[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 88 (Tuesday, June 28, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H5302-H5355]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 341 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. 3057.

                              {time}  1638


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 3057) making appropriations for foreign operations, 
export financing, and related programs for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2006, and for other purposes, with Mr. Thornberry in the 
chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) had 
been disposed of and the bill was open for amendment from page 6, line 
20, through page 12, line 9.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of today, no further amendment to 
the bill may be offered except:
  Pro forma amendments offered at any point in the reading by the 
chairman or ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations 
or their designees for the purpose of debate;
  the amendment printed in the Record and numbered 4;
  the amendment printed in the Record and numbered 6, which shall be 
debatable for 60 minutes;
  an amendment by Mr. Sanders regarding Export-Import Bank loans for 
nuclear power plants in China, which shall be debatable for 30 minutes;
  an amendment by Ms. Lee regarding excess property transfers to Haiti, 
which shall be debatable for 20 minutes;
  an amendment by Ms. Lee regarding the U.S. fund to fight AIDS, 
tuberculosis, and malaria;
  an amendment by Mr. Schiff regarding funding for the Human Rights and 
Democracy Fund;
  an amendment by Mr. King of Iowa regarding funding for the Global 
HIV/AIDS Initiative;
  an amendment by Mr. Beauprez regarding assistance to countries that 
refuse to extradite certain individuals;
  an amendment by Mr. Deal of Georgia regarding assistance to countries 
that refuse to extradite certain individuals;
  an amendment by Mr. Bonilla regarding an Inspector General at the 
Export-Import Bank;
  an amendment by Mr. Weiner or Mr. Ferguson regarding limiting funds 
for Saudi Arabia;
  an amendment by Mr. Bradley of New Hampshire regarding limiting funds 
for Romania;
  an amendment by Mr. Otter regarding assistance to the Palestinian 
Authority;
  an amendment by Ms. Millender-McDonald regarding funding for 
pediatric HIV/AIDS centers;
  an amendment by Mr. Simpson regarding Export-Import Bank loans to 
China;
  an amendment by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey regarding Federal employee 
participation in overseas conferences;
  an amendment by Ms. Waters regarding sense of Congress on Haiti 
elections;
  an amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding employment of 
minors in the military of other countries;
  an amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding funding for 
Sudanese refugees in Chad;
  an amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding funding for water 
security improvements in Sub-Saharan Africa;
  an amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding funding for 
children in developing nations;
  an amendment by Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California regarding IMET 
funding for Vietnam;
  an amendment by Mr. Hefley regarding an across-the-board cut;

[[Page H5303]]

  an amendment by Mr. Inslee regarding renewable energy;
  an amendment by Mr. Capuano regarding Darfur;
  and an amendment by Mr. Kolbe regarding funding levels.
  Each such amendment may be offered only by the Member named in the 
request or a designee, or by the Member who caused it to be printed in 
the Record or a designee, shall be considered as read, shall not be 
subject to amendment except that the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Appropriations and the Subcommittee on 
Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs each may 
offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of debate; and shall not 
be subject to a demand for division of the question.
  Except as otherwise specified, each amendment shall be debatable for 
10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent.


                      Amendment Offered by Ms. Lee

  Ms. LEE. 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. Lee:
       Page 12, after line 9, insert the following:
       In addition to the amount provided in the preceding 
     paragraph for a United States contribution to the Global Fund 
     to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, $600,000,000 for 
     such purpose, to remain available until September 30, 2007: 
     Provided, That such amount is designated as an emergency 
     requirement pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th 
     Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal 
     year 2006.

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) and a Member opposed will each 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to first start by thanking the chairman, the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), and our ranking member of the 
Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related 
Programs, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), for their hard 
work on this bill and for making sure that it is a bipartisan bill. I 
also thank them for their very difficult work in establishing the 
priorities in terms of our foreign policy funding priorities. I know 
that every year they are given, I believe, an inadequate allocation and 
that they both wish that they could do more to meet our foreign 
assistance priorities.
  But, Mr. Chairman, I am compelled to come to the floor today and 
offer this amendment because every year the global HIV/AIDS, 
tuberculosis and malaria pandemics kill over 6 million people combined. 
Just imagine that, over 6 million every year. That is more than the 
number of people who die from war, famine, terrorism or natural 
disasters each year combined. That is really quite mind-boggling. What 
is worse, each of these three diseases is completely, completely 
preventible and treatable; and in the case of tuberculosis and malaria, 
they can be completely cured.
  So while we have begun to focus our efforts and funding with regard 
to this pandemic, I believe that we cannot afford to drag our feet and 
just let 6 million people die like this year after year. When do we 
draw the line and say enough is enough and we are going to escalate our 
efforts and put more resources into this pandemic?
  We cannot in good conscience, Mr. Chairman, ignore this human tragedy 
that unfolds around us each and every day. We must act, and we must act 
in a bold fashion.
  That is why today I am offering an amendment to add $600 million in 
emergency funding to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and 
malaria, adding to the $400 million already in the bill, and bringing 
our total contribution to $1 billion.
  Unfortunately, last week $100 million was actually cut from the 
Global Fund in the Labor-HHS bill by this body. The Global Fund is one 
of the most powerful tools that we have as an international community 
to combat these three diseases. In fact, we created the framework for 
the Global Fund back in 2000 with the passage of the Global Aids and 
Tuberculosis Relief Act of 2000, which was signed into law by President 
Clinton.

                              {time}  1645

  And we provided the very first contribution in 2001 to help attract 
further financing from other donor nations.
  Today, the Global Fund is a model for what the future of 
international development may look like. Designed strictly as a 
financing instrument, the Global Fund seeks to attract, manage, 
leverage, and disburse funding to support locally-driven strategies to 
combat AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. To date, the Global Fund has 
approved $3.4 billion for over 300 grants in 127 countries.
  However, this year the Global Fund faces one of its biggest 
challenges: renewing over the $1.8 billion in existing grant agreements 
and approving upwards of $1 billion in new contracts, and this is still 
not enough. With the renewing of these contracts, there is just not 
enough money.
  Without increased support from the United States and other donor 
nations, the fund may be forced to cut back on funding new grants and, 
worse, may be forced to cut crucial funding for people already on anti-
retroviral therapy. Mr. Chairman, that would quite frankly just be 
totally disastrous.
  Around the world, momentum is building in support of increased 
funding for the Global Fund and other international development 
initiatives. Two weeks ago, France announced it that would double its 
Global Fund contribution through 2007. Last week, Japan pledged $5 
billion in new funding to help Africa combat AIDS, TB, and malaria, 
with a sizable contribution going to the Global Fund. And, with the 
upcoming G-8 summit taking place in Scotland next week, and with the 
British Prime Minister's focus on a huge new development initiative for 
Africa, the United States can and must do more. By providing $600 
million in emergency funding, my amendment would take that first step.
  Mr. Chairman, because my amendment is an emergency spending request, 
it will exceed the foreign operations subcommittee's 302(b) allocation 
and, therefore, I know that that is subject to a point of order. But I 
would hope that given the gravity of the pandemic, that my colleagues 
would consider this as a moral effort, strictly a moral effort to those 
who desperately need our help. Given the magnitude of the deaths and 
the pain and the suffering caused by HIV/AIDS, TB, and malaria, and the 
devastation that these diseases leave behind, I would ask the Chair to 
reject the point of order.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his point of order.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's commitment 
and passion, and I certainly share her commitment about the need to do 
something about HIV/AIDS. Nonetheless, Mr. Chairman, I must make a 
point of order against the amendment because it does propose to change 
existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and 
therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The rule states in pertinent part:
  ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order 
if changing existing law.''
  The amendment does include an emergency designation and, as such, it 
constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.
  I ask for a ruling of the Chair.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of 
order?
  Mrs. LOWEY. I wish to be heard on the point of order.
  I want to thank the gentlewoman for her leadership on the issue. I am 
pleased that the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) and I were 
able to double the President's request for the Global Fund in the bill 
from $200 million to $400 million, and, as the gentlewoman probably 
knows, given the allocation, it was simply the best we could do.
  However, I understand the urgency of the situation, and I look 
forward to working with the gentlewoman as we move the bill forward to 
continue to

