[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 92 (Wednesday, July 7, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H5306-H5323]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 701 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. 4754.
{time} 2031
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
[[Page H5307]]
further consideration of the bill (H.R. 4754) making appropriations for
the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for
other purposes, with Mr. Hastings of Washington in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole House rose earlier
today, a demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 6 offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) had been postponed, and the bill
was open for amendment from page 57, line 18 through page 108, line 22.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the chairman and the
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their
designees may offer one pro forma amendment to each amendment for the
purpose of further debate.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Flake:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to implement, administer, or enforce the amendments
made to sections 740.12 of title 15, Code of Federal
Regulations (relating to license exemptions for gift parcels
and humanitarian donations for Cuba), and 740.14 of such
title (relating to license exemptions for baggage taken by
individuals for travel to Cuba), as published in the Federal
Register on June 22, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 34565-34567).
The CHAIRMAN. Points of order are reserved. Pursuant to the order of
the House of today, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member
opposed each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the Flake-Davis-Emerson-Delahunt amendment simply
prohibits the enforcement on the new Department of Commerce
restrictions published June 22 of this year.
These new restrictions added to the list of items prohibited in the
sending of gift parcels, namely, clothing, personal hygiene items,
seeds, fishing equipment, soap-making equipment, and veterinary
medicine and supplies. As I read through the new list, it occurs to me
that these items would promote self-sufficiency among Cubans.
The rationale in the new regulations, however, seems to promote a
dependency of Cubans on their oppressive government, the same
government that has deprived them of freedom for the past 45 years. To
quote the Federal Register that contains these new restrictions: ``Such
parcels decrease the burden on the Cuban regime to provide for the
basic needs of its people.'' By prohibiting these items from being sent
to Cuba, we are, in fact, promoting dependence of these people on a
dictator.
This amendment would simply take us back to June 21 of this year, at
which point several restrictions were already in place.
The message of this amendment is that it is unreasonable for our
government to prevent Americans from sending clothes, personal hygiene
items, seeds, et cetera to people in Cuba who are struggling under the
dictatorship of Fidel Castro. Withholding of such items will have
little affect on Castro and a significant effect on individuals who
already struggle for the basics.
This amendment would also prevent the enforcement of the new
restriction that says gift parcels can only be sent once a month per
household instead of once a month per individual. Again, why should we
limit the help that Cuban Americans can send to their families?
Finally, it would prevent the enforcement of the new restriction that
says travelers are only allowed to carry 44 pounds of luggage, another
way to limit the amount of help that can be sent to struggling
families.
In Cuba, the average salary is about $10 a month. When a Cuban family
receives simple household items in a parcel, it can save its limited
income and spend it on food and other necessities. It is hard to think
of an economic sanction that does more harm to the welfare of families
in Cuba or does more to make the United States seem mean-spirited
towards families who already have the misfortune to live under
Communism.
We Republicans have diverse views on the Cuban embargo, but we are
united on family values; and we should stand up for them here.
As President Reagan said in 1984, ``We must be careful, in reacting
to actions by the Soviet Government, not to take out our indignations
on those not responsible.'' I would submit, Mr. Chairman, that that is
what we are doing here. We are taking it out on those who are not
responsible.
The United States should not be targeting economic sanctions directly
against Cuban families, nor should we take away from Cuban Americans
the right that all immigrants have, to help loved ones who are left
behind.
I urge support of the Flake-Davis-Emerson-Delahunt amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, and I
yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. Still allowed
is food, medicine, medical supplies, equipment; receive only radio
equipment for reception. It does not eliminate humanitarian aid. So the
amendment prohibits implementation of a regulation that is still under
development. This regulation, as I understand it, would provide several
categories of items that BIS has approved for export to Cuba, the
eligibility requirements for gift parcels that can be sent to Cuba
without a license.
The Commerce Department had told us that based on input from the
public since they published the regulation and in consultation with the
State Department, the Department is revising the rule.
Castro has a number of people that are in prison today, many speaking
out for human rights; and I think it would be important to send a
message; and, as a result of that, I rise in strong opposition to the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Davis).
Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me this time, and I respectfully disagree with the
distinguished chairman of the subcommittee. I think this is a human
rights issue.
This is not an issue about whether the embargo is going to stand with
Cuba. This is a more fundamental issue about the human rights of Cuban-
Americans living in the United States: in my home, the Tampa Bay area
of the State of Florida, throughout the country, and their families who
have been left behind in Cuba.
As the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) alluded to, under the new
restrictions that have been announced by the State Department that have
taken effect, we now as a country prohibit Cuban-Americans from sending
to their own family members, soap, toothpaste, or underwear. Those will
no longer be allowed to be mailed by family members in the United
States to their families in Cuba. On top of that, these regulations
specifically prohibit United States citizens from sending anything to
family members other than their mother, father, brother, or sister. In
other words, if you had a cousin or an aunt or uncle in Cuba that you
care about and are trying to help, under this rule which has now taken
effect, you can no longer send to them medicine or food or medical
supplies.
This is tragic. This is absurd. This is unforgivable. This is
something that we should not countenance as a House. This is not a
policy we ever would have adopted as a Congress.
There are a few things that I believe people on both sides of this
amendment agree upon: first, that the conditions under the horrific
Fidel Castro regime are insufferable for Cubans and their families
living down there; secondly, that for years, this government has done
very little to help their people and will continue to do very little.
We can also agree that one of the few sources of hope and comfort that
families in Cuba have is the hope that their own family members will
try to help them. I know from visiting Cuba 18
[[Page H5308]]
months ago with the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe), I saw for
myself the horrific, intolerable, unmerciful conditions this regime has
inflicted on its own people. There are people walking around without
adequate clothing, without adequate food, without adequate medical
supplies.
Now, we are telling those people that we are going to take away one
of the last sources of hope and support they have: their own family
members who are trying to assist them by mailing to them food,
medicine, clothing, toothpaste, soap. I represent a lot of people who
work very hard so they can set aside money to buy the things that we
take for granted every day in our own homes; and they mail it, they
used to mail it to their family members, their aunts, their uncles,
their cousins, their parents, their children. They can no longer do so
under these regulations that are not in development; these regulations
are in effect.
This is having an impact today on the lives of people here in the
United States and in Cuba who are hanging on for dear life. We all know
there are times in our lives where the only person you can count on to
help you is your own family because the government lets you down, other
people cannot or will not help you. This is one of those times in the
horrific history of Cuba where family members are there. They are the
only thing that is there to keep people alive, to keep them healthy, to
keep them from starving; and we as a government have stepped in,
through a rule that was developed very quickly without a lot of public
discussion and debate, and we have cut off that family support.
This is not who we are as a country. This is not what we stand for.
These are not our values. They are also not the values of these people
in Cuba who are fighting to maintain their dignity and their health. We
should adopt the Flake-Davis-Delahunt-Emerson amendment. We should
repeal these rules. This is a mistake. I urge my colleagues to adopt
the amendment.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I asked to go to Cuba. The gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Smith) and I asked to go. We were denied. We were denied by Castro
for the ability to go visit church leaders in Cuba. Yet, I constantly
see, and I guess we are not supposed to mention the names of those in
the other body, different members of the other body sort of floating
into Havana and coming back out. We were not given the ability to go.
The State Department was not able to help us. Castro would not let us
go. So it would be a little more objective and a little more fair if
those who are opposed to what Castro stands for who basically are
taking the Reagan doctrine that he took to Eastern Europe there were
able to go.
Even in the Soviet Union under the dark days of Krushchev, we were
able to go; and when we went, we brought computers in and different
things.
So I just want the record to show there has not been a case that I
know of of any Member in this body, and there are good people on both
sides, I know both sides do not favor Castro, but I have never seen a
Member from this body who strongly opposes and speaks out against
Castro to ever be given a visa to visit. You even have to go through
the pro-Castro groups to ask for an opportunity to go.
So I think the record ought to show that I want to go. And for those
of my colleagues who have been and feel that they speak a little bit
and have some influence, pick a time and the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Smith) and I will go and we will go into the prisons; we will go
into the churches. But the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and I
have never been able to go.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Lincoln Diaz-Balart).
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the
gentleman for yielding me this time.
As a matter of fact, when Castro denied the authority, because he
knows very well who he does not want to allow from this body to enter
Cuba, he called the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) provocateurs for having sought
permission to enter, because the dictator knows that the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) would
go and try to visit Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet and the other political
prisoners, the thousands of political prisoners in Cuba. That is their
attempt, and the dictator knows.
The issue here, Mr. Chairman, is very simple. The people who have
family in Cuba, Cuban-Americans who send aid to family members in Cuba,
are in our districts, in the district that I am honored to represent,
in the district of the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), of
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart), and of the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez). But this amendment says, our
constituents cannot know what is right for their families. This
amendment says, we know better.
By the way, the gentleman from Florida made a series of statements
that were factually untrue. He said that the new regulations that have
just come into effect promulgated by President Bush prohibit
humanitarian aid of food and medicine. I believe the gentleman from
Florida said that. That is untrue.
The gentleman also said that the new regulations promulgated by
President Bush prohibit family members from sending such humanitarian
aid to immediate family members. He said that. That is factually
untrue.
{time} 2045
So I would recommend to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis) that
he read the new regulations.
Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I think the gentleman should read
the regulations first.
Mr. DAVIS of Florida. I have read the regulations.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Well, then why would the
gentleman say that immediate family members would not be able to
receive food and medicine?
Mr. DAVIS of Florida. If the gentleman would yield, I would be happy
to answer his question.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Why would the gentleman say that
if he had read the regulations?
Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Because under the regulations, if you are
trying to send something down to your cousins, to your aunts----
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. That is not what the gentleman
said.
Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, the new regulations, this gentleman
said and it is on the record, that food and medicine is prohibited to,
he said, children and fathers and sons. So anyway, that is factually
incorrect.
I am glad that he said he read the regulations, but obviously he did
not understand them. Maybe he should read them again.
