratification of the 
legislature. Due to the unwillingness on the part of the political 
opposition party's willingness to participate in elections, there is no 
legislature to confirm the interim president; and, therefore, the 
recently sworn in president is, unfortunately, regrettably not ruling 
pursuant to the Haitian constitution.
  On Sunday President Bush said, ``The Haitian constitution is 
working.'' How does he believe just because he said it that that could 
make it true? The President forgets that when they fail to respond to 
the opposition's rejection of the U.S. brokered peace plan that they 
had in fact repudiated their own plan for peace. It was just on Monday 
of last week that Secretary of State Powell said ``The United States 
will not support the overthrow of a democratically elected government 
by thugs and criminals.''
  For the administration to remain mute while the constitutional 
process was thwarted and then to pressure President Aristide, the one 
who was compromised to resign, is in no way in line or in accordance 
with Haiti's constitutional process.
  Moreover, now that the administration has created this constitutional 
quagmire in Haiti, it is reprehensible to claim that the constitution 
is working.

                              {time}  2145

  Our administration is jeopardizing the lives of countless numbers of 
Haitian asylum seekers by enforcing immediate Coast Guard interdiction 
without an opportunity for a fair asylum hearing.
  Members of Congress call on the Bush administration to extend 
temporary protected status to Haitian asylum seekers because returning 
to Haiti will pose a serious threat to their personal safety.
  To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to designate Haiti 
under section 244(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act so that the 
nationals of Haiti present in the United States or reaching our shores 
may be granted temporary protected status. This would mean that both 
Haitians who are present in the United States and those who may be 
fortunate enough to make it to shore will not arbitrarily be sent back 
to Haiti until the country is stable.
  This administration's neglect of Haiti and the intentional, 
systematic dismantling of the Haitian social, economic, and political 
circumstance which culminated in the current political instability and 
provided the environment for a coup d'etat.
  As Members of the Congress, we call on our leaders in Congress to 
hold joint public hearings between the House Intelligence Committee and 
the International Relations Committee on the Bush administration's role 
in undermining a democratically elected government in, of all places, 
the western hemisphere. The United States should not have allowed the 
opposition in Haiti without a legislative popular mandate to veto the 
possibility for peace in Haiti. Now there is mayhem and on-the-spot 
executions and other atrocities which are taking place daily.
  Why did the United States not send in a force to reinforce the police 
when a political solution was still possible? Why did the United States 
only act after that possibility, along with President Aristide, was 
removed? Why have the rebels not been arrested? Were their actions not 
illegal? How did the leaders of the insurgence, some of whom are the 
most notorious torturers and death squad members, return to power? 
Louis Jodel Chamberlain is a former military leader who led a brutal 
paramilitary group that backed the most recent of Haiti's coup d'etats 
in 1991. The other, Guy Philippe, is a charismatic former soldier once 
loyal to President Jean-Bertrand Aristide who fled Haiti 3 years ago 
after being accused of drug dealing and of treason.
  What are we to say to history? How will we account for this tragic 
set of circumstances that have now surrounded this poor beleaguered 
nation? As of today, the United States Coast Guard has repatriated 902 
Haitian refugees to Port-au-Prince despite the escalating and 
continuing violence there. A handful of Haitians only have met the 
``credible fear'' standard required for asylum. They remain on Coast 
Guard vessels and are being assessed by asylum officers from the 
Department of Homeland Security's Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration 
Services.
  Officials from the Department of Homeland Security and Coast Guard

[[Page H743]]

have said that Haitians picked up at sea who indicate that they are 
afraid of returning to Haiti are given interviews with asylum officers 
on Coast Guard cutters. Haitians are not individually asked if they 
have a fear of return, nor are they necessarily spoken to individually 
where they may have a chance to say why they left. Homeland security 
says that when people are afraid, they find a way to convey that. I do 
not know whether any of the Coast Guard officials who first encountered 
the Haitians speak French or Creole. If Haitians do not express fear 
somehow, then they are given an interview with asylum officers who 
either speak French or Creole or have interpreters. Thus far, three 
Haitians have been found to possibly have a credible fear of 
persecution. Those who are deemed to be economic migrants have been 
turned over to the Haitian Coast Guard and were disembarked in Port-au-
Prince. The last repatriation was today when 21 refugees returned to 
the Haitian Coast Guard. No new refugees have been picked up by the 
United States Coast Guard since Friday; and as far as is known, the 
repatriations will be ongoing despite the terrible insecurity in Port-
au-Prince.
  I have been unable to get information on the current control of the 
Haitian Coast Guard now that the government in effect ceases to exist. 
It seems that the United States Government is still treating the 
Haitian Coast Guard as an official agency under legitimate command of 
the Republic of Haiti.
  And so, my colleagues in the Congress, we are now called to an 
immediate task to make right, to correct the terrible wrong that has 
been visited much by our inaction upon the 8 million inhabitants of 
this small country. We have a duty to persist. It is not over. We will 
investigate, we will protest, we will evaluate, we will persuade, until 
the majority of the American people are convinced that we cannot leave 
this wrong, which is a wrong for which we must be responsible, to go 
uncorrected. That is the pledge I leave my colleagues with on this 
evening.
  I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-
Lee), who serves with great effectiveness on the Committee on the 
Judiciary of the House of Representatives and is the ranking member on 
the Subcommittee on Immigration.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished ranking member of 
the full committee for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, this has been a tumultuous and trying set of days for 
the members of the Congressional Black Caucus and other Members of this 
House who have shown their leadership and concern for the Haitian 
people. I want to thank, particularly, the gentleman from Michigan for 
an untiring and unrelenting effort as the chair of the Haiti Task 
Force, a persistent and informed advocate for Haiti over the years, 
knowledgeable about issues of democracy. I join him tonight because I 
believe that not only have we tainted the page of democracy but some 
might say that we have torn it from its book.
  As I look over this last weekend and the last couple of days in the 
meetings that we held or had with both the Secretary of State and the 
National Security Adviser and, of course, the President of the United 
States, the Members who were present were there in good faith and they 
had good intentions to be able to accept or at least to make real 
democratic principles, and, that is, our plea was at that time to 
establish a humanitarian corridor, to have an international force of 
peacekeeping and peace maintenance, and to restore or to have a 
diplomatic solution once the violence had ended.