[[Page H5304]]

meet our responsibilities, and then some, because of the tremendous, 
tremendous impact of HIV/AIDS in every part of this world.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The Chair finds that this amendment includes an emergency 
designation. The amendment therefore constitutes legislation in 
violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is not in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                         development assistance

       For necessary expenses of the United States Agency for 
     International Development to carry out the provisions of 
     sections 103, 105, 106, and subtitle A of title VI of chapter 
     II, and chapter 10 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961, $1,460,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2007: Provided, That $214,000,000 should be allocated for 
     trade capacity building, of which at least $20,000,000 shall 
     be made available for labor and environmental capacity 
     building activities relating to the free trade agreement with 
     the countries of Central America and the Dominican Republic: 
     Provided further, That $365,000,000 should be allocated for 
     basic education: Provided further, That of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading and managed by the United 
     States Agency for International Development Bureau of 
     Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, not less 
     than $15,000,000 shall be made available only for programs to 
     improve women's leadership capacity in recipient countries: 
     Provided further, That such funds may not be made available 
     for construction: Provided further, That of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading that are made available for 
     assistance programs for displaced and orphaned children and 
     victims of war, not to exceed $37,500, in addition to funds 
     otherwise available for such purposes, may be used to monitor 
     and provide oversight of such programs: Provided further, 
     That funds appropriated under this heading should be made 
     available for programs in sub-Saharan Africa to address 
     sexual and gender-based violence: Provided further, That up 
     to $15,000,000 should be made available for drinking water 
     supply projects in east Africa.


              International Disaster and Famine Assistance

       For necessary expenses of the United States Agency for 
     International Development to carry out the provisions of 
     section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for 
     international disaster relief, rehabilitation, and 
     reconstruction assistance, $356,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended of which $20,000,000 should be for famine 
     prevention and relief.


                         Transition Initiatives

       For necessary expenses for international disaster 
     rehabilitation and reconstruction assistance pursuant to 
     section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     $50,000,000, to remain available until expended, to support 
     transition to democracy and to long-term development of 
     countries in crisis: Provided, That such support may include 
     assistance to develop, strengthen, or preserve democratic 
     institutions and processes, revitalize basic infrastructure, 
     and foster the peaceful resolution of conflict: Provided 
     further, That the United States Agency for International 
     Development shall submit a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations at least 5 days prior to beginning a new 
     program of assistance: Provided further, That if the 
     President determines that is important to the national 
     interests of the United States to provide transition 
     assistance in excess of the amount appropriated under this 
     heading, up to $15,000,000 of the funds appropriated by this 
     Act to carry out the provisions of part I of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 may be used for purposes of this 
     heading and under the authorities applicable to funds 
     appropriated under this heading:  Provided further, That 
     funds made available pursuant to the previous proviso shall 
     be made available subject to prior consultation with the 
     Committees on Appropriations.


                      Development Credit Authority

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans and loan guarantees provided 
     by the United States Agency for International Development, as 
     authorized by sections 256 and 635 of the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961, up to $21,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2008, may be derived by transfer from funds 
     appropriated by this Act to carry out part I of such Act and 
     under the heading ``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the 
     Baltic States'': Provided, That such funds shall be made 
     available only for micro and small enterprise programs, urban 
     programs, and other programs which further the purposes of 
     part I of the Act: Provided further, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such direct and guaranteed 
     loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided 
     further,  That funds made available by this paragraph may be 
     used for the cost of modifying any such guaranteed loans 
     under this Act or prior Acts, and funds used for such costs 
     shall be subject to the regular notification procedures of 
     the Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That the 
     provisions of section 107A(d) (relating to general provisions 
     applicable to the Development Credit Authority) of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as contained in section 306 
     of H.R. 1486 as reported by the House Committee on 
     International Relations on May 9, 1997, shall be applicable 
     to direct loans and loan guarantees provided under this 
     heading: Provided further, That these funds are available to 
     subsidize total loan principal, any portion of which is to be 
     guaranteed, of up to $700,000,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out 
     credit programs administered by the United States Agency for 
     International Development, $8,000,000, which may be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriation for 
     Operating Expenses of the United States Agency for 
     International Development: Provided, That funds made 
     available under this paragraph shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2007.


     Payment to the Foreign Service Retirement and Disability Fund

       For payment to the ``Foreign Service Retirement and 
     Disability Fund'', as authorized by the Foreign Service Act 
     of 1980, $41,700,000.


   Operating Expenses of the United States Agency for International 
                              Development

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     $630,000,000, of which up to $25,000,000 may remain available 
     until September 30, 2007: Provided, That none of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading and under the heading 
     ``Capital Investment Fund'' may be made available to finance 
     the construction (including architect and engineering 
     services), purchase, or long-term lease of offices for use by 
     the United States Agency for International Development, 
     unless the Administrator has identified such proposed 
     construction (including architect and engineering services), 
     purchase, or long-term lease of offices in a report submitted 
     to the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days prior to 
     the obligation of these funds for such purposes: Provided 
     further, That the previous proviso shall not apply where the 
     total cost of construction (including architect and 
     engineering services), purchase, or long-term lease of 
     offices does not exceed $1,000,000: Provided further, That 
     contracts or agreements entered into with funds appropriated 
     under this heading may entail commitments for the expenditure 
     of such funds through fiscal year 2006: Provided further, 
     That none of the funds in this Act may be used to open a new 
     overseas mission of the United States Agency for 
     International Development without the prior written 
     notification of the Committees on Appropriations: Provided 
     further, That the authority of sections 610 and 109 of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be exercised by the 
     Secretary of State to transfer funds appropriated to carry 
     out chapter 1 of part I of such Act to ``Operating Expenses 
     of the United States Agency for International Development'' 
     in accordance with the provisions of those sections.