Now, Mr. Chairman, prodemocracy leaders inside of Cuba, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) just mentioned that he sought to visit with
them, risking their lives, have sent us a statement that we received
just a few days ago, supporting President Bush's measures, stating,
``These measures of the United States Government are designed to bring
about democracy in Cuba. These measures will not only benefit the
Cubans who live on the island, but also those in exile, leading Cuba to
a peaceful transition, and the people themselves will claim their
legitimate rights which were stolen from them by the Communist
dictatorship in 1959. The dollars that enter the country go directly
into the coffers of Castro's Communist system, allowing them to
continue enjoying the goods and pleasures that are denied to the Cuban
people. They will continue to live above Cuba's working and exploited
class, without even thinking of the common Cuban.''
Now, they signed this. They risked their lives to send us this
statement. Numerous prodemocracy activists. They are not, by the way,
the so-called ``dissidents'' that are allowed by the regime to travel
the world to get awards or to come here to Congress to lobby against
sanctions on the dictatorship. These are people in the political
prisons or risking their lives because they know that at any moment
they could be thrown into those totalitarian gulags and given sham
trials where they are sentenced to decades in the gulag.
But this amendment, Mr. Chairman, says, We know better than those
people. This amendment, Mr. Chairman, is
[[Page H5309]]
dishonest. This amendment is condescending. It seeks to undermine an
entire policy that President Bush has just implemented to serve the
interest of a brutal dictatorship.
The Democratic Party November 30 ``Frank Pais'', along with the
November 30 Movement in Exile, after debating the pros and cons of the
new measures that will be enforced beginning June 30, 2004 state the
following consensus:
As far as we are informed, we agree to accept the measures imposed by
the United States government. We know that they are designed to bring
about democracy in Cuba.
We recognize that many common Cubans will be severely affected and
specially the children, the elderly and the ill but we, as members of
the Cuban opposition, will try to care for those families as best we
can, relying on the unconditional assistance of the Exile community.
On the other hand, there are tens of thousands of Cubans who live off
the remittances sent to them by their families in the United States.
They even travel to the United States and do nothing to help improve
the situation of common Cubans.
We believe, and are almost certain that these measures will not only
benefit the Cubans who live on the island, but also those in Exile,
leading Cuba to a peaceful transition and the people themselves will
claim their legitimate rights, which were stolen from them by the
communist dictatorship in 1959.
It is important that the people know that the government of Fidel
Castro, as a decaying system, no longer has anywhere to purchase goods
because it is in debt to the entire World and the dollars that enter
the Country go directly into the coffers of Castro's communist system,
allowing them to continue enjoying the goods and pleasures that are
denied to the Cuban people. Furthermore, they will continue to live
above Cuba's working and exploited class, without even thinking of the
common Cuban.
Many families live off the clothes and shoes that their families in
Exile work so hard to send them, but the Cubans over there, just like
the ones here, must remember that the first one who separated the Cuban
family was Castro's communist government, who forbade the people from
receiving even a single letter from relatives. Many Cubans--far from
going out on the streets in protest--chose to settle in Exile and now
they protest against whom they should not protest. They should come and
protest against Fidel Castro who is the only one responsible for all
these measures.
The double standard must cease, they must go out into the streets if
they wish to receive remittances to change the grey and sad destiny of
the homeland of Marti. Let no one doubt it, victory is closer each day.
We only need the unity of all, and with all, of all and by all, therein
lies the success of victory against the dictatorship that for 45 years
has sunk the people of Cuba into mud and misery.
We are counting on you, our Cuban brothers and sisters in Exile and
within Cuba.
Long Live a Free Cuba!
Havana, June 27, 2004.
Mirta Villanueva.
Reinaldo Gante Hidalgo--activist of the November 30 Movement; Ernesto
Medina Pascual--activist of the November 30 Movement; Camilo Perez
Villanueva--activist of the November 30 Movement; Afredo Vapan
Marquez--activist of the November 30 Movement; Luis Almansa Veleta--
activist of the November 30 Movement; Victor Junier Fernandez
Martinez--activist of the November 30 Movement; Ada Kaly Marquez
Abascal--National Coordinator for functions of the Democratic Party
November 30 ``Frank Pais'' and correspondent for the Oriental Zone of
the Information Bridge Cuba-Miami.
Statement given via telephone by Ada Kaly Marquez Abascal--National
Coordinator for functions of the Democratic Party November 30 ``Frank
Pais'' and correspondent for the Oriental Zone of the Information
Bridge Cuba-Miami, for the Information Bridge Cuba-Miami and Net For
Cuba on the 27th day of June, 2004.
I would ask all of our colleagues to reject this amendment, to
support President Bush's policy to hasten the democratic transition in
Cuba. Oppose the Flake amendment.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I feel compelled to say again, this is not
about travel. This is about the freedom of Cuban Americans to send
packages of soap and clothing and personal hygiene items to their
families in Cuba.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt).
Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
time. I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis).
Mr. DAVIS of Florida. I just want to further respond to the
gentleman's comments because I agree, we need to be clear on the facts.
We will disagree on the policy. The rule specifically states that if
you are sending something to a spouse, a child, a parent or a
grandparent, you can send down food and medicine. But if you are
sending something to an aunt, uncle or cousin, you cannot, and that is
what the regulations say. And with respect to anybody in your family,
you are prohibited from sending down soap, toothpaste or clothes. So I
think that sets the record straight.
Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, in a recent interview, the chief of staff
of Secretary of State Colin Powell said that the U.S. embargo has not
worked for 40 years. ``It is crazy,'' he said. And, again, I am quoting
the chief of staff to Secretary Powell. He went on to say, ``It is the
dumbest policy on the face of the Earth.'' That is his language.
Well, let me suggest now it just got dumber. Several weeks ago, as
the others have said, these new regulations were implemented by the
administration. Allegedly they are designed to hasten Cuba's transition
to a free and open society, which I think we all agree is a worthy
goal. But, tragically, the impact of these changes fall heaviest on
Cubans on the island and their families here in the United States who
want to help them, to assist them.
It is as if 45 years of this tough approach has not already been
proven to be an abysmal failure. So today's debate on this moment
focuses clearly on one of the most absurd of the new provisions. The
regulation of the Department of Commerce that takes the existing
restrictions on the contents of gift packages to their relatives from
Americans to their relatives in Cuba, and narrows the list even
further.
The new rule would make it illegal for U.S. citizens to send Cuban
relatives clothing, soap, shampoo, and other personal hygiene items.
And furthermore, since June 30 it is now illegal to send parcels to
cousins, aunts, nephews, anyone who is not a member of your immediate
family. It is also illegal to send more than one nonfood gift parcel
each month to a household, for up until now you could send a monthly
care package to each individual in a household. But that is over.
So now it is U.S. foreign policy to prohibit American citizens from
sending their relatives soap and shampoo and clothes. I would suggest
this hardly constitutes weapons of mass destruction. And the U.S.
government is breaking new ground, because it is now in the business of
defining family for its own citizens.
Under these regulations, grandparents trump uncles and sisters beat
out cousins. In past debates in this Chamber about restrictions on the
right of Americans to travel to Cuba, I have referred to the travel
police. Well, now we have the shampoo police. We have the soap police.
We have the deodorant police. We have the clothing police guarding, at
taxpayers' expense, against the possibility that these items might make
it across the Florida straits.
This is just as much folly as the fact that the Treasury Department
now has more people tracking grandmothers bicycling in Cuba than it
does looking at the finances of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.
What in the world are we doing? What have we come to?
You might want to review some of the other new regulations, two
announced at the same time, like limiting family visits to once every 3
years with no humanitarian exceptions such as the occasion of the death
of a mother, the death of a father, the death of a daughter or the
death of a son.
President Bush got it right 2 years ago when he went to Miami and
said, I love being with my family. There is nothing more important than
family in my life. But he got it dead wrong when he announced these
regulations. They are antifamily, they are mean-spirited, and they are
un-American; and I urge support for this amendment.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. DeLay).
Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, sometimes our speeches get away with us and
trivialized. The oppression of people in Cuba, sometimes in making a
speech we joke about what is going on in Cuba as if it does not even
exist. I think that is pretty unfortunate.
People are dying in Cuba. They are imprisoned in Cuba. The entire
island
[[Page H5310]]
is nothing but a prison of a Communist dictator. The author and
proponent of the Flake amendment does not intend to help Fidel Castro's
brutal regime grind its boot heel of tyranny deeper into the necks of
Cuban people, but that is exactly what this amendment will do.
The premise upon which the Flake amendment is based is that gift
packages sent from the United States to Cuba will be delivered to their
addresses by some chipper little mailman with a wink and a smile.
No, Mr. Chairman, it works more like this:
A family of refugees in Miami hears that their relatives in the
proletarian paradise that is modern Cuba are short on capitalist
luxuries like clothing or soap. So this family gathers together a
package of supplies to help their relatives get through the month.
The U.S. Postal Service delivers the package to Cuba where it is
taken to a central depository. Once the package is secured by Castro's
goon squads, the relatives are notified of its arrival and of the price
that they must pay to have it released.
More than a billion dollars of charitable goods are given to the
Cuban people by their friends and families from America every year,
either in gift packages or personal deliveries by relatives. That is $1
billion that Castro does not have to spend on government services but
instead can spend on overtime for his secret police.
Meanwhile, under this arrangement, Castro's regime has pocketed more
than $36 million over the last 2 years in revenues from ``delivery
fees.''
Now, whether this $36 million went to fund international terrorism,
more efficiently torture political prisoners, or simply put in an
Olympic-size jacuzzi in Castro's rec room, we do not know. What we do
know, however, is that Fidel Castro gleefully, gleefully, profits off
the generosity of Cuban-Americans and the desperation of the Cuban
people.
This is Totalitarian Dictatorship 101, Mr. Chairman. There is
practically a chapter on it in the Communist Manifesto. And it is the
very arrangement that our Commerce Department will curb with these new
regulations. The new regulations ensure, I say to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), ensure that the goods sent to Cuba are
truly humanitarian. They will thereby cut into Castro's profits. They
are supported by the Cuban-American community and, given the chance,
they will work.