  Unfortunately, I believe that the direction that was taken was maybe 
somewhat parallel to what we saw in Iraq. Interestingly enough, the 
people of Iraq did not call the United States in for a unilateral, 
preemptive attack against Iraq. We all acknowledge the despotic and 
heinous acts of Saddam Hussein, but the people did not call us. But yet 
the people of Haiti begged for our intervention and they asked us to 
intervene along with the head of state. Unfortunately, they decided to 
ignore them. And what we have today are the following words, in an 
article dated March 2, 2004, in the Houston Chronicle. U.S. officials 
have called for the rebels to lay down their weapons now that Aristide 
has surrendered power. But the rebels make it clear that disarming is 
not in their playbook. Philippe, 37, and we know Guy Philippe, a former 
police chief, has said he has no intention of becoming Haiti's next 
president; but in the vacuum left by Aristide's departure, Philippe and 
the other armed rebels have become a force that cannot be ignored.
  Tippenhauer, another one of the opposition party leaders, said he and 
other opposition politicians were not formally cooperating with the 
rebels before Aristide's resignation, but they would have to deal with 
them now. Rebels, insurgents, individuals who have criminal records, I 
happen to believe that all are innocent until proven guilty; but there 
is a long history of their involvement in violence. And so the question 
is to the American people and to this government, how could you depose 
of and remove a duly elected democratic President in the name of Jean-
Bertrand Aristide and now place as leaders of the Haitian nation those 
who have been called many names, rebels and thugs, opposition leaders 
who are in fear of their lives, and rebels who suggest that they are 
not about to lay their arms down.
  And so, Madam Speaker, I am joining with my colleagues to ask now for 
full congressional hearings, not next week, not next month or next 
year, but immediately. President Aristide, who I believe has no reason 
to misrepresent how he was led away from his nation, his presidency, 
has indicated now in fear and apprehension that he was swished away 
from his home against his will. The question is who and why and who 
directed it. The question is whether or not the United States will 
abide by the governance of international law and whether or not we will 
tell the American people the truth.
  We now have as my colleague here on the floor of the House has so 
eloquently put in his statement and joined by the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Meek) those Haitians who are now in the United States who 
are in fear of their lives, there needs to be an immediate addressing 
of the question of temporary protection status. I join with my 
colleagues in pressing that opportunity and that emergency need. I 
further press the need for a complete overhaul of the treatment of 
Haitians in this country and will be pressing for, again, legislation 
to equate Haitians to Cubans, that when they touch the soil, their 
status will be able to be adjusted.
  I join the gentleman from Michigan in asking the question, how can 
you interrogate a boatload of Haitians by a global question, looking at 
them, asking either the leader or whoever is the senior person on board 
and then determining whether or not there is a credible claim of fear? 
I believe that the Homeland Security Department has to immediately 
revise its policies to retrain inspectors and immediately send out a 
directive that says each individual Haitian and family member must be 
questioned separately as to whether or not their life has been 
threatened and that they are in jeopardy upon returning. I have joined 
my colleagues in sending letters to the Speaker of the House and the 
leader of the House to ensure that we have these immediate 
investigations. It is imperative that they be the International 
Relations Committee, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, 
and I would offer to say the Select Committee on Homeland Security and 
the Judiciary Committee. Questions of the violation of law have been 
raised.
  Allow me just to read these words as I come to a close. In 1825, 
France forced Haiti to assume a debt of $90 million to compensate 
French plantation slave owners for their financial losses in exchange 
for France's recognition of Haiti's independence.
  My friends, Haiti paid back that debt. It took them 100 years, to 
1925, to pay back $90 million. President Aristide, duly restored to 
power in the 1990s and then stepping down from power, having a duly 
democratic election for a new president who served 5 years, and then 
the people of Haiti reelected him, came back and asked France, one of 
the nations who early on had asked for him to leave or to be deposed, 
if you will, or to step down and resign, a few years later President 
Aristide asked for that debt to be repaid to the Haitian people, 
totaling about $21.7 billion in today's currency.