                        Capital Investment Fund

       For necessary expenses for overseas construction and 
     related costs, and for the procurement and enhancement of 
     information technology and related capital investments, 
     pursuant to section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961, $77,700,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That this amount is in addition to funds otherwise 
     available for such purposes: Provided further, That funds 
     appropriated under this heading shall be available for 
     obligation only pursuant to the regular notification 
     procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: Provided 
     further, That of the amounts appropriated under this heading, 
     not to exceed $55,800,000 may be made available for the 
     purposes of implementing the Capital Security Cost Sharing 
     Program: Provided further, That the Administrator of the 
     United States Agency for International Development shall 
     assess fair and reasonable rental payments for the use of 
     space by employees of other United States Government agencies 
     in buildings constructed using funds appropriated under this 
     heading, and such rental payments shall be deposited into 
     this account as an offsetting collection: Provided further, 
     That the rental payments collected pursuant to the previous 
     proviso and deposited as an offsetting collection shall be 
     available for obligation only pursuant to the regular 
     notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: 
     Provided further, That the assignment of United States 
     Government employees or contractors to space in buildings 
     constructed using funds appropriated under this heading shall 
     be subject to the concurrence of the Administrator of the 
     United States Agency for International Development.


   Operating Expenses of the United States Agency for International 
                Development Office of Inspector General

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     $36,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2007, 
     which sum shall be available for the Office of the Inspector 
     General of the United States Agency for International 
     Development.


                  Other Bilateral Economic Assistance

                         Economic Support Fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     chapter 4 of part II, $2,558,525,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2007: Provided, That of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading, not less than $240,000,000 
     shall be available only for

[[Page H5305]]

     Israel, which sum shall be available on a grant basis as a 
     cash transfer and shall be disbursed within 30 days of the 
     enactment of this Act: Provided further, That not less than 
     $495,000,000 shall be available only for Egypt, which sum 
     shall be provided on a grant basis, and of which sum cash 
     transfer assistance shall be provided with the understanding 
     that Egypt will undertake significant economic reforms which 
     are additional to those which were undertaken in previous 
     fiscal years: Provided further,  That of the funds made 
     available under this heading for Egypt, not less than 
     $50,000,000 shall be used for programs to improve and promote 
     democracy, governance, and human rights and not less than 
     $50,000,000 shall be used for education programs: Provided 
     further, That with respect to the provision of assistance for 
     Egypt for democracy and governance activities, the 
     organizations implementing such assistance and the specific 
     nature of that assistance shall not be subject to the prior 
     approval by the Government of Egypt: Provided further, That 
     in exercising the authority to provide cash transfer 
     assistance for Israel, the President shall ensure that the 
     level of such assistance does not cause an adverse impact on 
     the total level of nonmilitary exports from the United States 
     to such country and that Israel enters into a side letter 
     agreement in an amount proportional to the fiscal year 1999 
     agreement: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated 
     under this heading, not less than $250,000,000 should be made 
     available only for assistance for Jordan: Provided further, 
     That $20,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading 
     should be made available for Cyprus to be used only for 
     scholarships, administrative support of the scholarship 
     program, bicommunal projects, and measures aimed at 
     reunification of the island and designed to reduce tensions 
     and promote peace and cooperation between the two communities 
     on Cyprus: Provided further, That $40,000,000 of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading should be made available for 
     assistance for Lebanon, of which not less than $6,000,000 
     should be made available for scholarships and direct support 
     of American educational institutions in Lebanon: Provided 
     further, That funds appropriated under this heading that are 
     made available for a Middle East Financing Facility, Middle 
     East Enterprise Fund, or any other similar entity in the 
     Middle East shall be subject to the regular notification 
     procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: Provided 
     further, That not more than $225,000,000 of the funds made 
     available for assistance for Afghanistan under this heading 
     may be obligated for such assistance until the Secretary of 
     State certifies to the Committees on Appropriations, that the 
     Government of Afghanistan at both the national and local 
     level, is cooperating fully with United States funded poppy 
     eradication and interdiction efforts in Afghanistan: Provided 
     further, That with respect to funds appropriated under this 
     heading in this Act or prior Acts making appropriations for 
     foreign operations, export financing, and related programs, 
     the responsibility for policy decisions and justifications 
     for the use of such funds, including whether there will be a 
     program for a country that uses those funds and the amount of 
     each such program, shall be the responsibility of the 
     Secretary of State and the Deputy Secretary of State and this 
     responsibility shall not be delegated.


                     international fund for ireland

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     $13,500,000, which shall be available for the United States 
     contribution to the International Fund for Ireland and shall 
     be made available in accordance with the provisions of the 
     Anglo-Irish Agreement Support Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-
     415): Provided, That such amount shall be expended at the 
     minimum rate necessary to make timely payment for projects 
     and activities: Provided further, That funds made available 
     under this heading shall remain available until September 30, 
     2007.


          Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States

       (a) For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Support for East 
     European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989, $357,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2007, which shall be 
     available, notwithstanding any other provision of law that 
     restricts assistance to foreign countries and section 660 of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, for assistance and for 
     related programs for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States.
       (b) Funds appropriated under this heading shall be 
     considered to be economic assistance under the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 for purposes of making available the 
     administrative authorities contained in that Act for the use 
     of economic assistance.
       (c) The provisions of section 529 of this Act shall apply 
     to funds appropriated under this heading: Provided, That 
     local currencies generated by, or converted from, funds 
     appropriated by this Act and by previous appropriations Acts 
     and made available for the economic revitalization program in 
     Bosnia may be used in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States to 
     carry out the provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961 and the Support for East European Democracy (SEED) Act 
     of 1989.
       (d) The President is authorized to withhold funds 
     appropriated under this heading made available for economic 
     revitalization programs in Bosnia and Herzegovina, if he 
     determines and certifies to the Committees on Appropriations 
     that the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina has not 
     complied with article III of annex 1-A of the General 
     Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina 
     concerning the withdrawal of foreign forces, and that 
     intelligence cooperation on training, investigations, and 
     related activities between state sponsors of terrorism and 
     terrorist organizations and Bosnian officials has not been 
     terminated.


    Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union

       (a) For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     chapters 11 and 12 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961 and the FREEDOM Support Act, for assistance for the 
     Independent States of the former Soviet Union and for related 
     programs, $477,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2007: Provided, That the provisions of such chapters 
     shall apply to funds appropriated by this paragraph: Provided 
     further, That, notwithstanding any provision of the Freedom 
     Support Act of 1992, funds appropriated under this heading in 
     this Act or prior Acts making appropriations for foreign 
     operations, export financing, and related programs, that are 
     made available pursuant to the provisions of section 807 of 
     Public Law 102-511 shall be subject to a 6 percent ceiling on 
     administrative expenses.
       (b) Of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less 
     than $52,000,000 should be made available, in addition to 
     funds otherwise available for such purposes, for assistance 
     for child survival, environmental and reproductive health, 
     and to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and other infectious 
     diseases, and for related activities.
       (c)(1) Of the funds appropriated under this heading that 
     are allocated for assistance for the Government of the 
     Russian Federation, 60 percent shall be withheld from 
     obligation until the President determines and certifies in 
     writing to the Committees on Appropriations that the 
     Government of the Russian Federation--
       (A) has terminated implementation of arrangements to 
     provide Iran with technical expertise, training, technology, 
     or equipment necessary to develop a nuclear reactor, related 
     nuclear research facilities or programs, or ballistic missile 
     capability; and
       (B) is providing full access to international non-
     government organizations providing humanitarian relief to 
     refugees and internally displaced persons in Chechnya.
       (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
       (A) assistance to combat infectious diseases, child 
     survival activities, or assistance for victims of trafficking 
     in persons; and
       (B) activities authorized under title V (Nonproliferation 
     and Disarmament Programs and Activities) of the FREEDOM 
     Support Act.
       (d) Section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act shall not apply 
     to--
       (1) activities to support democracy or assistance under 
     title V of the FREEDOM Support Act and section 1424 of Public 
     Law 104-201 or non-proliferation assistance;
       (2) any assistance provided by the Trade and Development 
     Agency under section 661 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961 (22 U.S.C. 2421);
       (3) any activity carried out by a member of the United 
     States and Foreign Commercial Service while acting within his 
     or her official capacity;
       (4) any insurance, reinsurance, guarantee or other 
     assistance provided by the Overseas Private Investment 
     Corporation under title IV of chapter 2 of part I of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2191 et seq.);
       (5) any financing provided under the Export-Import Bank Act 
     of 1945; or
       (6) humanitarian assistance.

                          Independent Agencies


                       Inter-American Foundation

       For necessary expenses to carry out the functions of the 
     Inter-American Foundation in accordance with the provisions 
     of section 401 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1969, 
     $19,500,000, to remain available until September 30, 2007.


                     African Development Foundation

       For necessary expenses to carry out title V of the 
     International Security and Development Cooperation Act of 
     1980, Public Law 96-533, $20,500,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2007: Provided, That funds made available 
     to grantees may be invested pending expenditure for project 
     purposes when authorized by the board of directors of the 
     Foundation: Provided further, That interest earned shall be 
     used only for the purposes for which the grant was made: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding section 505(a)(2) of 
     the African Development Foundation Act, in exceptional 
     circumstances the board of directors of the Foundation may 
     waive the $250,000 limitation contained in that section with 
     respect to a project: Provided further, That the Foundation 
     shall provide a report to the Committees on Appropriations 
     after each time such waiver authority is exercised.


                              Peace Corps

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the 
     Peace Corps Act (75 Stat. 612), including the purchase of not 
     to exceed five passenger motor vehicles for administrative 
     purposes for use outside of the United States, $325,000,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2007: Provided, That 
     none of the funds appropriated under this heading shall be 
     used to pay for abortions: Provided further, That the 
     Director may transfer to the Foreign Currency Fluctuations 
     Account,

[[Page H5306]]

     as authorized by 22 U.S.C. 2515, an amount not to exceed 
     $2,000,000: Provided further, That funds transferred pursuant 
     to the previous proviso may not be derived from amounts made 
     available for Peace Corps overseas operations.


                    Millennium Challenge Corporation

       For necessary expenses for the ``Millennium Challenge 
     Corporation'', $1,750,000,000 to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That of the funds appropriated under this 
     heading, up to $75,000,000 may be available for 
     administrative expenses of the Millennium Challenge 
     Corporation: Provided further, That up to 10 percent of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading may be made available 
     to carry out the purposes of section 616 of the Millennium 
     Challenge Act of 2003: Provided further, That none of the 
     funds available to carry out section 616 of such Act may be 
     made available until the Chief Executive Officer of the 
     Millennium Challenge Corporation provides a report to the 
     Committees on Appropriations listing the candidate countries 
     that will be receiving assistance under section 616 of such 
     Act, the level of assistance proposed for each such country, 
     a description of the proposed programs, projects and 
     activities, and the implementing agency or agencies of the 
     United States Government: Provided further, That section 
     605(e)(4) of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 shall apply 
     to funds appropriated under this heading: Provided further, 
     That funds appropriated under this heading may be made 
     available for a Millennium Challenge Compact entered into 
     pursuant to section 609 of the Millennium Challenge Act of 
     2003 only if such Compact obligates, or contains a commitment 
     to obligate subject to the availability of funds and the 
     mutual agreement of the parties to the Compact to proceed, 
     the entire amount of the United States Government funding 
     anticipated for the duration of the Compact.

  Mr. KOLBE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent 
that the remainder of the bill through page 29, line 12, be considered 
as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to that section of the bill?
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                          Department of State


                       Global HIV/AIDS Initiative

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for the prevention, treatment, 
     and control of, and research on, HIV/AIDS, $1,920,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading, not less than $200,000,000 
     shall be made available for a United States Contribution to 
     the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Turberculosis and Malaria (the 
     ``Global Fund''), and shall be expended at the minimum rate 
     necessary to make timely payment for projects and activities: 
      Provided further, That not more than $12,000,000 of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading may be made available 
     for administrative expenses of the Office of the Coordinator 
     of United States Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS 
     Globally of the Department of State.


                 Amendment Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

  Mr. KING of Iowa. 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. King of Iowa:
       Page 29, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by 
     $1,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, reserving a point of order, I ask for 
clarification as to which of the two amendments the gentleman is 
offering to the House.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) is recognized for 5 
minutes in support of his amendment.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, to clarify that point of order, again, this is the 
amendment that takes $1 million out and puts $1 million back in, and it 
is for the purposes of raising the issue to discuss some of the things 
that I think we should be doing, particularly in Africa with regard to 
AIDS.
  I recall back in this Chamber in January of 2003 when the President 
gave his State of the Union address. I had been reading the articles 
about ABC for AIDS prevention in Africa, and particularly and directly 
in Uganda, the ABC program being abstinence, being faithful, and, with 
a small ``c'' of using condoms in the event that abstinence and being 
faithful is not utilized.
  As the President called for the $15 billion, 5-year AIDS initiative, 
I saw a standing ovation in here, and that standing ovation was started 
over in this region, and I want to give credit that it appeared to me 
to be a lot of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus that stood 
for that ovation. I stood too, because I had been getting a sense of 
how bad it was, and this is an international crisis. Millions of people 
are dying, and we do need to address this. We have a moral obligation 
to address the AIDS.
  So I believe also in ABC. I continue to believe in abstinence, being 
faithful, and condoms as a last resort.
  I went to Africa, Mr. Chairman, last July, late July and early 
August, visited Morocco, then Namibia, Botswana, and South Africa. In 
Morocco, the AIDS is less than 1 percent. When you get to Namibia and 
South Africa it is around 23 to 25 percent and, in Botswana, the HIV/
AIDS infection rate is 38.8 percent. When you realize that four out of 
every 10 people you meet on the street are staring into a death 
sentence, you realize that something has to be done. Economically they 
have been destroyed.
  As I went there, I asked the questions of the people who were 
implementing this multi-billion dollar policy, and it has become not an 
ABC policy, not a little ``c'' policy, it has been become a big ``C'' 
policy, a hand-out of condoms policy; when I asked, what you are doing 
to address the promiscuity, they told me, you do not change the 
culture. You cannot change the culture. Well, they are establishing a 
condom culture. If you can change it to a condom culture, you can 
promote the elimination of promiscuity and abstinence until marriage 
and monogamy after that.
  The other question that I asked, and it is a question that Congress 
needs to ask is, are we saving more lives, or are we costing more 
lives, or are we putting people into maybe 30 more years of an active 
sex life, and are they going to use a condom right every time for the 
next 30 years, or are they going to infect more people. Some of the 
answers I got back was yes, condoms are the answer. They work 100 
percent of the time according to the doctor from the CDC. I do not 
accept that. One of their other solutions was to delay the young 
ladies' sexual debut for perhaps another year, as if that made a 
statistical difference; and another one of those real good ideas was, 
and I say that facetiously, expedite the travel of trucks through the 
borders so that the prostitutes do not have as much opportunity to 
market themselves to the truck drivers. These were shallow approaches.
  I think we need to put the drugs in there, the anti-retroviral drugs, 
we need to get the high-protein food there, and we need to keep people 
alive. I held some of those babies. We need to have a whole policy, one 
that is planned, an approach to save the maximum number of lives. One 
that puts the responsibility back on the individuals and changes the 
culture in that part of the world. That is the best thing we can do. I 
am asking that by next year we take a look at that, we get a report, 
and that is my initiative for this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, though I am 
not in opposition, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I have looked at this amendment and I think the gentleman has made 
some very good points. It does not change in any substantive way the 
bill, and I am prepared to accept the amendment.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I withdraw my 
reservation, because I understand from the chairman that this does not 
have any substantive changes being made in the bill. But I certainly 
think that the content of the gentleman's amendment deserves greater 
discussion at another time. The chairman and I were also in Botswana, 
we were also in South Africa, we were in Tanzania as well, and there is 
progress being made in some parts of the country, and some not. It is a 
tremendous challenge, but I think