The Flake amendment, however innocuous it would seem, would undo
those regs, further underwriting Communist oppression and welcome
Castro's vile snout back to the trough of American charity.
That is why this amendment will not do. And that is why I urge my
colleagues to stand with the Cuban people and vote no.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Missouri (Mrs. Emerson).
Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Chairman, the Flake amendment is very simple, and I
will repeat what my colleagues have heretofore said. It prevents the
Department of Commerce from carrying out new misguided regulations,
further restricting gift parcels and personal baggage going to Cuba.
Now, the stated purpose of these regulations, as my colleagues have
said, is to prevent gift parcels sent to Cuba from supporting the
Castro regime.
{time} 2100
In reality, we all know that these regulations will have little
effect on the Cuban regime and, instead, will seriously hinder the
ability of Cuban-Americans to send critical humanitarian aid to their
family members in Cuba.
I want to examine, if I could, Mr. Chairman, again some of the
supposedly regime-supporting items that these Commerce Department
regulations would prohibit Cuban-Americans from sending to family
members in Cuba as a gift parcel.
Seeds, so that a family might plant vegetables or flowers; clothing;
personal hygiene items; fishing equipment; soap. Now, do those sound
like items that if withheld from the Cuban people are going to bring
down Castro's regime? I do not think so. There will be an impact, and
there is no question that Cuban families will suffer.
Mr. Chairman, imagine living with the knowledge that a member of your
family residing in Cuba cannot afford adequate clothing, and we all
know that the Castro regime makes it almost impossible to afford
clothing, new items; but imagine that you could not send him or her
this very basic item. Oh, you could send them a receive-only short-wave
radio, but you cannot send them clothing or Kleenex, toilet paper? Come
on. This is absolutely ridiculous.
I know personally that if I had distressed family members in Cuba or
any other country, that this country might prohibit me from sending
items to them, that I would use every tool available in order to assist
them. Securing travel to Cuba, I might try to pack as many essential
items for my family that I could fit into my luggage; but then again,
my efforts would be in vain because I would run into these restrictive
Commerce Department regulations. These regulations would keep me from
bringing more than 44 pounds of luggage per passenger, including my own
personal clothing for the trip.
By the way, as my colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Delahunt), said, thanks to the new regulations issued by the Treasury
Department, I could only visit family in Cuba once every 3 years. It is
kind of hard to pack 3 years of assistance to your family in 44 pounds
of luggage. In this situation, how am I supposed to send my family
clothing and other essentials?
These regulations, Mr. Chairman, do not reflect this Nation's family
values. I think, Mr. Chairman, that family values mean letting family
members help each other.
The Cuban people have experienced enough oppression. Let us not fund
policies that cut them off from their families, intensifying their
hardship. Vote for commonsense policies that reflect our values. Vote
``yes'' for the Flake amendment.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank my wonderful friend, the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), for his steadfast leadership
throughout the years in favor of human rights; and that is really what
is before us today.
I know that it is tempting to make quips and jokes about this
situation. It is not very funny to the Cuban people. It goes at their
expense, but I want to point out some of the facts that have been
misrepresented on the other side.
There will be no soap police. There will be no deodorant police. I
know this is so funny. There is not much laughter in Cuba since Castro
took office illegally. There will be no shampoo police because of these
regulations, no toothpaste police. Call the Commerce Department and
find out what the regulations say. All of those goods will be allowed
to go into Cuba. Call the Commerce Department tomorrow and my
colleagues will read what the regulations say. Please read them.
I rise in strong opposition to the Flake amendment. Mr. Chairman,
after the deplorable attacks against our Nation on September 11, we
committed ourselves to denying terrorists and their sponsors the
financial resources to threaten the United States and our allies and
our interests, and this became the pillar of our foreign and our
domestic policy in our war against terrorism.
Yet, when President Bush takes steps to deny more than $1 billion
annually to the Castro regime, a rogue regime that has been repeatedly
classified by our own State Department as a state sponsor of terrorism,
the President is rebuffed and undermined.
After reviewing the evidence of how the Castro regime has manipulated
U.S. regulations to fill the coffers of his regime, the President was
compelled to act firmly and expeditiously, and what was this evidence?
I will tell my colleagues, Mr. Chairman.
More than $1 billion annually in funds and goods are sent to Cuba
from those living outside the island through the shipments of gift
parcels, remittances, and from vacations. In the year 2002 to 2003, the
Castro regime received over $36 million in revenues from delivery of
gift parcels. He is making a lot of money.
The regime earns another $20 million per year from excess baggage
fees and customs duties, and the proponents of this amendment would ask
us to ignore these facts, and they will claim that they would justify
their positions using
[[Page H5311]]
humanitarian claims, while Castro becomes one of the richest men in our
hemisphere.
The facts are the following: the new regulations continue to allow
gift parcels for humanitarian reasons. That is the truth. That is the
fact, but focus these gift parcels to include truly necessary items
such as medicines, medical supplies and devices and unlimited food,
just to name a few; and the fact is that gift parcels can be sent to
immediate family members. This will ensure that the senior regime and
Communist Party officials are not the beneficiaries.
Again, I ask my colleagues, what is wrong with a policy that seeks to
deny the Castro dictatorship millions and billions in hard-earned
currency? This Castro dictatorship is a regime that just a few days
ago, just a few days ago from today hosted the foreign minister of Iran
and other Iranian regime officials. What happened there?
The Iranian officials thanked the Cuban dictator for the regime
support for Iran's nuclear quest, and he indicated that Iran and Cuba
must stand together against U.S. efforts to deny Iran access to nuclear
technology.
The Iranian foreign minister underscored the significance of sharing
expertise and technical knowledge between two countries in various
enterprises.
He said he ``conveyed the warm greetings'' of Ayatollah Khomeini and
Khatami to Castro for ``resisting the political and economic pressure''
from the U.S.
What pressure was he referring to, Mr. Chairman? The very regulations
and policies that we are debating today, that the proponents of this
amendment seek to revoke.
The Iranian foreign minister also referred to Castro's 2002 visit to
Iran. He called it a turning point in relations between the two
countries, leading to stronger Cuba-Iran ties; and notably, it was
during this visit that Fidel Castro, with the Ayatollah, stated,
``Together, Cuba and Iran can bring America to its knees.''
So this stronger Cuba-Iran relationship that the foreign minister was
referring to is built on this mission, this shared goal of destroying
the United States.
So I ask, why would we want to assist the Castro regime, a regime
that seeks to destroy our country? Why would we want to assist this
regime? What is wrong with trying to deny the Castro regime the
financial means to pursue this goal of bringing America to its knees?
The facts speak for themselves, Mr. Chairman. The new regulations
implemented by the President are in keeping with our global anti-
terrorism efforts, specifically targeting terrorism financing. They do
not affect true humanitarian flows between the U.S. and the Cuban
people. They do not, and as our dear former President Ronald Reagan
would say, toward those who would export terrorism and subversion in
the Caribbean and elsewhere, especially Cuba, we will act with
firmness.
So I hope that our colleagues will act with firmness, will follow the
Reagan example and act with firmness against the Castro regime because
the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba has given us a mandate to
identify measures that are going to help the Cuban people bring an end
to the Castro dictatorship, and this is an element of a plan for U.S.
assistance to a postdictatorship Cuba.
Castro has exploited U.S. humanitarian policies to shift burdens that
should be assumed by the Cuban state; and instead, he has used it to
generate hard currency that he uses to maintain the regime's repressive
apparatus. These families can continue to send on a monthly basis
medicine, medical supplies, food, personal hygiene products to their
immediate family members, and also, and we have not talked about it,
but nongovernmental organizations are providing humanitarian support
and assistance to civil society groups in Cuba, and they will continue
to do so with the President's recommendations.
I thank the chairman again for his time.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) has 13\1/2\
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) has 14
minutes remaining.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume
before yielding to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
I just wanted to clarify what the rule actually says. The rule we are
seeking to amend states this rule removes seeds, clothing, personal
hygiene items, veterinary medicine and supplies, fishing equipment and
supplies, and soap-making equipment from the list of commodities that
may be sent to Cuba in gift parcels.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts
(Mr. McGovern).
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Flake-Davis
amendment. This amendment will help not the Cuban regime, but this is
an amendment that will help the Cuban people.
Mr. Chairman, for the past 5 years, this House and the other body
have voted time and time again to lift various U.S. restrictions on
travel and on commercial food and medicine sales. Yet this
administration has moved with ruthless determination to tighten and
increase restrictions on heretofore legal interactions between
Americans and Cubans.
Who have they targeted to be most affected by these new rules and
regulations? Who is so subversive, so threatening to our national
security that they must face tighter and tighter and tighter
restrictions on their activities? Well, it is not members of the Cuban
Government. Mr. Chairman, it is Cuban families that will suffer as a
result of these new policies.
The Bush administration has even gone so far as to redefine what the
word ``family'' means for Cuban-Americans; and it does not include
uncles or aunts or cousins or nephews or nieces, let alone your
godparents or godchildren or any other member of your extended family.
As far as the Bush administration is concerned, if these extended
family members are beloved by a Cuban living in America, too bad.
As the sponsors of this amendment have already described, the new
Commerce Department policies demand that Cuban-Americans in the United
States restrict humanitarian or gift parcels to just one per household
in Cuba once a month, rather than a parcel once a month to each
individual family member, and while the package may include food, it
cannot include seeds so that the family might grow more of their own
food or fishing equipment so that they might catch their own food or
veterinary medicines and equipment so that a family might care for
animals that help them supplement their diet or income.
While the parcel may include medicines, it cannot include personal
hygiene items or soap-making equipment; and I would say to my
colleagues here, I have the regulations. They are right here in black
and white. I am happy to show them to my colleagues and give them to
them so they can read.
While Cuban-Americans can send their family members receive-only
radios, they cannot send them clothing. Clearly, in the minds of
officials at the Commerce Department, listening to Radio Marti is a
greater priority for Cuban families than adequate clothing.
Mr. Chairman, our Nation has always placed an emphasis on families,
on family values, on the reunification of families. As a Nation of
immigrants, we have thrived on supporting our extended families, both
those living in the United States with us and family members still
struggling to survive in their mother countries.