                              {time}  2200

  That amount of money would have restored Haiti to its prominence, 
would

[[Page H744]]

have provided them with the ability to rebuild its crumbling economy. 
Restitution, reparations, fair reparations, that this should have 
occurred. Is it not interesting that as President Aristide tried to 
hold his nation together, the International Monetary Fund, the World 
Bank, and the leadership of this Nation refused to release funds that 
would have helped the agrieconomy and other aspects of its economy be 
rebuilt, and yet we blame President Aristide in totality for the 
condition of this nation?
  I join the gentleman in asking and demanding an immediate response by 
this administration that international forces be maintained in Haiti to 
keep the peace and to hold the peace, that immediate infusion of funds 
come into that Nation in order to provide a safety net for the people 
who are now starving without water and good food, and as well that the 
constitutional premise be adhered to and that is that the transition of 
government be adhered to under Article 149 where it speaks to the 
transfer of government. The present leader now admits he is not a 
politician. I do not even know if he will have the wherewithal to lead 
Haiti in this time, but what I will say is that the hand of the United 
States is very much involved in this process. Thugs have said that they 
are not going to lay their weapons down. What I actually say tonight is 
that we have a crisis, and I believe, along with the United Nations, 
this government has a responsibility to stand up and be counted. I am 
asking the administration now to be counted in this effort to rebuild 
Haiti. I am also asking for this administration to be accountable for 
what has happened to President Aristide, a duly-elected President, and 
I am asking for this Congress to abide by the Constitution for the fact 
that this Congress is an oversight body and ask the hard questions as 
to why freedom has seemingly been jeopardized and seemingly been 
undermined in the last 48 hours.
  I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for allowing us to 
have an opportunity to be able to challenge both our government and the 
international arena for what has occurred to an independent people who 
have sought nothing but freedom in this 200th year of their 
independence. I will continue to join with the voices of those who will 
join and stand up with them and be reminded of words heard earlier this 
evening: Someone said how does one change this government? They said by 
agitation, agitation, agitation. And I hope tonight will be the 
beginning of our agitation of change.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to once again ask the Administration 
to take leadership and responsibility to bring peace and stability to 
Haiti. We read and hear in all media sources information that suggests 
that the CIA may have been involved with or had knowledge of the 
alleged kidnapping of Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. I have 
reached out to our leadership to request that they schedule 
congressional hearings immediately to investigate this matter. One 
government was supposed to be in Haiti for the specific purpose of 
helping restore peace, give humanitarian aid, and to uphold the 
principles of democracy and the rule of law. Apparently, the 
Administration had another agenda in mind. If the allegations are true, 
it will be an atrocity, an embarrassment, and a hypocrisy for this 
Administration to facilitate the commission of a crime against 
international law and an act that is completely adverse to the 
principles of democracy.
  His Excellency, the Prime Minister of Jamaica, P.J. Patterson, 
chairman of the Caribbean regional group, CARICOM, has verbally 
supported the allegations that Aristide had been removed illegally. I 
question the authority that guided the CIA and the military's 
involvement in the removal of President Aristide--especially since he 
has been duly elected under a recognized democracy.
  Because there is uncertainty as to what caused President Aristide to 
depart from or to be removed from Haiti, it is imperative that we hold 
immediate Congressional hearings to ensure that there has not been a 
violation of international law. Allowing or facilitating the removal of 
a democratically elected president in a manner that violates 
international law sets a dangerous precedent for other established 
democracies and tarnishes our reputation in the international 
community.
  I rise this evening to once again revisit the escalating political 
crisis in Haiti. I, along with Members of the Congressional Black 
Caucus (CBC) met with President George Bush, Secretary of State Colin 
Powell, and National Security Advisor Dr. Condoleezza Rice to discuss 
the immediate need for the establishment of a humanitarian zone with 
foresight in Haiti.
  When I, along with my colleagues of the Congressional Black Caucus 
met with President Bush concerning this situation, we stressed that the 
United States must support democracy and that the rule of law is 
paramount. Instead of political ideologies, we need to preserve the 
innocent lives in the region where over 70 have been killed and dozens 
wounded to date. Violence, chaos, and anarchy cannot be allowed to oust 
the democratic government.
  The deadly uprisings in this war-torn nation come at the hands of the 
same factions that ravaged Haiti several years ago. Reports show that 
two of the rebel leaders are the most notorious torturers of the death 
squads, having already earned a reputation of infamy in a massacre that 
took place before Jean-Bertrand Aristide returned to power.
  Louis-Jodel Chamblain is a former military leader who once 
orchestrated the most recent coup d'etat in Haiti in 1991 with a brutal 
paramilitary group. Guy Phillipe, a charismatic former soldier and 
loyalist to President Aristide, fled Haiti three years ago in exile to 
the Dominican Republic to escape charges of drug-dealing and treason. 
Phillipe and Chamblain crossed the Dominican border back into Haiti a 
week ago to join their gang of former police and soldiers.
  We cannot allow innocent Haitians to die at the hands of thugs who 
want to thwart the establishment of democracy. We hope that, after 
our meeting, the President will call for an affirmative plan to respond 
to the Opposition Party's rejection of peace proposals offered by the 
Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the Organization of American States 
(OAS). Our acquiescence and inaction will soon suggest support of the 
opposition; therefore, it is time that we acted to demonstrate our 
strong commitment to democracy, constitutional government, peace, and 
the rule of law.