[[Page H5307]]

it is simplistic to say that only one area deserves further funding, 
and that the ABC approach may not be as successful as one may think.
  So I think we need to discuss this further, and I would like to enter 
into dialogue with the gentleman at another time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to say I appreciate 
the chairman's work on this, and the comments that I have heard, and I 
look forward to that dialogue.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


          International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement

       For necessary expenses to carry out section 481 of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $437,400,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2008: Provided, That during 
     fiscal year 2006, the Department of State may also use the 
     authority of section 608 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961, without regard to its restrictions, to receive excess 
     property from an agency of the United States Government for 
     the purpose of providing it to a foreign country under 
     chapter 8 of part I of that Act subject to the regular 
     notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary of State shall provide 
     to the Committees on Appropriations not later than 45 days 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act and prior to the 
     initial obligation of funds appropriated under this heading, 
     a report on the proposed uses of all funds under this heading 
     on a country-by-country basis for each proposed program, 
     project, or activity: Provided further, That $10,000,000 of 
     the funds appropriated under this heading should be made 
     available for demand reduction programs: Provided further, 
     That of the funds appropriated under this heading, not more 
     than $33,484,000 may be available for administrative 
     expenses.

  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I yield 
to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy 
and extend my appreciation to the Chair and Ranking Member for the work 
they have done. I feel, considering the modest allocation that they 
were given, they have managed to fashion a solid piece of legislation.
  Ironically, we only give 0.16 percent of our Gross National Product 
to development assistance, even though ironically, most Americans think 
we give far more.
  I wanted to make four brief points, if I could. I wanted to thank 
them for earmarking $50,000 for increasing access to clean water in 
Africa. We are going forward tomorrow in the Committee on International 
Relations to explore opportunities to increase this in terms of 
authorization, but I think we are making an important step in the right 
direction.
  I also appreciate the report language explaining concern over USAID's 
urban programs.
  Mr. Chairman, the CIA's Outlook 2015 that looked at threats to the 
United States pointed out that the rapid urbanization in the developing 
world was one of the top seven security concerns for our country. For 
the first time in human history, a majority of people live in cities, 
with a million people a week moving to cities in the developing world, 
a million new people a week in areas that are greatly stressed.

                              {time}  1700

  Yet despite this, our country's USAID investment in urban programs is 
in continued decline. I appreciate the committee's spotlighting this, 
and I hope that we can work together to reverse this unfortunate trend.
  I appreciate the colloquy that occurred earlier on the Global 
Environmental Facility, the GEF, that has funded over 1,000 projects in 
160 countries. I think these innovative approaches to environmental 
challenges that can be replicated elsewhere and financed on a larger 
scale by non-GEF sources is very important.
  I appreciate the difficulty. I know we have got a long way to go with 
this bill. I appreciate your efforts and would do anything I could 
because every dollar that we spend on GEF leverages 15 in funding from 
other sources in some of the most vulnerable areas of our country.
  I appreciate your work. I appreciate the courtesy in permitting me to 
speak on this. I opted not to offer up amendments because, frankly, I 
could not see ways to repackage what you have done. I hope in the 
future we will have more leverage, more running room. But in the 
meantime, I appreciate your efforts; and I will support the bill.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague for his 
comments on the bill. And I hope the gentleman will work, certainly, 
with the chairman and myself and many of us who would support increased 
funding to address the critical issues that the gentleman mentions.
  However, within this allocation, the gentleman knows it was very 
difficult; and I feel very strongly that in terms of our international 
policies, nothing is more important than expanding our support in the 
country for all the important initiatives included in this bill and 
increasing the dollars that we can spend on them.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                     Andean Counterdrug Initiative

       For necessary expenses to carry out section 481 of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to support counterdrug 
     activities in the Andean region of South America, 
     $734,500,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008: 
     Provided, That in fiscal year 2006, funds available to the 
     Department of State for assistance to the Government of 
     Colombia shall be available to support a unified campaign 
     against narcotics trafficking, against activities by 
     organizations designated as terrorist organizations such as 
     the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the 
     National Liberation Army (ELN), and the United Self-Defense 
     Forces of Colombia (AUC), and to take actions to protect 
     human health and welfare in emergency circumstances, 
     including undertaking rescue operations: Provided further, 
     That this authority shall cease to be effective if the 
     Secretary of State has credible evidence that the Colombian 
     Armed Forces are not conducting vigorous operations to 
     restore government authority and respect for human rights in 
     areas under the effective control of paramilitary and 
     guerrilla organizations: Provided further, That the President 
     shall ensure that if any helicopter procured with funds under 
     this heading is used to aid or abet the operations of any 
     illegal self-defense group or illegal security cooperative, 
     such helicopter shall be immediately returned to the United 
     States: Provided further, That the Secretary of State, in 
     consultation with the Administrator of the United States 
     Agency for International Development, shall provide to the 
     Committees on Appropriations not later than 45 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act and prior to the initial 
     obligation of funds appropriated under this heading, a report 
     on the proposed uses of all funds under this heading on a 
     country-by-country basis for each proposed program, project, 
     or activity: Provided further, That funds made available in 
     this Act for demobilization/reintegration of members of 
     foreign terrorist organizations in Colombia shall be subject 
     to prior consultation with, and the regular notification 
     procedures of, the Committees on Appropriations: Provided 
     further, That section 482(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961 shall not apply to funds appropriated under this 
     heading: Provided further, That assistance provided with 
     funds appropriated under this heading that is made available 
     notwithstanding section 482(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act 
     of 1961 shall be made available subject to the regular 
     notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: 
     Provided further, That no United States Armed Forces 
     personnel or United States civilian contractor employed by 
     the United States will participate in any combat operation in 
     connection with assistance made available by this Act for 
     Colombia: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated 
     under this heading, not more than $19,015,000 may be 
     available for administrative expenses of the Department of 
     State, and not more than $7,800,000 may be available, in 
     addition to amounts otherwise available for such purposes, 
     for administrative expenses of the United States Agency for 
     International Development.


                Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. McGovern

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

       Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. McGovern:
       Page 31, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $100,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.

[[Page H5308]]

  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the McGovern-McCollum-Moore 
amendment to cut military aid to Colombia by $100 million.
  For the past several years, we have debated Colombia policy here in 
the House. We are always being told that things are getting better; but 
they are not getting better, Mr. Chairman.
  This policy has failed as an antidrug policy. It has failed as a 
human rights policy, and it has failed to have any impact whatsoever in 
reducing the availability, price or purity of drugs in the streets of 
America. In fact, illegal drugs are cheaper today than they were 6 
years ago and $4 billion ago. And yet we will hear again today from 
supporters of Plan Colombia that everything is just rosy in Colombia, 
that we are winning the drug war, and respect for human rights is 
flourishing. Not true, Mr. Chairman.
  It makes no difference whether you are looking at the United Nations 
numbers, the U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy numbers, the 
Colombian National Police, or the CIA's. It all adds up to the same 
picture. Compared to where we were in 1999, right before the start of 
Plan Colombia, coca cultivation in Colombia has declined by only 7 
percent and in the Andean region by only 9 percent. And the growing of 
coca did not decrease at all in the year 2004.
  On top of that, the U.N. and the Colombian National Police agree that 
opium growing in Colombia did not decrease at all in 2004.
  You have to twist yourself into a pretzel to make something good out 
of these numbers. You do that by deliberately ignoring where we were 6 
years ago before Plan Colombia and picking and choosing bits and pieces 
of statistics, like starting your comparisons in 2003. Well, that only 
works because you ignore the huge increases in coca production in 2000, 
2001, and 2002.
  But, ultimately, the most damning numbers come from our own 
Department of Justice, which states that cocaine remains readily 
available on the streets of America, with wholesale and retail prices 
for cocaine and heroin at an all-time low and purity at or near 
historic highs.
  Congress was told that we had to support Plan Colombia. We had to 
pour billions and billions of U.S. tax dollars into the Colombian 
military to stop the surge of drugs in America.
  Well, what a waste of money it has been. Six years ago, the Rand 
Corporation told us that every dollar we spent trying to wipe out coca 
in remote areas of Colombia would be 23 times more effective if we 
spent it right here at home on drug treatment, prevention, and 
education and on local law enforcement.
  But Congress chose to ignore that good advice; and here we are, 6 
years and $4 billion later. Now, we may have thought our policy was 
tough on drugs, but it sure was not very smart.
  So how about human rights? Is Colombia's human rights situation any 
better today? Colombia is still the most dangerous country in the world 
to be a trade union leader. It is the second most dangerous place to be 
a religious pastor or lay leader.
  The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees calls the issue of 
Colombia's internally displaced a great humanitarian crisis second only 
to Sudan. Death threats against human rights defenders have increased 
significantly over the past 18 months.
  Abuses by the Colombian military are on the rise and the armed forces 
commit crimes with impunity, with no high-level Colombian military 
officer ever having been successfully prosecuted for human rights 
crimes.
  Even our own State Department has not been able to certify any human 
rights progress in Colombia since March because the situation is so 
untenable. But has Colombia tried to improve their human rights 
situation at all so that the State Department could have something, 
anything that will allow it to certify? Not at all.
  But so much pressure from the Pentagon and the Colombian Government 
and even from some members of Congress is building on the State 
Department to go ahead and certify anyway that I hear that the State 
Department is likely to certify right after this Congress breaks for 
the Fourth of July recess.
  But the most galling thing of all is this: while U.S. taxpayers have 
sent over $4 billion of their hard-earned money to Colombia over the 
past 6 years, the wealthy elites of Colombia have hardly contributed a 
dime. Out of a population of 42 million people, only 740,000 Colombians 
pay any income tax at all, and even that is a pitiful amount. So 
Colombians are not paying to fight their own war, and they are not 
paying to improve the conditions that keep so many of their own people 
in poverty.
  It is time that this House stood up and decided to stop sending a 
blank check to Colombia, year after year. It is time that we demand 
real progress on human rights as a condition to our aid. It is time 
that we stop being a cheap date.
  We are not walking away from Colombia. We are just sending a long 
overdue message that it is time to take a cold hard look at our current 
course and change it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis).
  (Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to any 
attempts to cut funding for the Andean Counterdrug Initiative. I think 
this is a time to reaffirm, not dismantle, our commitment to this 
program, to the people of Colombia and to American citizens who want 
illegal drugs off their streets.
  How can we cut funding when we are seeing tremendous results in 
illegal crop eradication? Coca cultivation in Colombia has been reduced 
by 33 percent since 2002, and opium poppy cultivation dropped 52 
percent in 2004 alone.
  As a result of ACI funding, we have seen unprecedented levels of drug 
interdiction. And interdiction is what this amendment goes to, cutting 
$100 million.
  From January to May of this year, 71.7 metric tons were seized from 
traffickers and destroyed before reaching our neighborhoods. Each week 
brings news of new seizures of cocaine and heroin, interdictions that 
are usually the result of U.S. supplied intelligence.
  In fact, just last month, Colombian authorities seized 13.8 tons of 
cocaine worth about $350 million in what was one of the largest drug 
busts in history. Interdiction efforts like these would not be possible 
if the gentleman's amendment passes.
  The Colombian Government is reestablishing state presence in areas 
where the country has lacked it for a century. Criminals who have 
remained at bay for years are being captured and extradited to the U.S. 
for prosecution. Colombia has extradited 271 Colombian citizens to the 
United States since August of 2002, mostly on narcotics related 
charges.
  How do we justify pulling the plug on ACI funding when we are seeing 
record numbers of extraditions to the U.S. of FARC and drug cartel 
members?
  In 2004 alone, more than 11,000 narcoterrorists were captured. More 
than 7,000 terrorists have deserted their organizations since President 
Uribe took office. Thousands of weapons and rounds of ammunition have 
been surrendered. The demobilization and reincorporation of illegal 
armed groups are part of a process that is providing stability to the 
entire region.
  Colombians are finally beginning to feel safer. The murder rate 
dropped 14 percent in 2004. It has dropped 25 percent thus far this 
year.
  Plan Colombia is working. I have been down there several times. I 
have seen firsthand just a month ago the devastation that drug 
production and trafficking has on that country. But to those who 
question our investment, I would ask them to visit Colombian soldiers 
who have lost their limbs or their eyesight or sustained permanent 
disabilities in their battle to return peace to their nation and keep 
drugs off American streets.
  On a recent trip, we accompanied Colombian National Police to a 
manual eradication site in the mountains and helped them pull the coca 
crop from mountainous terrain that helicopters cannot reach. These are 
dedicated people giving up their lives to destroy the drug trade and 
rid their country of drugs and violence and prevent their illegal 
importation to the United States.
  Our travels have shown how critical U.S. assistance is to their 
government.