The new restrictions issued by the Commerce Department make a mockery
of this common heritage that binds all Americans together. No matter
what any Member of this body believes about the rightness or wrongness
of our current policy toward Cuba, and for the record, Mr. Chairman, I
believe that our policy is a miserable failure, but no matter what one
believes, we should not place the burden and price of those beliefs on
Cuban-Americans and their relatives still living on the island.
No constituency in America has fought more fiercely for a free Cuba.
Yet, these are the very families Commerce is going to punish.
{time} 2115
These new policies were specifically made to isolate Cubans on the
island
[[Page H5312]]
from their relatives in the United States. They were specifically made
to increase the hardships faced by those families.
Mr. Chairman, these new policies are cruel, these new policies are
inhuman, and these new policies are cold-hearted and their enforcement
should not be funded.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of the Flake-
Davis amendment.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia has 14 minutes remaining.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this
amendment, which would weaken the pressure on Castro's gangster regime.
Yes, Cuban families will be suffering. Yes, Cuban families will suffer
more than they suffer now. But they are not suffering because of the
United States of America. No.
It is always America's fault, right? It is always America's fault
whether the Cuban people are suffering or any of the people who live
under tyranny are suffering anywhere in the world. It is always our
fault.
No, the people of Cuba are suffering, as they have for the last 3 and
4 decades, because of the Castro regime. It is a brutal dictatorship
that has suppressed the people, that has eliminated freedom, that has
permitted the economy, that once-proud economy, one of the most
prosperous economies of the hemisphere, to go right down the tubes.
The people of Cuba know why they are suffering. It is not because of
the people of the United States. And, in fact, we should have policies
that differ between democratic countries and dictatorships. If we have
the same policies, what pressure are we going to be able to put on
these dictatorships to change? That leaves us with only the military
option. We should have an economic policy that will pressure this
hemisphere's most brutal dictatorship, and we should make sure that we
do not relieve that pressure at this moment.
It is important that the people of Cuba fully understand the
consequences of Castro's dictatorship. It is not the fault of the
people of the United States, as we have heard here. It is not the fault
of this administration. It is the fault of this bearded dictator who
has murdered all of his opposition in Cuba. That is why there is no
prosperity. That is why the people are living in misery. It is not
because of anything we are doing here.
Yes, we should put economic pressure on Cuba to get rid of Castro.
Castro has not only a dictatorship that oppresses his people, he
supports insurgents and terrorists throughout this hemisphere. He uses
his territory as a base of operations that is designed to hurt the
people of the United States of America.
Fidel Castro rules with an iron fist. Yes, you do not grow much food
when you have iron fists on your hands. That is right, you do not grow
much food and you do not have a high standard of living when you spend
all your money subsidizing terrorists and a heavy military regime, as
Castro has. That is why the people of Cuba are suffering.
The best thing we can do right now is continue the pressure on Castro
until he is gone. That is what we can do for the people of Cuba. And if
we right now take the measure that is being suggested by the Flake
amendment, it will be seen as a weakness on the part of the United
States towards this hemisphere's most brutal dictatorship. It will not
encourage change for the better, it will encourage intransigence on the
part of dictators and terrorists like Fidel Castro.
It is time for us to oppose any type of suggestion like that proposed
by the Flake amendment today.
Let us be for Cuba and the people of Cuba, for freedom and democracy,
and say, yes; Cuba, si; libertad, si; Castro, no mas.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume
before yielding to the gentleman from Idaho.
I would just say that let us do stand for freedom, let us allow Cuban
Americans to observe the freedom that they have to send personal
hygiene items and food, medicine, and clothing to their family members
in Cuba.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr.
Otter).
Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Flake) for his leadership and once again for bringing forth, I think, a
very important doctrine relative to our policy here in the Western
Hemisphere.
I rise today in support of this amendment, with great concern about
the more than 40 years of failed American policy towards Cuba.
We talk a lot about bringing democracy to Cuba and other parts of the
world, especially for those who have suffered under the cruel fist of
Communist tyranny for decades. Yet for decades we have worked to shut
off their access to their very best hope for freedom, and that is to
experience it by conversing with people who are free, or at least were
free up until June 30, when once again we adopted another tyrannical
national policy toward Cuba.
Instead of bringing about positive change for the people of Cuba,
this decrepit policy has hurt ordinary Cubans. It has hurt their
families and has deprived ordinary Americans of the opportunity to
become ambassadors of freedom. The new restrictions that were put into
effect last month only cripple our ability to see change come to the
Cuban people.
We say we are trying to help the Cuban people, but by imposing even
stricter limits on how Cuban Americans can help their family members in
Cuba, these changes hurt not only the Cuban Government but ordinary
Cuban citizens who are struggling under that very dictatorship that we
try now to depose.
These new restrictions and the underlying policies are unreasonable
and fly in the face of what everyone knows is the best way to make
people hungry for change, and that is to show them the benefits of what
they are missing and the benefits of what they will gain by changing.
Is anyone surprised, then, that in 4 decades we have seen little
change in the Cuban political climate? How can we claim to support
families while our policies encourage the breakdown of family units by
limiting the support of Cuban Americans that can provide family members
while they struggle in Cuba? How can we claim to value our God-given
freedoms, while denying American citizens the right to move about the
world as they please? And how can we claim to want a free and
democratic Cuba while refusing the Cuban people the opportunity to see
freedom in action and at its best?
Our failed Cuban policies toward Cuba cannot continue. Making them
tougher only makes them worse. If we truly seek to end ruthless and
brutal human rights violations in Cuba while showing the Cuban people
the way toward social and economic freedom, we must begin by changing
our own policies of restriction and denial. I urge the support of this
amendment.
And let me just say in closing, Mr. Chairman, that I wonder, because
I have heard tonight about the iron fist, the restrictions, the
suppression, and government directed. Is that not what we are talking
about in our directions toward Americans and their want of travel to
Cuba? Is that not what we are talking about in our government
restricting the activities and relationships between families? Is that
not what we are talking about with our religious associations and the
lack of our ability to have our religious associations go to Cuba? Is
that not what we are talking about when we are afraid, for some reason,
to expose the Cuban people to another form of political thought?
I wonder from where that iron fist and that tyrannical hand comes
into play?
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I have the greatest respect for my
good friends, but as a naturalized American, as a political refugee
from an enslaved Communist regime, I would hope that my colleagues
would never compare this greatest Nation on Earth, the United States of
America, the beacon of hope and democracy for oppressed people
everywhere, to what is going on 90 miles from my constituency, the
beast of Fidel Castro, who enslaves his
[[Page H5313]]
people and who denies his people basic liberties.
Please do not insult my adopted country in that manner.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Feeney).
Mr. FEENEY. Mr. Chairman, it is an important night tonight, because I
find myself in between a fight with two sets of freedom fighters, two
groups that care deeply about freedom. But the suggestion made by the
last speaker, who is a dear friend of mine, that we are interrupting
relations between families, in my view, is a little bit like saying
that somehow the United States was responsible for a catastrophe
visited upon us by Hitler because we refused to give Anne Frank lunch
buckets before the Holocaust.
My colleagues, there is way too much at stake here to sit back and
say that this is a totalitarian regime that we are going to do business
with. I have freedom fighters, including the sponsor of this amendment,
who is a hero of mine, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake), who
believes deeply in limited government. He believes deeply in free
trade. He believes deeply in the things that make our country and free
nations great. But I have to say that the question before us tonight
is, are we going to accommodate, will we appease, will we compromise
with, will we do business with, will we facilitate, will we provide
basic resources to a dictator that has put his own people in jail,
under the knife in prison, who has basically undermined every single
basic liberty we have ever experienced?
Our own State Department has identified, as one of the sixth major
exporters of terrorism, the Cuban government. Are we going to recognize
that, or are we going to reward that and facilitate that? That is the
question here tonight. The question is what Lady Freedom would do here
tonight.
I have freedom fighters on both sides of this argument and people I
respect. But fundamentally if we send the message to Castro that he and
whoever replaces Castro can stay forever and punish freedom, throw 70
reporters in jail on an annual basis simply for reporting the truth, if
they will constantly undermine what is good about our free world, then
we have got to live with ourselves as the price comes due for allowing
freedom to be undermined.
It is true that this is a policy that for some 45 years has not
worked. The first 35 the Soviets supported them. With the last 10
years, we have had a chance to undermine Castro. Mr. Chairman, I ask my
colleagues to please oppose the amendment.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time remaining?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) has 5\1/2\
minutes remaining and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) has 8
minutes remaining.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Farr).
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time. I think we have to stop and listen and look at what is going on
here. What we are talking about is regulations that went into effect 7
days ago. These are new regulations. There was no oversight by
Congress. We are providing the opportunity here to give that oversight
and to do the checks and balances.
The regulations are anti-American because they only affect us. They
do not affect Cubans. We are the ones that cannot do this. Our
government is telling us that we cannot be compassionate Americans. We
cannot send seeds, cannot send clothing, cannot send fishing equipment,
cannot send soap to people in another country. And we are going to have
to have a police force that goes out and enforces that? That is not a
compassionate America.
We cannot be a country that says that we can leave no child behind
when we cannot even send hygiene products to this country. We cannot.
Americans cannot. We can send to every other kid in the world something
that we cannot send to Cuba. That is not leave no child behind.
What are we afraid of? What are we so afraid of that we have to make
these regulations so restrictive that we Americans just cannot send a
goodwill package to people? How are we going to have friendships? How
are we going to instruct about democracy? How are we going to talk
about this great country?
This country is turning into the ugly American, the really ugly
American by making these really dumb and anti-American restrictions;
and we in Congress should lift them by voting for this amendment.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Weldon).
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to
this amendment. We all know that Castro was kept alive for decades by
the Soviet regime, and they have collapsed. So how does he stay alive?
One of the things he is doing is he is making a lot of money from
people that are going back and forth and back and forth.