  Humanitarian aid and military assistance are critical needs for the 
Haitians given the threat that demonstrators may thwart the delivery of 
food and other relief items. There has already been a cry for 
assistance by President Aristide. Haiti, the poorest country in the 
Western Hemisphere, with only 4,000 police officers for 8 million 
citizens has formally requested humanitarian aid and security forces.
  As we work with the government of Haiti to explore the role of the 
international community in averting civil war, we must also begin to 
look beyond the current crisis. For example, Haiti continues to be in 
dire need of food aid and medical assistance. The current unrest could 
set off an exodus of refugees. Furthermore, there is an uncertainty as 
to the timing and fairness of the next elections is promoting 
suspicions and instability. We must anticipate the work that will have 
to be done in order to effectively and humanely process the imminent 
influx of refugees by improving our immigration screening and detention 
processes.
  I do not believe that Haitian refugees receive a fair chance to 
satisfy the requirements for entitlement to an asylum hearing. Also, I 
am disturbed by the lack of parity between the Haitian refugees and the 
Cuban refugees. While Haitian refugees are detained and then removed 
from the United States, Cuban refugees who reach American soil are 
welcomed. They are admitted or paroled into the United States, and a 
year later they are eligible for adjustment of status to that of lawful 
permanent residents. This difference in treatment is unfair and 
unjustifiable.
  I will support a bill sponsored by our colleague Mr. Meek of Florida 
to designate Haiti under Section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act to allow Haitian refugees to obtain Temporary Protective Status 
(TPS). I have signed on to join my brother today in fact to take 
leadership in this crisis.
  Furthermore, I will introduce a piece of legislation, the 
``Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2003.'' Section 502 of this 
bill responds to Attorney General Ashcroft's decision in Matter of D-J-
, 23 I&N Dec. 572 (AG 2003), in which he denied bond release to a 
Haitian on the ground that giving bond to undocumented refugees who 
come to the United States by sea would cause adverse consequences for 
national security and sound immigration policy.
  This legislation would permit the adjustment of status for Haitians 
who meet the following categories:
  (1) The individual would have to be a native or citizen of Haiti;
  (2) The individual would have to have been inspected and admitted or 
paroled into the United States; and
  (3) The individual would have to have been physically present in the 
United States for at least one year.
  The Caucus advocates positive action by the U.S. Government to 
support peaceful and democratic efforts to alleviate the violent and 
unsanitary conditions to prevent the spread of diseases such as HIV/
AIDS. Collaboration by and assistance from the United Nations will be 
key in the effort to stimulate the participation

[[Page H745]]

of the international community. The Haitian people must implement the 
organic constitutional and democratic principles to indicate its 
contrition and willingness to effect change. With the plan to institute 
a democratic form of governance must accompany maintenance of the rule 
of law so as to ensure the development of a framework of fundamental 
rights. Violence will not bring about peace, but fair and transparent 
electoral processes will.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope that our words are heard and that this nation 
will move to end this problem before a full-scale civil war results. 
Action today will translate into an investment that will benefit 
innocent Haitian lives and the immigration challenges that do not 
diminish. I urge this Administration to do the right thing and to 
provide the humanitarian aid and security provisions necessary to save 
these lives.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman 
from Texas for her analysis and her contributions to this discussion.
  I yield to, if he desires, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek).
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for 
holding this special order on Haiti tonight. I believe all through the 
week and next week and the week after that and the month after that 
that we will continue to raise the issue of the policy decision that 
the Bush administration has put forth as it relates to Haiti. I must 
say that it is sad today in this democracy that we celebrate that we 
are now in the position and seen by the world community as being a 
country to decide who will lead in a democracy and who will leave a 
democracy.
  Madam Speaker, I just wanted to come down here for a minute. This is 
the front page of the Washington Post. Mr. Guy Philippe, the rebel 
leader who went through Haiti, taking cities over and left about 70 
people dead in the path of that. Here is the cover of the New York 
Times. This is Mr. Philippe again, with two armed individuals with AK-
47 fully automatic weapons, going through the streets of Port-au-
Prince. Mr. Philippe called a meeting today and he said if police 
chiefs throughout Haiti and also the prime minister, if they did not 
show up, that he would place them under arrest. He has declared himself 
as the leader of the Haitian army. He said that he respects democracy 
and that he would respect the wishes of the now president, who was the 
supreme court justice, if he asked him to lay his weapons down.
  Madam Speaker, I am no great cheerleader, I must add, of President 
Aristide or the opposition forces, but I am a cheerleader for 
democracy, and I will tell the Members, regardless of what anyone may 
say or what they feel, representing south Florida where we have several 
Haitian Americans, I must add that it is a disappointing day on behalf 
of democracy. The fact that the President of the United States, along 
with the Secretary of State, along with Mr. Noriega, who is Assistant 
Secretary of State, made the singular decision to go visit President 
Aristide on a Saturday night to give him two options: One, board a 
plane to save his life or, two, die. I do not consider that an easy and 
nonpersuasive discussion. I will take that as a very persuasive 
discussion if someone, just any American, just think about it, if 
military forces came to one's house representing the United States of 
America and said they have two options, one, leave with us and live, 
two, die, we will not stop them from killing them.
  Madam Speaker, we have a lot of distinguished Members that are ready 
to address the House here tonight, but I want to say regardless of how 
one may feel toward Haiti, the administration, as far as I am 
concerned, the Bush administration had something personally against 
President Aristide. It was personal. This was not, well, he is not a 
great guy, he is not this, that, and the other. Guy Philippe is a 
murderer. He is a murderer and a thug and still carrying out thuggery 
on the streets of Haiti. He is willing to arrest the prime minister? He 
is going to arrest any police chief who did not show up at a meeting, 
and he is parading around the streets with armed individuals? This does 
not look like security for Haiti. What this looks like is more 
difficulty for Haiti. And he says he is interested in politics; so, 
Madam Speaker, I will say to the other Members the next leader of Haiti 
is going to be the person with the biggest guns and the most guns and 
who are willing to do what they have to do. I will tell the Members 
also as it relates to U.S. forces on the ground, what the Bush 
administration did on that Saturday night, Sunday morning have 
endangered the lives of American troops that are there that are trying 
to restore peace and security there, and international force troops, 
the President himself has placed their lives in jeopardy. As a member 
of the Committee on Armed Services, I am very upset about that. We do 
not go and do this kind of Saturday night visit giving people an 
ultimatum.