[[Page H5309]]

Of course it is not all rosy and a lot of obstacles remain. But the 
Uribe administration is committed to this war.
  I ask, Mr. Chairman, that now is the time not to turn our backs on 
the progress we are making. We cannot win this war on drug-supported 
terrorism without the proper tools.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on the McGovern amendment.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I want to assure the gentleman I have 
been to Colombia several times and have gone well beyond the areas that 
the embassy has recommended me to go, and I assure the gentleman things 
are quite bad.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota 
(Ms. McCollum), the cosponsor of this amendment.
  Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, the McGovern amendment to 
cut $100 million from Plan Colombia is about accountability and sending 
the message that cutting deals with narcotic traffickers who pose as 
politicians will not be tolerated by the American taxpayer.
  After 6 years and over $400 billion, Plan Colombia is not reducing 
the supply of cocaine on our streets. But it has succeeded in making 
cocaine in America cheaper, more available, and more potent than ever 
before.
  The drug war in Colombia is failing, failing the people of Colombia 
and the American taxpayer. Spending another $735 million to stay the 
wrong course and to continue to finance failure is irresponsible.
  Let us send a message to Colombia that there are no more blank checks 
in the American taxpayers' checkbook.
  Unfortunately, Plan Colombia has not made the Colombian people safer. 
More than 2 million Colombians have been forced to flee their homes. 
Ninety percent of the violent crime, murders, and rapes go unpunished. 
Human rights abuses among Colombia's military and law enforcement are 
all too common.
  These are deeply disturbing trends: cheaper cocaine on American 
streets, millions of innocent people fleeing for their lives, 
lawlessness. This is hardly what we would call good governance.
  In return for the narcoterrorism and corruption, the American 
taxpayers are being asked to reward the Colombian Government.
  Now, a law passed by Colombia's congress and supported by President 
Uribe provides immunity and protection for right wing death squads and 
narcoterrorists.
  For ending their participation in death squads, Colombia will be 
giving virtual immunity and protection from extradition to 
narcotraffickers, many who are sought by the United States.
  One paramilitary death squad, the AUC, earns 70 percent of its income 
from narcotics trafficking. And the AUC is listed as an official 
terrorist organization by the U.S. Government.
  The AUC's leader, Diego Murillo, is described as a brutal 
paramilitarian warlord who made a fortune in the drug trade. Under the 
plan for disarmament supported by our allies in Bogota, Murillo and 
terrorists like him who have committed massacres, kidnappings, drug 
trafficking, and murders of elected officials received freedom from 
prosecution. They get to keep their possession of riches.
  In Colombia, if crime pays, if drug trafficking pays and terrorism 
pays, let us not have the American taxpayer pay for it. Congress needs 
to cut funding to Plan Colombia and save the American taxpayers $100 
million and send a message that Colombia cannot protect narcoterrorists 
with our tax dollars.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support the McGovern amendment.

                              {time}  1715

  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Kirk) may yield time on behalf of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Kolbe).
  There was no objection.
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Rogers), a former FBI agent.
  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, the amendment is well-intended 
but horribly misguided.
  If you have spent time in Colombia, then you know that incredible 
progress is being made. This is absolutely the worst time to turn our 
backs on the great efforts that these folks are making against narco-
terrorism, the FARC, the AUC, other militia groups. They are making 
progress.
  Let me tell you a little bit about it. Kidnappings from 2002 to 2004 
are down 52 percent. That is because they are on the offensive. 
President Uribe, 18 assassination attempts and maybe even climbing, has 
stood tall for democracy and said he will not tolerate the FARC, and 
the AUC, and narco-terrorist groups trying to control Colombia and 
sending death to America by cocaine paste and cocaine kilos and 
everything that we know is bad and killing our children in the streets 
of America.
  We have a true partner who is willing to take and literally risk his 
life and his presidency to stop this in Colombia. This is the wrong 
time, Mr. Chairman.
  Right now, we have three United States citizens hostage to the FARC. 
What message would we send to our friends in Colombia who are risking 
their lives to rescue these citizens from the FARC and other AUC groups 
by cutting this funding. This is not the time, Mr. Chairman.
  This is the chance that we stand up and say, We are making progress. 
We will support an aggressive attitude toward narco-terrorist 
trafficking in not only Colombia, but all of Latin America and make 
that difference, not only for the three United States citizens that 
deserve our support, but every American who fights to keep drugs out of 
their family, out of their schools, out of their community.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking Democrat on the Committee on Armed 
Services.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman and I compliment my 
friend and colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) 
for this amendment, which is also co-sponsored by the gentlewoman from 
Minnesota (Ms. McCollum) and the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore).
  This amendment is important because it will force this body to look 
hard at American policy in Colombia. Since Congress began funding 
support in Colombia under the Plan Colombia in fiscal year 2000, we 
have spent approximately $4.5 billion in counterdrug and military 
support. That is a lot of money, a lot of money under any circumstance, 
and it is certainly at a time when we are fighting two wars elsewhere.
  Given the magnitude of what we have spent and the fact that Plan 
Colombia will expire this year, we should be asking some really tough 
questions. Such as, is the amount of money spent in line with the 
benefits to the United States and to our national security, and are the 
Colombians doing enough to provide for their own security?
  Funding for Colombia was initiated in order to stem the flow of drugs 
to our country. Yet, the United Nations figures show that decreases in 
cultivation in Colombia have been more than matched elsewhere in that 
region. There has been no decrease in drugs coming into the United 
States.
  Funding was also intended to promote peace in Colombia. Certainly on 
that front, there is some progress. I believe President Uribe is trying 
to do the very right thing for his country, and we should support his 
efforts, which we are. The question is whether we should support it at 
the cost at a time when our military and our foreign aid dollars, our 
defense dollars are spread so thin across the globe.
  This amendment, Mr. Chairman, with this modest cut to overall aid to 
Colombia, should force a rethinking of our strategy in Colombia on 
whether we are achieving goals important to our own national security. 
At the same time, we need to ask whether the Colombians are doing all 
they can to provide for their own future security. Let me say that 
again. At the same time, we should ask whether the Colombians are doing 
all they can to provide for their own future security.
  Their tax revenue continues to be at very low levels. Fewer than 
750,000 Colombians contribute to their national defense through the tax 
base of a population of 42 million. Many Colombians with high school 
educations continue to avoid military service. The Colombians should be 
taking on more of a responsibility for their own effort. This amendment 
does not cut all funding for Colombia. Far from it. But it does send a 
clear signal that the American dollars invested are not yielding the 
results we need to.