{time} 2130
There are Americans essentially vacationing down there, and to say,
You cannot send packages, you cannot go at all, I mean, these are gross
exaggerations.
This is a very well-thought-out policy of the President of the United
States, and we should support our President in this. And the Cuban
Americans in my district, it amazes me for people to get up and say the
Cuban Americans do not like this. The Cuban Americans in my district
like this. They think it is a very good thing to do, that Castro is
being helped by the previous policy and that this policy will be much,
much better for our foreign policy interests, which happen to be to
support freedom.
And I think this is a very poorly thought out amendment. Vote against
it. Support the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) in this.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Paul).
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support for this amendment. This, to
me, is a freedom issue, as the gentleman from Florida has indicated. I
think everyone in this body is concerned about freedom in Cuba, and we
should be, and we should do whatever we can to encourage it, but
obviously some believe you can encourage freedom by sanctions, which
has not worked very well, but it seems to boggle my mind that if we
restrain freedom here, that we help freedom there.
This is what we are doing. We are restraining the freedom of our
people to send a package, and of course not dealt with in the
amendment, but travel as well.
The founders of this country gave strong advice to us, and for 100
years or so we followed it. They said friendship and trade with
everyone who is willing, alliances with none; and that is pretty good
advice. But what have we done in recent years? We have a hodgepodge
when we deal with other countries.
Just think of what has happened recently. We took the gentleman from
Libya, the so-called gentleman Omar Qadhafi, who is now scheduled to
shoot four nurses and a doctor, and we have given him normal trade
sanctions, and we are going to subsidize trade with him. And here he
admits to having shot down one of our airplanes or blown up one of our
airplanes. He is a terrorist, but here we are dealing with him in that
way.
We have trade with China. Things have gone better with China, not
worse.
Where are the free traders? It really bothers me when I hear the free
traders who promote free trade in every other area except the freedom
of an American citizen to send a package to Cuba.
I do not believe you can enhance freedom in Cuba by limiting the
freedom of American citizens. We must be more open and more confident
that freedom of choice by American citizens is worth something to
defend; and I stand strongly for this amendment and I compliment the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) for bringing it to us.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Cunningham).
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment,
and I will tell you why. Ask the Cuban exiles if they support this
amendment. Every single one of them in my district says no. They know
what Castro represents. Ask Cuban exiles all over.
I want to be able to walk into a free Cuba with the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), with the gentlemen from Florida, the Diaz
brothers, and the millions of people that
[[Page H5314]]
have been exiled out of Cuba. What is helping the Cubans is to get rid
of Castro.
Mr. Chairman, this is also personal. Here sat the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson) tortured, tortured brutally by Castro
interrogators. They took a pistol and blew the head off of one of our
Americans that was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. Remember Elian
Gonzales? Remember them shooting down an American airplane that was
along their coast?
You know, I do not forget things. Look at the movie Hanoi Hilton. It
is not made up. I see people shaking their heads. A Castro torturer
stood and held a gun to an American prisoner of war and blew his head
off. Ask Sam Johnson. He was there. And it is appalling.
Now, there are American stakes. Some of my friends said, Well, Duke,
we are trying to open up agriculture trade. We represent agriculture
districts in the opening up of sanctions to Cuba. Sometimes things are
worth fighting for. Sometimes things are worth giving up.
Let us give up a little bit so that the Cuban people can be free and
that Castro dictator can be eliminated. God bless this country. To hell
with Castro.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time and for his leadership in sponsoring this very common-sense
amendment.
The point is very simple and clear. Not one dime, not one penny of
U.S. tax dollars should be spent to regulate how much soap and
toothpaste Cuban Americans can send to their loved ones. Very basic.
I know that many want to topple the Castro government. Regime change,
of course, has been central to United States foreign policy under the
Bush administration. I happen to believe, however, that we should end
the embargo, allow Americans the right to travel, which is their right,
and also allow families to embrace each other. Forty-five years of an
embargo against an Afro-Hispanic country 90 miles from our shores is
fundamentally wrong and immoral.
The United States has normal relations with China. Even the Cuban
dissidents believe that ending the embargo makes sense for that cause.
This amendment does not even do that. All it does is allow soap and
toothpaste and gift boxes to be sent to Cuban people. We should support
this modest amendment and stop punishing ordinary people because of a
backwards foreign policy.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart).
Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I just heard that the
dissidents in Cuba do not support the sanctions. That is just not
correct. As a matter of fact, yesterday, Mr. Antunes, a black Cuban
leader who has been in prison since he was 16 years old, imprisoned by
that white Spanish son, and grandchildren of Spanish people, Spanish
white people who have imprisoned mostly blacks, and again the blacks in
prison like Dr. Biscet, like Mr. Antunes, all support these sanctions.
Let me just tell Members who do not support the sanctions: Castro
himself does not support sanctions, he supports this amendment as a
matter of fact. But the primary reason we have heard today for this
amendment, and we have heard it time and time again, is that the Cuban
Americans are going to suffer. Those of us who represent the Cuban
Americans do not know. The Cuban Americans, you see, according to this
amendment, do not know what is right for them. No, those people, we
have heard that before, those people do not know what is right for
them. So, therefore, this amendment sponsored by people from Arizona
and Massachusetts, very far-away places, this amendment knows what is
best for that group of Hispanics and their families.
There are two words for what this amendment is, Mr. Chairman, two
words for an amendment that says those people, those Hispanics do not
know what is right for them, so this amendment has to tell them what is
right, two words, ``patronizing'' and ``racist''; you see, because the
Cuban American people do know, Mr. Chairman, what is right for
themselves and their families. The Cuban American people do know what
is the right thing to do, which is why they do not support this
amendment. They overwhelmingly support the President's smart, well-
thought-out, responsible measures.
Let us oppose this amendment that again tries to tell that group of
Hispanics what is right for them, what is right for Cuban Americans. We
who represent the Cuban Americans can tell you, they know what is right
for them and their families, and they will tell Members to vote ``no''
on this amendment.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, up until most recently, this has been an enlightening
discussion. I think it is unfortunate that those who seek to enhance
the freedom of individuals to decide whether or not they can send their
families services or goods, that is considered racist or that is
considered patronizing or condescending. Nothing can be further from
the truth. We are simply allowing freedom.
It would be the ultimate irony if we allow Fidel Castro, as William
F. Buckley said in a column today, it would be the ultimate irony if we
allow Fidel Castro to impinge on the rights of Americans.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I am somewhat surprised at some of the supporters of
this amendment and the way that they are supporting the amendment, as I
will. They actually sound like this is on the level. They actually
debate this like this is for real.
Let me refresh Members' memories, those who support my position in
favor of the Flake amendment on how this happened. A group of Florida
legislators wrote the White House and said, if you do not tighten up on
Cuba, you are going to lose votes in Florida. That is what happened.
That is the truth. So I am surprised that some of my colleagues would
actually debate this as if this was real and on the level. This is not
on the level.
If you arrived from the moon tomorrow and did not know this was an
election year and Florida was in play, how would you have a hint that
it was an election year and Florida was in play? Tighten up on Cuba to
make Florida not in play, but fall into one column. That is why we
bring up Elian Gonzalez, who is playing soccer in Cuba minding his own
business. That is why we have decided that Castro stands at the gate
and every single dollar and every single tampon and every single
Kleenex that goes in Cuba he grabs for himself, and that is why he is
the richest guy in the hemisphere, except there is no sign that he is
going anywhere and he is nearing 80, so I do not know when he is going
to spend all of this money he accumulated.
In 1950, my family came from Puerto Rico. We were not coming from a
foreign country, but we felt like we were, and in some cases, we were
treated like we were. What do I remember the most? I remember the cold
of New York. That was new to me. I arrived in short pants. My father
dressed us for Puerto Rico and not for New York.
And I remember my father made $40 a week, and every single Friday
upon being paid, he ran to the post office and bought a green money
order that he sent back to the folks that we left behind.
So I grew up not understanding a policy that says, to bring about
political change, you bring pain to the people you left behind. I do
not understand that. That is not right and not correct.
Now, I realize there are rules in the House about how one deals with
other Members, and I am one of the most respectful Members when it
comes to that, but it was nice to see the majority leader come to the
floor and denounce this policy when he is always a leader on trade with
China. So whenever he denounces policies like this towards Cuba, I try
to see if he is crossing his fingers behind his back since he is such a
strong supporter of trading with China.
What are we saying here, that to bring down a government you will
deny a family member the ability to visit but once every 3 years. What
are we saying, that you are so intent on bringing down a government
that has lasted,
[[Page H5315]]
for whatever reason, for whatever reason, for over 40 years, because
you will not allow a cousin toothpaste? Is that who we are as a people?
Is that what we believe in?
The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) is like a brother to me, one
of the most humane Members in this Congress, and I know the role he has
to play on this amendment, just like he understands the role I play on
other amendments. But he cannot really believe we are hurting people in
the Government of Cuba by denying toothpaste to people in Cuba. That is
not what we are doing.
Mr. Chairman, what we are doing is looking for votes. And you know
something? It might work. But there are hollow victories, and this may
be one of those. This may be one of those victories where you say,
Sure, I won, but the people lost, and I was supposed to be representing
the people.
{time} 2145
And so in memory of my father, remembering that $10, $5 check that he
sent back every week to help those who stayed behind, in respect to the
Dominicans and so many people in my district and Mexican Americans who
send money back every day, in respect for all of those folks and for
what they stand for, I cannot be part of this policy. The only change
now is that I am no longer alone here. There was a time when the Ron
Dellums and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and I were totally
alone. Now I am glad to say that all those ideas are now Republican
ideas, and I welcome that. I love these Republican amendments that try
to deal with Cuba in any way.
But, Mr. Chairman, we cannot continue down this route. We are not
going anywhere. We are just making enemies of everybody that we can
find in Cuba, and that is not the way to do it.
And one last point. Yes, I have seen TV, Spanish radio interviews
with dissidents in Cuba who are saying if we want to help them do not
do this, that we are just alienating them. And there is one good sign.