  Madam Speaker, I look forward to the hearings that will be hopefully 
held in the coming days here in this Congress because if we allow this 
to happen as a U.S. Congress, we are in for a rude awakening from the 
international community about our integrity as it relates to democracy. 
I thank the chairman so very much.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, may I just thank the 
gentleman for his leadership. He has just heightened the drama and the 
fear and the crisis that we are in. Coming from south Florida, does it 
make any sense for this administration not to immediately grant, as the 
gentleman has requested, temporary protective status to present to 
those who may be in fear of their lives? When we have just read that we 
have Guy Philippe who is not laying down his arms, he indicated that he 
is going to arrest leadership of government if we even have a 
government, is there any reason for this not to be granted in the next 
24 hours to protect the people that the gentleman represents and others 
around the Nation?
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, that answer is yes. I just want 
to say that the President and the Department of Homeland Security can 
grant temporary protective status as they have done in similar 
situations in Nicaragua and other places where they had disruption and 
danger on the streets. But, Madam Speaker, I must say the repatriating 
of 900-plus individuals seeking safety and refuge and to get a true 
asylum hearing of being returned back to Haiti, 12 executions, 12, took 
place on Monday. These are pro-Aristide supporters. Twelve individuals 
died execution style. So I am going to tell the Members right now that 
our country, and I will not even say our country, I would say our 
leadership has placed us in that position. So, once again, we have 
other Members here. We will be hitting the floor in the coming days and 
coming hours. It is important that we have leadership in this House 
that is willing to schedule congressional hearings immediately based on 
the actions of the executive branch on a Saturday evening to go to a 
democratically elected president's home and tell him either he gets on 
a plane or he loses his life.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I want to tell the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Meek) that as usual his perception about this problem is 
remarkable. I know that he has not an awful lot of seniority, but he 
worked on this problem for many years before he became a Member of 
Congress. He worked in his State legislature as a State senator. He 
worked alongside with his mother, Ms. Carrie Meek, who held a seat 
before he did. So it is very important that we seriously analyze the 
contribution that he has made tonight, and I thank him for it.
  I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson).
  Ms. WATSON. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman so much in this late 
hour.
  The die has been cast. Our country's leap year contribution to 
Haiti's bicentennial celebration is another example of the support of 
violence over democracy when it suits our national political interests.
  There is no doubt that this administration empowered the so-called 
opposition which consisted of no more than a coterie of wealthy 
Haitians, CIA operatives, neo-Duvalierists, and drug merchants to 
inflame a struggling populace. We did this by denying a democratically 
elected president the support and the resources needed and promised for 
his people's development.
  This rebel opposition is no more than a retread of the same elements 
traditionally militating against the people's interest ever since the 
African slaves soundly thrashed the finest of the French and other 
European legions to reclaim their freedom 200 years ago.

[[Page H746]]

  The United States State Department, which ``never negotiates with 
terrorists,'' had sufficient cozy contact with the Haitian rebels to 
convince them to delay their onslaught on Port-au-Prince. Even after 
the rebels rejected terms of settlement acceptable to President 
Aristide, in a matter of hours the State Department acceded to the 
rebels' demand, the removal of President Aristide.
  There is a distressing school of thought that subscribes to the new 
official spin that President Aristide has no one but himself to blame 
for this sordid state of affairs. Maybe Aristide is to blame for not 
realizing that there was no way that the Haitian elite and their U.S. 
conservative supporters would allow a government of black ex-slaves to 
succeed in this hemisphere.