And it is the hope; it is the future. A significant number in Florida
of Cuban-Americans are saying this is wrong. This is not the way to
win. This is not the way to help me. Let me talk to my cousin. Let me
visit my grandmother. Let me close to the family I left behind because
I am in this country, they are not, and I do not want them to miss out
on some of the things I have.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I sometimes think the institution that we serve here is so
economically driven that we worship at the alter of trade. We are
becoming an economic institution. I remember the days of Ronald Reagan
where we were more concerned about freedom than anything else.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) is not here. He said things are
better in China. Things are not better in China. I opposed MFN for
China. Things are worse in China. There are 11 Catholic bishops in jail
in China. They have just arrested the person who was identified with
regard to SARS. They are persecuting the Tibetans, the Muslims, the
evangelicals. Things are worse in China today with MFN and with trade
than they have been for a long time.
Secondly, I am really kind of sorry that we are really divided. We
should be together, and I think things like this send messages that are
not necessarily positive. I wish there had been more discussion, quite
frankly, on both sides about those who are being persecuted and those
who have been arrested and those who are in jail. Have any Members read
the book, and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) has met with
him, and I have met with him once, by Armando Valladares? The
persecution and the suffering that has gone on. I have heard almost no
one here tonight say that if Castro were to open up the prisons and the
jails and release the people, I may change my position. But we should
be asking Castro to do something, and we never do that. Why does Castro
not open up the prison doors and allow peaceful people out? Why does
Castro not allow the journalists to write whatever they want? Why does
he not do that? So there should be more discussion on this and less
interest in economic interests on both sides and more on human rights
and religious freedom.
Lastly, Ronald Reagan took away MFN from Rumania when all the
business interests and the Congress was opposed to it. Ronald Reagan
was the one who stood up with regard to Communism. The policy in
Castro's Cuba has not been a total failure. They are no longer
exporting their political situation around the world.
In the interests of those who are suffering, we should be together;
and I would hope that whatever amendment would be offered, and it is
too late to amend this amendment, so whatever amendment would be
offered would also carry the stipulation that those who are in prison
for what they believe in, for religious freedom and persecution, as we
do whatever the Flake amendment does, that the prison jails are opened
and that people be released.
With that I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona [Mr.
Flake] for the time.
I rise to support the Flake amendment to prohibit the use of funds in
this bill to enforce the Commerce Department's recently-announced anti-
family restrictions on sending gifts to Cuba.
These restrictions are part of an extensive set of new Bush
administration rules that punish Cuban-Americans who have families in
Cuba. These regulations include limiting family visits to Cuba by
Cuban-Americans to once every three years and further restricting the
ability of Cuban-Americans to send money to their families in Cuba.
The Commerce Department's new regulations would make it illegal for
Cuban-Americans to send clothing, seeds, soap, personal hygiene
products and veterinary medicines to their families in Cuba. Other
gifts would be limited to one gift parcel per month per household in
Cuba. Gifts could be sent to parents and children, but not to aunts,
uncles, nieces, nephews or cousins.
What conceivable rationale could there be for this cruel, misguided
assault on Cuban-American families? Is there anyone who truly believes
that we are achieving anything productive by keeping Cuban-Americans
from helping their family members who remain in Cuba? How dare this
administration tell American citizens they can't send clothes, toilet
paper or toothpaste to the families they love!
I urge my colleagues to protect the right of Cuban-Americans to
assist their families. Let's help these families, not punish them.
Support the Flake amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. FLAKE. 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 Arizona (Mr. Flake) will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Paul
Mr. PAUL. 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 Mr. Paul:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), add the
following:
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 801. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to pay any United States contribution to the United
Nations or any affiliated agency of the United Nations.
The CHAIRMAN. Points of order are reserved.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Paul) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This is an amendment that I have offered several times in the past,
and it is very simple. It says none of the funds made available in this
act may be used to pay any United States contribution to the United
Nations or any affiliated agency of the United Nations. So very simply,
it would defund the United Nations.
The United Nations and the international organizations are now
receiving more than $3 billion; so there would be some savings there.
But that is not the whole reason why I bring this up. My concern, of
course, is for national
[[Page H5316]]
sovereignty, and I think that we have drifted a long way from the time
when this Congress and the President decided on foreign policy to the
point now where we are more or less driven by the United Nations. The
United Nations has not too long ago set up an international criminal
court that we are trying to avoid jurisdiction on our people but
nevertheless it hangs out there as a threat to our military. We now pay
a larger sum to the United Nations than anybody else. For the
administrative part, it is 22 percent, and for the peacekeeping part,
it is 27 percent. So essentially we are paying a quarter of the U.N.
dues; and, of course, we do not get 25 percent of the vote.
In recent months, we have all become aware of the scandal involving
the United Nations, the Food for Oil program, and there is $10 billion
missing. And if there was ever a time that we ought to send a message
that we do not condone this type of activity, it is now. There is an
investigation going on led by Paul Volcker, but he has no subpoena
power. The United Nations and the personnel have no intention so far of
cooperating. The odds of our really finding out where this $10 billion
went are really quite slim.
But the whole process is wrong. So over the years I would say not
only the $10 billion that was taken but the many tens of billions, if
not hundreds of billions, of dollars that we have pumped into these
international organizations have essentially been money down a hole.
But the bigger issue, of course, is the United Nations making
decisions for us. We do now capitulate to the WTO. I am a free trader.
I have talked this evening about free trade, true free trade. But the
WTO is an organization that, because we are a member, we obediently
come and change our tax law to conform with what the WTO tells us to
do. We should not be very pleased with that type of an organization
that does not really even defend free trade. And we have the IMF and
the World Bank, and all it is is a big payment and a big burden for the
American taxpayer.
Shortly after the United Nations was established, one of the worst
acts occurred early on, and that was that our President took us to war
in Korea. And it is ongoing. There is a U.N. war that has been going
on, and we have had troops in the United Nations there for over 50
years, and that is quite a bit different than if war would be declared
by the Congress and we would fight and win wars.
Even the current war that we are having today, it is not a war, but
it is a war when it is necessary to call it a war; but we did not
declare a war against the Iraqis, and yet in 1991 we went to war under
a U.N. resolution. It was said at that time we did not even need a
congressional resolution. We could just go because it was under U.N.
orders. Even this current time it confuses us quite a bit because when
we voted on going again into battle in Iraq, the United Nation was
mentioned 21 times to give this authority, but still it was not a
declaration of war.
But at the same time that we use the United Nations to do something
to enforce U.N. resolutions, then we turn around and we defy the United
Nations. They might ask for a resolution of support. We do not get it,
but we do it anyway, which does not do a whole lot to build friendship
around the world.
So I see this as totally chaotic, not in our interests. It exposes
our men and our women to battle in undeclared wars that are generally
not won. Ever since World War II, since wars have not been declared and
they have been fought essentially under United Nations, wars have not
been won, a lot of men and women are killed, and the resolution is
never complete.
So my argument is it is time to send a message to those who are
questioning whether or not we are too unfriendly to the United Nations,
but at least we ought to assume that there should be a responsibility
here for us to have the prerogatives of making these decisions
ourselves and not by an international body.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) has
expired.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in strong opposition to the gentleman's amendment. As
imperfect as the U.N. is, there is no other forum which exists to
further the U.S. goals. The Security Council's unanimous resolution on
Iraq on June 8 was critical to a U.S. priority and to the Bush
administration, their effort with regard to bringing some sort of
resolution to the issue in Darfur in Sudan, the peacekeeping effort to
stop the genocide in Liberia and in Sierra Leone and other places. So
the U.S. maintains a key factor here. So I think there are so many
arguments that in the interest of time I would hope the amendment would
be overwhelmingly defeated.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. PAUL. 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 Texas (Mr. Paul) will be
postponed.
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: the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake), the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner), the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley), amendment No. 13 offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), amendment No. 9 offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), amendment No. 6 offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), amendment No. 10 offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).
The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Flake
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) 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 vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 221,
noes 194, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 329]
AYES--221
Abercrombie
Alexander
Allen
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bartlett (MD)
Bass
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boehlert
Bono
Boozman
Boswell
Boucher
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Camp
Capps
Capuano
Carson (OK)
Case
Castle
Clay
Clyburn
Coble
Cooper
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cubin
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeMint
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Emerson
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gilchrest
Gonzalez
Gordon
Graves
Green (TX)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutknecht
Harman
Herseth
Hill
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Hooley (OR)
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kleczka
Kolbe
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
McHugh
McNulty
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Ney
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Otter
Owens
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Rehberg
[[Page H5317]]
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Woolsey
Wynn
NOES--194
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Andrews
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Beauprez
Berkley
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Chabot
Chocola
Cole
Cox
Crane
Crenshaw
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (AL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Engel
Feeney
Ferguson
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gephardt
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Granger
Green (WI)
Gutierrez
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
John
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McCotter
McCrery
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
Menendez
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Ose
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pearce
Pence
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Regula
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Royce
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schrock
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Wu
NOT VOTING--18
Blumenauer
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Chandler
Collins
Conyers
Deutsch
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Honda
Jones (OH)
LaHood
Matsui
Meek (FL)
Tauzin
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there are 2
minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 2221
Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico, Mr. TANCREDO, and Mr. HOEKSTRA changed
their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. FROST and Mr. HOEFFEL changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
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 206,
noes 212, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 330]
AYES--206
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bartlett (MD)
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bilirakis
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Boehlert
Boswell
Boucher
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burns
Burr
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carson (OK)
Case
Chabot
Chandler
Chocola
Coble
Costello
Davis (FL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Doggett
Doyle
Dunn
Edwards
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Foley
Ford
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gingrey
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Herseth
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Hooley (OR)
Hulshof
Inslee
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Jones (NC)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Manzullo
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Nadler
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Obey
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Owens
Pascrell
Paul
Peterson (MN)
Pickering
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Quinn
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Rehberg
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Ross
Rothman
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Saxton
Schiff
Scott (VA)
Sessions
Shaw
Shays
Shimkus
Simmons
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Taylor (MS)
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Turner (OH)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Waters
Watt
Weiner
Weldon (PA)
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Woolsey
Wu
NOES--212
Akin
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boyd
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Castle
Clay
Clyburn
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Dooley (CA)
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English
Everett
Flake
Forbes
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gephardt
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Grijalva
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hayes
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hill
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Kennedy (MN)
Kilpatrick
King (IA)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas (OK)
Maloney
McCrery
McInnis
McKeon
Menendez
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Napolitano
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Oberstar
Olver
Oxley
Pallone
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Pombo
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Regula
Rodriguez
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roybal-Allard
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schrock
Scott (GA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shadegg
Sherman
Sherwood
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (TX)
Solis
Spratt
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Towns
Turner (TX)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walsh
Wamp
Watson
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Wynn
NOT VOTING--15
Blumenauer
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Collins
Deutsch
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Honda
Jones (OH)
LaHood
Matsui
Meek (FL)
Tauzin
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there are 2
minutes remaining in this vote.