                              {time}  2215

  Maybe the priest-turned-politician was too naive in committing his 
faith and the fate of his people to the tender mercies of the U.S. 
State Department.
  Maybe Father Aristide was so consumed in doing good that he could not 
recognize the need to play ball with the powers that be, making himself 
a conduit through which the millions of international aid funds would 
flow into the greedy hands of the elite who would keep Haiti 
impoverished while they pranced on the ritzy edges of society.
  But whatever the cause, the deed has been done. Regime change has 
again trumped sovereignty. The first democratically elected president 
of the first black nation in this hemisphere has, on the last day of 
Black History Month, 2004, been removed from office and escorted into 
exile.
  Whether Aristide's removal was voluntary, that is, by free will, or 
voluntary, as in eagerly handing over your wallet to a gunman in the 
alley, will be resolved, I hope, in time. The question is, where do we 
go from here?
  As legislators, we have a duty to attempt, wherever possible, to 
snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. So far, the United States has 
spearheaded the drive to commit peacekeepers on the Haitian scene, to 
bring back stability to the political environment and to set the stage 
for prosperity and development. Keeping the peace is the simplest of 
these missions. You can keep the peace by totally suppressing disorder 
with overwhelming force, or you can rely on the natural establishment 
of peace emanating from the application of social justice and economic 
prosperity.
  In Haiti's case, building a solid social and economic structure is 
more important than building our concept of democratic institutions, 
and military forces and police law and other actions are only 
applicable if required in the pursuit of social and economic goals.
  Therefore, the size and national composition and duration of 
deployment of the peacekeeping force should be determined by the extent 
and the progress of the nation-building force, and not by proposed 
election schedules. Rather, the question of political elections in 
Haiti from now on should be determined by the stability and the 
economic progress achieved and sustained by an interim government 
replacing the deposed Aristide regime.
  This situation proposes that the international community, possibly 
through the United Nations Development Program, deploy a Haitian 
Reconstruction Commission, a nation-building force charged with the 
responsibility for reconstructing the economic and social fabric of 
Haitian society, and with the employment of the peacekeeping force, 
constitute the interim government of Haiti.
  Any intervention that fails to establish an interim regime strong 
enough to assert a humane face on the Haitian nation and that lacks the 
sustained commitment of the U.S. and the international community to 
Haiti's future well-being can only condemn the millions of that country 
to the future of neo-slavery from which Dr. Jean-Bertrand Aristide 
tried to save them.
  Madam Speaker, we have much work to do to right an egregious wrong 
that has been committed by our so-called democratic administration. We 
must act.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I want to express my appreciation to the 
gentlewoman from Los Angeles, California, for the work and steadfast 
commitment she has had to make democracy work in a tiny, impoverished 
nation, now celebrating its 200th anniversary. I thank the gentlewoman 
deeply.
  I yield now to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens), 
who has worked in this as long as anyone I know.
  (Mr. OWENS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OWENS. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for having 
this Special Order at this critical moment in the history of Haiti and 
world relations.
  First, I would like to salute Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the Father of 
Democracy in Haiti. In all the years Haiti has existed, it has never 
had a democracy. Jean-Bertrand Aristide was elected democratically in 
1991. He was deposed by a coup d'etat by the army. He was here in this 
capital for 3 years.
  He went back after the Congressional Black Caucus urged President 
Clinton and worked very closely with President Clinton to restore 
democracy to Haiti. He went back, and he gave up the fact that he had 
missed 3 years. He did not insist on serving 5 years, he just completed 
the term, 2 years. Like George Washington, he stepped down in order to 
guarantee there would be a constitutional process going on, just as 
George Washington stepped down. He stepped down and there was another 
president for 5 years, and then Aristide came back. He was reelected 
later on for another 5-year term.
  It is important for people to know that Jean-Bertrand Aristide was 
not in charge of Haiti for all these years that you hear talked about, 
especially the year that the parliamentary elections were questioned. 
The parliamentary elections that were questioned were held and the 
irregularities that were charged, which involved six out of 100-some 
people elected, those irregularities were charged during a period when 
Jean-Bertrand Aristide was not in power. It is important to get the 
chronology straight.
  There are many people who say that Jean-Bertrand Aristide has only 
one fault, and some of us might have a tendency to want to agree with 
that, and the fault is he is not a seasoned politician. He came out of 
the priesthood. He was a priest. He was almost murdered three times 
before he was elected president.
  This priest, who some say is an inept politician, also was able to 
maintain influence, to maintain a following for all the years that have 
gone on since he was first elected. While he was out of office, he had 
influence and had a following. Does that sound like somebody who is 
inept and not a person who knows how to organize people?
  He has been accused of being a ruthless dictator. I have been trying 
to find out what the basis of that charge is. What ruthless dictator do 
we know who would disband his army? What ruthless dictator would not 
want an army?
  One of the most important things that Jean-Bertrand Aristide did when 
he went back after being deposed by the army was to abolish the army. 
The army of Haiti has been in charge ever since the United States 
created the army.
  Most people do not know the United States Marines created the army of 
Haiti. In their long occupation of more than 30 years, they built the 
Haitian army. After they left, whenever there was somebody not liked by 
the rich governing families, the oligarchy of Haiti, whenever there was 
somebody not liked by the United States, the army was used to remove 
them. He got rid of the army. What ruthless dictator would get rid of 
the army?
  I just want to say that this democratically elected president, this 
very unusual person of a magnitude you do not see in politics usually, 
who is accused of so many crimes in general, but when you start asking 
people specifically what he did, nobody ever has an answer.
  Did he go all over the world shopping, like Baby Doc Duvalier and his 
wife, spending $1 million on a weekend? Did he have palaces built like 
Saddam Hussein while the population starved? Where is the personal use 
of government funds to be seen? Nobody can tell me specifically any of 
that.
  But what I do know is because of his antipathy toward violence, 
because he understood the long history of Haiti and did not have an 
army, he has been taken advantage of by terrorists. Terrorists. If you 
look at the fact, this is