[[Page H5318]]
{time} 2237
Messrs. MARKEY, ABERCROMBIE, BURNS, DICKS, BROWN of Ohio and Ms.
MAJETTE changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia and Messrs. FORBES, LEWIS of Georgia,
MICA and NEY changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Hefley
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment 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 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 71,
noes 342, not voting 20, as follows:
[Roll No. 331]
AYES--71
Baird
Baker
Bartlett (MD)
Boozman
Bradley (NH)
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cox
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal (GA)
DeMint
Duncan
Everett
Flake
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Gillmor
Graves
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hostettler
Houghton
Hunter
Isakson
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
King (IA)
Kingston
Manzullo
Marshall
McInnis
McKeon
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Norwood
Otter
Paul
Pence
Petri
Ramstad
Reynolds
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Skelton
Smith (MI)
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Taylor (MS)
Terry
Thornberry
Toomey
Vitter
Weldon (PA)
Wilson (SC)
NOES--342
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Bachus
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carson (OK)
Carter
Case
Castle
Chandler
Clay
Clyburn
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
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
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gephardt
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gingrey
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Green (TX)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Hall
Harman
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Herseth
Hill
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hyde
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Kleczka
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
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)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
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
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reyes
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott (GA)
Serrano
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sweeney
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (NC)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--20
Aderholt
Akin
Blumenauer
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Collins
Deutsch
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Honda
Jones (OH)
LaHood
Matsui
Meek (FL)
Scott (VA)
Tauzin
Thomas
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised that 2 minutes
remain in this vote.
{time} 2243
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Kucinich
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) 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 232,
noes 186, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 332]
AYES--232
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Becerra
Bell
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boehlert
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carson (OK)
Case
Chandler
Clay
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Edwards
Emanuel
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Ford
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gephardt
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green (TX)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hart
Herseth
Hill
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murphy
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Ney
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
[[Page H5319]]
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Simmons
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (PA)
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOES--186
Akin
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bereuter
Biggert
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole
Cox
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Emerson
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Foley
Forbes
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Goss
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Latham
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas (OK)
McCrery
McInnis
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Musgrave
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pombo
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Sherwood
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Stenholm
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Upton
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
NOT VOTING--15
Blumenauer
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Collins
Deutsch
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Honda
Jones (OH)
LaHood
Matsui
Meek (FL)
Tauzin
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there are 2
minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 2251
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Paul
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes
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 is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 135,
noes 283, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 333]
AYES--135
Aderholt
Akin
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Boozman
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Cannon
Cantor
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cox
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Jo Ann
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Duncan
Emerson
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Gibbons
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Graves
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McCotter
McCrery
McInnis
McIntyre
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Ney
Norwood
Otter
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Taylor (MS)
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Vitter
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
NOES--283
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blunt
Boehlert
Bono
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Calvert
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carson (OK)
Carter
Case
Castle
Chandler
Clay
Clyburn
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Diaz-Balart, L.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Foley
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Gephardt
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Green (TX)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall
Harman
Harris
Hefley
Herseth
Hill
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Holden
Holt
Hooley (OR)
Houghton
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kirk
Kleczka
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Northup
Nunes
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Rodriguez
Rogers (KY)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Simmons
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sweeney
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--15
Blumenauer
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Collins
Deutsch
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Honda
Jones (OH)
LaHood
Matsui
Meek (FL)
Tauzin
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there are 2
minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 2258
Mr. NEY changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
[[Page H5320]]
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Farr
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) 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 is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 148,
noes 268, not voting 17, as follows:
[Roll No. 334]
AYES--148
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baird
Baldwin
Bartlett (MD)
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boehlert
Bono
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Capuano
Case
Clay
Conyers
Crowley
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Engel
Eshoo
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Frank (MA)
Garrett (NJ)
Gephardt
Gilchrest
Gonzalez
Graves
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Holt
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren
Lowey
Majette
Maloney
Markey
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Meehan
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller, George
Moran (VA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Otter
Owens
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Porter
Price (NC)
Rangel
Rodriguez
Rohrabacher
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Simmons
Simpson
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Solis
Stark
Strickland
Tancredo
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wynn
NOES--268
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Baca
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Bereuter
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Boozman
Boswell
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carson (OK)
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chandler
Chocola
Clyburn
Coble
Cole
Cooper
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (AL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Emerson
English
Etheridge
Everett
Feeney
Ferguson
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth
Hill
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jenkins
John
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kildee
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Lampson
Langevin
Latham
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Manzullo
Marshall
Matheson
McCotter
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Oxley
Pallone
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sandlin
Saxton
Schrock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Skelton
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Souder
Spratt
Stearns
Stenholm
Stupak
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tanner
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Upton
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Wu
NOT VOTING--17
Blumenauer
Boucher
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Collins
Deutsch
Hall
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Honda
Jones (OH)
LaHood
Matsui
Meek (FL)
Tauzin
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in this
vote.
{time} 2305
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Mr. GRAVES. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 334 I inadvertently voted
``yes.'' I intended to vote ``no.''
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Paul
The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN. 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 83,
noes 335, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 335]
AYES--83
Akin
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Bonner
Boozman
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Cannon
Cantor
Coble
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis, Jo Ann
DeLay
Doolittle
Duncan
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Foley
Forbes
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Gibbons
Gingrey
Goode
Harris
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Istook
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kingston
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
McCotter
McInnis
Miller (FL)
Moran (KS)
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Ney
Norwood
Otter
Paul
Peterson (MN)
Platts
Pombo
Putnam
Radanovich
Rehberg
Renzi
Rogers (AL)
Rohrabacher
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Taylor (MS)
Tiberi
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
NOES--335
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Burns
Burr
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carson (OK)
Carter
Case
Castle
Chabot
Chandler
Chocola
Clay
Clyburn
Cole
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Dreier
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Ford
Fossella
Frank (MA)
[[Page H5321]]
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Gephardt
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall
Harman
Hart
Hensarling
Herseth
Hill
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley (OR)
Houghton
Hoyer
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kirk
Kleczka
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murphy
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Northup
Nunes
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Owens
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Simmons
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sweeney
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--15
Blumenauer
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Collins
Deutsch
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Honda
Jones (OH)
LaHood
Matsui
Meek (FL)
Tauzin
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Announcement by the Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in this
vote.
{time} 2312
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
{time} 2313
Amendment Offered by Ms. Millender-McDonald
Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Ms. Millender-McDonald:
Page 92, line 16, after the dollar amount insert the
following: ``(increased by $1,500,000)''.
Page 93, line 8, after the dollar amount insert the
following: ``(reduced by $1,500,000)''.
The CHAIRMAN. Points of order are reserved.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Millender-McDonald) and a Member opposed will each
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-
McDonald).
Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
My amendment would provide increased funding for the Small Business
Administration's Women's Business Centers Program. This amendment would
provide for an additional $1.5 million in funding for the Women's
Business Centers Program that is currently funded at the level of $12
million, which is included in the committee's version of the report,
bringing this total level of program funding to $13.5 million.
The United States Small Business Administration network of Women's
Business Centers provide a wide range of services to women business
owners at all levels of business development through grant funding to
private, nonprofit economic development organizations. These centers
are located in 46 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands, and provide financial and
general business management and marketing assistance, as well as long-
term training and counseling, to existing and potential women business
owners, many of whom are socially and economically disadvantaged.
Many centers make a special effort to assist women on welfare become
self-sufficient and administer programs and workshops in business
ownership, other employment or a combination of the two. All of the
centers provide individual counseling and access to the SBA's programs
and services.
I have always been a strong supporter of women-owned small businesses
and have led efforts in past Congresses to increase authorized funding
levels for the WBC programs.
Mr. Chairman, women-owned businesses are a dynamic and thriving force
in the U.S. economy. Business ownership has been one of the most
effective means of improving women's economic well-being. Female
participation in business ownership at all levels is climbing. Women
now own 40 percent of all small businesses and are growing at twice the
rate of all other businesses. America's 9.1 million women business
owners employ 2.75 million people and contribute $3.6 trillion to the
economy.
Additional funding for this program will go a long way to ensuring
that both existing and new centers will have the funding to help women
entrepreneurs with additional training and technology assistance,
especially minority women and start-up businesses.
I would like to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their
support and guidance as I have introduced this amendment, and I ask all
of my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, we accept the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Burgess
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Burgess:
Page 108, after line 22, insert the following (and make
such technical and conforming changes as may be appropriate):
TITLE VIII--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS
SEC. 801. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING THE FEDERAL TRADE
COMMISSION.
It is the sense of the Congress that the Federal Trade
Commission should provide to Independent Physician
Associations guidance on contracting with health plans, on
practice business arrangements, and on member communications,
and a reasonable time for such Associations to ameliorate
certain arrangements that could lead to Federal Trade
Commission enforcement of antitrust laws against any such
Association that has engaged in alleged anticompetitive
activities.
The CHAIRMAN. Points of order are reserved.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Burgess) and a Member opposed will each control 5 minutes.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is reserved.
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this is an extremely important issue to physicians and
patients around the country.
Over the past few years, the Federal Trade Commission has been
targeting groups of doctors known as Independent Physician
Associations, alleging anticompetitive business activities. These
groups, IPAs, are integrated groups of physicians that can provide a
wide array of medical services to patients in their community.