[[Page H747]]

a group of terrorists that has taken over Haiti. Terrorists.
  Now, we have varying degrees of suspicion about to what degree our 
own government was involved. We do know certain individuals well known 
to our government who have cooperated with the CIA in the past have 
shown up among these terrorists. We do know that they had modern 
weapons, United States weapons, machine guns, grenade launchers and so 
forth, that are not made in Haiti.
  We do know that our government said to Aristide, we will not accept 
your agreement. Aristide agreed to the CARICOM agreement, and our 
government would not support the legitimate government of Haiti, and 
say, well, you agreed, therefore we will step in and protect you from 
the violence until there is some kind of settlement. No. They said to 
Aristide as long as the opposition, as they called it, do not agree, we 
will not get involved in trying to guarantee the safety of your 
government.
  They empowered the terrorists. Whatever else they did not do, 
whatever other lack of complicity there is, there is the open 
complicity of the United States Government in empowering the 
terrorists, making them equal to Aristide, saying unless they agree, 
you have a doomed government.
  Beyond our own United States of America, the international community 
went along with all that, unfortunately.
  There is a lesson, unfortunately, here, for all the Caribbean nations 
of this hemisphere and for small nations throughout the world. There is 
no more gunboat diplomacy. There will not be any obvious takeover that 
the United Nations can object to, but look forward to a new kind of 
takeover process; and that is the process with the use of terrorists.
  Evidently, some people think there are good terrorists and bad 
terrorists; there are terrorists you can use and terrorists you have to 
worry about. But I say that Haiti is a victim of terrorism, and we 
should bear that in mind as we start sifting out the facts. As we go to 
our hearings, as we call into account our own elected officials and our 
appointed officials connected with this, let us remember to ask the 
question, have we acted in complicity with terrorists?
  I thank the gentleman very much for yielding to me, and again 
congratulate him on this Special Order.
  Mr. CONYERS. How profoundly we are in the debt of the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Owens) for his contribution tonight and from across the 
years around the people and the country and the idea of a democratic 
process.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine 
Brown), a strong and dedicated leader and fighter in seeking justice 
for Haiti.
  (Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida asked and was given permission to 
revise and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Madam Speaker, let me just say that I 
am sick and tired of being sick and tired.
  I think everything goes back for me to the 2000 election when we had 
our own form of coup d'etat; when in my district alone, over 27,000 
votes were stolen, 27,000 votes. So when we think about the domestic 
issues, I go back and blame that election. But what happened this 
weekend and last week is just unacceptable.
  This administration, the Bush administration, it is clear, if you do 
not go along with them lockstep, then they will take you out.

                              {time}  2230

  Look at Venezuela, look at Iraq, and now Haiti. For the past 3 years, 
this administration, the Bush administration, along with its leadership 
have blocked humanitarian assistance to Haiti. And, yes, the Haitian 
people are suffering. And the words ``corrupt government,'' what do you 
have to be corrupt with? We block any funds from the international 
community. The majority of the money that the Haitian people receive is 
for those people that are working abroad in the United States and 
sending it back.
  I am on the Committee on Transportation and the Infrastructure. I 
understand something about infrastructure, roads, bridges. They do not 
have food, water. The people are suffering. But we are responsible for 
the crumbling of that poor island. And I want to thank the chairman 
because I have been there on numerous occasions with him. And, of 
course, he and I and others in the Congressional Black Caucus attended 
their election. And I can tell you that the people were excited about 
voting. And I can also tell you that 27,000 votes were not thrown out 
in Haiti like it was thrown out in Duvall County.
  But I have four questions that I would like to just ask the chairman 
and other Members. The first one, to what extent do you think the role 
of the United States played in a Haitian coup d'etat? What part did we 
play?
  Mr. CONYERS. Well, apparently there was an American role. The details 
have not been forthcoming because what actually happened has been 
covered up with a series of misrepresentations that are clearly not 
accurate, and that is a challenge that remains for us to uncover. That 
is our job as legislators. And I think that the gentlewoman's fierce 
determination to get to the bottom of this will lead this country, this 
Congress, to an honest evaluation of what has gone down.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Madam Speaker, in talking to other 
international leaders and, of course, we have to be careful not to call 
any names because then they will also be put on the hit list, but they 
were very disappointed with the leadership of the Bush administration. 
They were willing to act but not only would this Bush administration 
and its leadership not act; they blocked other nations from acting. So 
do you think that the State Department has been honest to the American 
people in regard to Haiti?
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, it is very clear that what has happened 
and what has been explained as what has happened are both totally 
inconsistent and have yet to be reconciled and that this is another 
responsibility that has added to our duties.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, do you believe that if 
the United States had acted earlier in a more humane way that this 
crisis could have been averted?
  Mr. CONYERS. Now, on that I firmly believe that had we not taken the 
incredible diplomatic position that we had to resolve a political 
dispute before security could be brought to the people, that we would 
not be in the position that we are in.
  Just consider, how can you tell people that when the rebels do not 
want to compromise, do not want to negotiate, do not want to resolve 
the violence, that unless President Aristide can reach a conclusion 
with them, they did not even listen to representatives of the United 
States, much less their own government, because they were determined 
not to reach a political accord, something that was patently obvious 
from the very beginning?
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Madam Speaker, I would like to thank 
our troops for preventing further chaos and killing in Haiti. But I 
would like to know what in the world does the future hold for the 
Haitian people.
  Mr. CONYERS. That is precisely what we are in the process of 
determining. And I would like to say that my optimism is still on the 
side of justice, that my conviction that there are enough people in 
this Federal legislature and in this country to right the terrible 
wrong that has been visited upon the poor beleaguered citizens of that 
little tiny nation only miles away from our shore. We can make Haiti 
better. We can still create a humanitarian corridor to bring in the 
life-giving supplies without which they will not only perish but the 
violence will continue.
  I again thank the gentlewoman for her perseverance and commitment 
across the years on this subject.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. I once again want to thank the chairman 
for his leadership. But my mind goes back to our meeting that we had 
Wednesday at the White House with the Congressional Black Caucus 
members, with Colin Powell, Secretary of State, and with Condoleezza 
Rice and with later the President; and I guess I have a little Haitian 
or a little African in me because I knew then that our government under 
the leadership of the Bush administration and those Cabinet members 
were not going to lift their hands to help the poor people of Haiti. 
They were not going to do one single thing.
  We have spent $200 billion of American dollars in Iraq to build up a 
democracy there, but we deny people less