[[Page H5322]]
While it is important that the Federal Trade Commission enforce the
antitrust laws when organizations engage in anticompetitive behavior,
they must understand that the recent complaints brought against IPAs
could and do disrupt patient care. This amendment would ask that the
Federal Trade Commission keep in mind and provide Independent Physician
Associations with guidance and a time to ameliorate any arrangement
that could violate the law before the FTC pursues enforcement action.
The fact is, Mr. Chairman, if you are an Independent Physician
Association, in the eyes of the FTC, you are by definition a
conspirator or in the process of conspiring. In fact, the FTC seems to
pursue a mission statement that you are guilty unless you happen to be
able to prove your innocence, and these actions are extremely expensive
to fight.
My concern is not so much the innocence or guilt of the
organizations, but the impact that the lack of guidance from the
Federal Trade Commission can have on the provider community and
patients who receive a high quality of care from IPAs. IPAs
consistently rate high in customer satisfaction and positive health
outcomes.
One such organization in north Texas, the North Texas Specialty
Physicians, provides excellent health care. With over 600 doctors, they
serve around 11,000 patients a day. They are the only Medicare risk
provider in north Texas. This is important because Medicare risk is the
old Medicare+Choice. Here is the group that took that Medicare HMO and
made it work, made it work for the doctors and made it work for the
patients; and as a consequence, they are punished for their success.
They accept new Medicare enrollees when many other networks in the
area do not. Most emergency calls are responded to by their physicians.
Their access ratings are very high. At a time when most doctors will
not take new Medicaid clients, they are one of the few networks that
take new Medicaid enrollees every day.
Federal agencies should not be punishing businesses when their only
transgression is success. By having the FTC give IPAs basic guidance on
how they contract with health plans and how they communicate with other
IPA members and established business relationships, patient care in the
community will not suffer. That should be our concern.
It is important for the FTC to enforce the law. All this amendment
asks is that a reasonable standard be applied and care be exercised
when patient care could be disrupted.
What brought this to my attention was this particular group which has
been charged by the FTC with an action. This group has spent $1 million
over the last year and a half, defending itself against what it
believes are unfair allegations, and probably the FTC has spent,
conservatively, three times that amount, and these are dollars we can
scarcely afford out of this appropriation. Groups that are
procompetitive and manage risk are being punished.
Mr. Chairman, I plan to withdraw my amendment, but I hope to work
with the chairman in the future to bring more balance to this
situation.
Mr. Chairman, at this time I withdraw my amendment.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Wolf
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Wolf:
At the end of title VI, insert the following:
Sec. 627. It is the sense of the Congress that the
Secretary of State, at the most immediate opportunity,
should--
(1) make a determination as to whether recent events in the
Darfur region of Sudan constitute genocide as defined in the
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide; and
(2) support the investigation and prosecution of war crimes
and crimes against humanity committed in the Darfur region of
Sudan.
The CHAIRMAN. Points of order are reserved.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and a Member opposed will each control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, the amendment is very simple and concerns
recent events in the Darfur region of Sudan, which I visited last week.
I offer the amendment on behalf of myself and the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Payne).
The amendment asks the Secretary of State to support the
investigations of war crimes or crimes against humanity in Darfur, and
I have done this in consultation with my colleague on the other side,
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano).
Senator Brownback and I just returned from spending 3 days and 2
nights in Darfur, Sudan. During our trip we visited five refugee camps:
Abu Shouk; Tawilah; Krinding; Sisi and Morney--all sprawling tent
cities jam-packed with thousands of displaced families and fast
becoming breeding grounds for disease and sickness. We drove past
dozens of pillaged villages and walked through what was left of four
burned to the ground. We heard countless stories about rape, murder and
plunder.
We talked to rape victims. We saw the scars on men who had been shot.
We watched mothers cradle their sick and dying babies, hoping against
all odds that their children would survive. We saw armed Janjaweed
waiting to prey on innocent victims along the perimeter of refugee
camps.
We saw Janjaweed--who are carrying out these attacks--sitting astride
camels and horses just a short distance from where young and old have
sought what they had hoped would be a safe harbor.
The same stories were repeated at every camp we visited. The raids
would happen early in the morning. First comes the low rumble of a
Soviet-made Antonov plane to bomb the village. Next come helicopter
gunships to strafe the village with the huge machine guns mounted on
each side. Sometimes the helicopters would land and unload supplies for
the Janjaweed. They would then be reloaded with booty confiscated from
a village. One man told us he saw cows being loaded onto one
helicopter. The Janjaweed, some clad in military uniforms, would come
galloping in on horseback and camels to finish the job of killing,
raping, stealing and plundering.
Walking through the burned out villages we could tell the people
living there had little or not time to react. They left everything they
owned--lanterns, cookware, water jugs, pottery, plows--and ran for
their lives. There was no time to stop and bury their dead. The
Janjaweed made certain that there would be nothing left for the
villagers to come home to. Huts were torched. Donkeys, goats and cows
were stolen, slaughtered. Grain containers destroyed. In one village we
saw where the Janjaweed even burned the mosque.
ethnic cleansing
What is happening in Darfur is rooted in ethnic cleansing. Religion
has nothing to do with what unfolded over the last year. It was clear
that only villages inhabited by black African Muslims were being
targeted. Arab villages sitting just next to African ones miles from
the nearest towns have been left unscathed.
While government officials are adamant in saying there is no
connection between the Government of Sudan and the Janjaweed, the
militiamen we saw did not look like skilled pilots who could fly planes
or helicopters.
We also were told the Janjaweed are well armed and well
supplied. They have satellite phones, an astonishing fact considering
most people in the far western provinces of Darfur have probably never
even seen or walked on a paved road.
The impunity under which the Janjaweed operate was most telling as we
approached the airport in Geneina on our last day in the region for our
flight back to Khartoum. In plain sight was an encampment of Janjaweed
within shouting distance of a contingent of Government of Sudan
regulars. No more than 200 yards separated the two groups. Sitting on
the tarmac were two helicopter gunships and a Russian-made Antonov
plane.
The situation in Darfur is being described as the worst humanitarian
crisis in the world today. We agree. But sadly things could get worse.
Some say that even under the best of circumstances, as many as 300,000
Darfuris forced from their homes are expected to die from malnutrition
and diarrhea or diseases such as malaria and cholera in the coming
months.
The impending rainy season presents its own set of problems, making
roads impassable for food deliveries and the likelihood of disease
increasing dramatically with the heavy rains.
difficult life in idp camps
Abu Shouk was the first of five IDP (Internally Displace People)
camps we visited. More than 40,000 people live in this sprawling tent
city. Families arriving at the camps--almost all
[[Page H5323]]
after walking for days in the hot sun from their now abandon villages--
are only given a tarp, a water jug, cookware and a small amount of
grain.
At Mornay, the largest of the IDP camps in Darfur with more than
70,000 inhabitants, it was hard not to step in either human or animal
feces as we walked. In a few weeks, when the heavy rains begin,
excrement will flow across the entire camp. Mortality from diarrhea,
which we were told represents one-third of the deaths in the camps,
will only increase.
To their credit, all the non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that
have been allowed to operate in Darfur have done--and continue to do--a
tremendous job under extremely trying circumstances.
Rapes, we were told, happen almost daily to the women who venture
outside the confines of the camps in search of firewood and straw. They
leave very early in the morning, hoping to evade their tormentors
before they awake. With the camps swelling in size and nearby resources
dwindling, they often walk several miles. The farther the women go from
the camp, the greater the risk of being attacked by the Janjaweed.
As we approached Mornay, we saw a number of Janjaweed resting with
their camels and horses along the perimeter of the camp, easily within
walking distance. In one camp we heard the horrific story of four young
girls--two of whom were sisters--who had been raped just days before we
arrived. They had left the camp to collect straw to feed the family's
donkey when they were attacked. They said their attackers told them
they were slaves and that their skin was too dark. As they were being
raped, they said the Janjaweed told them they were hoping to make more
lighter-skinned babies. We were told that some of the rape victims were
being branded on their back and arms by the Janjaweed, permanently
labeling the women.
We also received a letter during our trip from a group of women who
were raped. To protect them from further attacks, we purposely do not
mention where they are from or list their names. The translation is
heartbreaking:
We are forty-four raped women. As a result of that
savagery, some of us became pregnant, some have aborted, some
took out their wombs and some are still receiving medical
treatment.
Hereunder, we list the names of the raped women and state
that we have high hopes in you and the international
community to stand by us and not to forsake us to this
tyrannical, brutal and racist regime, which wants to
eliminate us racially, bearing in mind that 90 percent of our
sisters at (. . .) are widows.
These rape victims have nowhere to turn. Even if they report the
attacks to the police, they know nothing will happen. The police, the
military and the Janjaweed all appear to be acting in coordination.
dire situation is man-made
The situation in Darfur is dire, and from what we could see, it is
entirely man-made. These people who had managed to survive even the
severest droughts and famines during the course of their long history
are now in mortal danger of being wiped out simply because of the
darker shade of their skin color.
Over the course of 3 days, we saw the worst of man's inhumanity to
man, but we also saw the best of what it means to be human: mothers
waiting patiently for hours in the hot sun so that they could try to
save their babies; NGO aid workers and volunteer doctors feeding and
caring for the sick and the dying; and the courage and bravery of men,
women and children eager to talk to us so that we would know their
story.
The world made a promise in 1994 to never again allow the systematic
destruction of a people or race. ``Never again''--words said, too,
after the Holocaust.
In Darfur, the international community has a chance to stop history
from repeating itself. It also has a chance to end this nightmare for
those who have found a way to survive. If the international community
fails to act, the next cycle of this crisis will begin. The destiny
facing the people of Darfur will be death from hunger or disease.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired.
The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
The amendment was agreed to.
{time} 2320
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Gingrey) having assumed the chair, Mr. Hastings of Washington, 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.
4754) making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice,
and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes, had come to no
resolution thereon.
____________________