[[Page H748]]

than 600 miles from our shore any assistance, any intervention. And not 
only do we deny them; we are prohibiting, prohibiting other countries 
from going in and assist them.
  Shame on this administration. And hopefully we can have a regime 
change or a change in our government come November.
  Ever since I was elected to office, I have advocated on behalf of the 
Haitian people, and it simply enrages me that Haiti has been nothing 
more than a stepchild to policymakers in the State Department. While 
Cubans gain access to U.S. citizenship by merely stepping on land in 
Florida, Haitian immigrants are not just detained indefinitely when 
they try to come to the United States, but they are mercilessly sent 
back to the island.
  These groups that refer to themselves as ``the opposition,'' are in 
reality nothing more than armed gangs often funded by drug lords, that 
are on the verge of taking power through undemocratic means. I repeat: 
these are not legitimate political opposition groups, many of them are 
the same criminals that were in power before Aristide, the same thugs 
we removed from office just a decade ago. Ex military, ex death squad 
members, drug and gang members, and members of the wealthy business 
elite that dislike representative government are their leaders. It is 
more than ironic that just as the Bush administration admonishes Haiti 
and other nations for being ``undemocratic,'' they led the way for 
these armed gangs (the same gangs they criticize in the press) to usurp 
power.
  They did not like the idea of a government that is trying to 
redistribute money to the poor and provide Haitians with proper 
education and health care, because they feel threatened that their 
previous absolute hold on power will dissolve. And since they can't 
defeat Aristide in a fair election, they resorted to overthrow him 
militarily.
  I have traveled to Haiti numerous times with Members of the 
Congressional Black Caucus, met with Haitian government officials, 
opposition groups, and leaders of NGOs, and served the Nation as an 
election observer, and I will tell you that Aristide won by a 
landslide. This cannot be denied by anyone. Yet for whatever reason, 
the Bush administration has been anything but a friend to the Aristide 
government, and insists ironically that Haiti does not deserve our 
monetary assistance because their elections were ``unfair.'' It simply 
mystifies me how President Bush, a President who was selected by the 
Supreme Court under more than questionable circumstances (in my 
district alone 27,000 votes were thrown out), is telling another 
country that their elections were not fair and that they are therefore 
undeserving of aid or international recognition.
  Haiti is a nation that is still in the incipient stages of democracy 
and is in desperate need of foreign aid, and the Bush administration's 
economic stranglehold on the island has exacerbated Haiti's already 
crippled economy. The economic situation in Haiti is dire, yet the Bush 
administration's State Department apparently does not lend help to 
nations for humanitarian reasons, only when a precious natural resource 
such as oil is at stake.
  Moreover, I remain outraged that Attorney General John Ashcroft and 
the Miami INS office is explicitly going after the Haitian refugees. In 
December, the INS routinely released refugees who passed credible-fear 
interviews--unless they were deemed special security risks connected to 
September 11. That is still the case for asylum seekers from Colombia, 
Venezuela, Cuba and almost any other country--except Haiti. The Miami 
INS, under orders from the Department of Justice, imprisons Haitians 
seeking to prove they deserve asylum, while asylum seekers from other 
countries roam freely within American borders. This unfair 
discrimination against Haiti has become a common practice under the 
current administration, and the Congressional Black Caucus is one of 
the few voices fighting against this outrageous policy.
  To conclude: I reiterate my utter disappointment in the events that 
occurred in Haiti, and my outrage at the Bush administration's 
contribution to the fall of a democratically elected government.
  Mr. CONYERS. I thank all of the Members that have participated in the 
Special Order.

                          ____________________