[[Page H5310]]

  At a time when we are engaged in two wars globally, we must even be 
more careful about where we are spending our resources, our dollars. We 
must urge our colleagues to support the amendment. I compliment the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Walden).
  Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this 
amendment. I believe it would undermine the efforts to eradicate 
production and trafficking of cocaine in Colombia which is the primary 
source of narcotics entering our Nation.
  We have heard some level of debate today about is the amount of 
cocaine down coming into the United States or not? But the real issue 
is, how much higher would it be if we did not have this program in 
place?
  Operations under the Andean Counterdrug Initiative have been 
instrumental in reducing the cultivation of coca 33 percent since 2002 
and cultivation of poppies 52 percent last year.
  Are those exactly the percentages and which years do you compare? The 
point is not the exact numbers. The point is the trend and the trend is 
that there is less being grown because we know we are eradicating it 
every year. If we are eradicating it, if we are ripping this stuff out, 
if we are spraying it, if we are making sure it is not growing, that is 
that much more is not available. That seems pretty obvious on its face.
  But this program is doing more to help improve the stability of the 
country of Colombia and the people who live there, particularly the 
realm of violent crime in Colombia. Kidnappings are down 34.5 percent 
in 2004 and almost 61 percent through May of this year. Homicides are 
down. Terrorist attacks are down. Internal displacement of people, also 
down by more than 50 percent. Over 200 Columbian narco-traffickers have 
been extradited to the United States in the last 2 years, including the 
leader of the Cali Cartel, an important FARC commander, and an AUC 
commander.
  The point is we are taking these narco-traffickers out of the 
business of trafficking in narcotics, of bringing this terrible stuff 
to our borders and to our people. This is a good program that has done 
well and we need to continue to fund it.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to respond to the gentleman who just spoke. 
Maybe he has not been reading the newspapers but the Colombian 
government just passed an amnesty law that gives narco-traffickers and 
the paramilitaries and people who have been guilty of crimes against 
humanity a get-out-of-jail-free card. That is one of the reasons why I 
am here today expressing my outrage.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Honda).
  Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the 
McGovern-McCollum-Moore amendment to H.R. 3057, the Foreign Operations 
bill for FY 2006. This amendment recognizes the critical problems that 
need to be addressed in Colombia.
  Six years ago, Plan Colombia was implemented with the goal of 
reducing the flow of cocaine into the United States and to improve 
respect for human rights and the rule of law in Colombia. Based on the 
administration's own target indicators and data, the drug eradication 
effort in Colombia has been an across-the-board failure.
  Plan Colombia has not significantly deterred coca cultivation, curbed 
cocaine availability, forced price increases or reduced cocaine use.
  After 6 years and an investment of more than $4 billion in taxpayer 
dollars, net coca cultivation in Colombia is only 7 percent below the 
1990 level. The total area under coca cultivation is estimated to be 36 
percent higher than in 2000. Furthermore, reports indicate that cocaine 
remains readily available on the U.S. streets. The cocaine and heroine 
problems in the United States are more acute today than they were 6 
years ago with lower prices, higher drug purity, and increased usage.
  Tragically, what we have seen in the past 6 years is an increase of 
human rights abuses, including violations by the army, unchecked 
government collusion with abusive paramilitary forces and violence 
against trade union members. We cannot be seen as condoning the ongoing 
human rights abuses in Colombia. We must be seen the world over as 
defending human rights. By supporting the McGovern amendment, we would 
be sending a strong signal to the international community that, yes, 
the United States does indeed value human rights.
  For genuine, lasting and positive changes in Colombia, the Colombian 
government and Colombian people must take an active role in initiating 
and sustaining those changes.
  Plan Colombia is not working and given the inexcusable ongoing human 
rights violations and military abuses in Colombia, reducing the 
allocation for Plan Colombia by $100 million is not only the 
responsible thing to do with taxpayer dollars, it underscores our 
Nation's standing as an advocate of human rights. Vote yes on the 
McGovern amendment.
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Burton), the distinguished chair of the Subcommittee on 
the Western Hemisphere.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I have heard what they are 
against. What are you for?
  We have got a drug problem that we are trying to deal with. Plan 
Colombia, according to the statistical data that has been quoted time 
and time and time again by my colleagues, and I am quoting a little bit 
about that, shows that we are making progress. You are against it, but 
what are you for?
  I mean, we have got a war against drugs and you are standing here 
saying, okay, let us not do this, let us not do this, but the drug 
problem exists so what do you want to do about it?
  Unless you have got some constructive alternative, I think you ought 
to take a hard look at what has been talked about here today by the 
colleagues on our side of the aisle.
  Now, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder) sent out a ``Dear 
Colleague'' to my colleagues and I would like to read you a little bit 
about what is in his ``Dear Colleague.'' Aerial eradication has reduced 
coca cultivation by 33 percent. That is a plus. Reduced coca 
cultivation by 16 percent in the Andean region in 2003 and by an 
additional 5 percent in 2004. That is a plus.
  Opium poppy cultivation in Colombia dropped 52 percent in 2004, the 
third straight year of decline. That is a plus. They have got 
alternative development programs. Since 2000 we have supported and they 
have supported more than 63,000 hectares of legal crops, some 
substitutions. That is a plus. Resulted in the manual eradication of 
23,200 hectares of illicit crops, coca and opium. That is a plus.
  Security. Police presence is extended to all 158 municipalities in 
Colombia that did not have any police protection before. That is a big 
plus.
  Colombia has extradited 271 Colombian citizens to the U.S. since 
August of 2002, mostly on narcotics-related cases. Another plus.
  Human rights. Kidnappings were down 34 percent in 2004 and a further 
60.9 percent through May of this year. Another plus. Homicides are down 
14.2 percent and another 22.3 percent through May of this year.
  There were 137,315 newly displaced persons in 2004. That is a drop of 
67.5 percent. Those are all pluses. Those are things that are being 
accomplished.
  Yes, we still have problems. Yes, there are narcotics in America. 
Yes, they are coming into this country. But we are making progress. And 
what you folks want to do is stop the progress. So what is your 
alternative?
  I do not hear anything but complaints. This is the wrong time and it 
is the wrong message to send to our allies, President Uribe, who is 
making progress down there. It is also the wrong signal to send to the 
surrounding countries that have to deal with this drug problem and the 
drug cartel.
  I guess I am out of time, but I think the point has been made. Unless 
you have a constructive alternative, I suggest you do what the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder) has suggested. Read his ``Dear 
Colleague.''
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.

[[Page H5311]]

  Mr. Chairman, let me respond to the gentleman. I believe we need a 
balanced policy. And some of us tried in the Committee on International 
Relations and in the Committee on Appropriations to make some modest 
changes in support of increased alternative development aid, but we 
were shut down on even those modest changes. Maybe the gentleman did 
not listen to my statistics.
  Also, we have a critique of the letter of the gentleman from Indiana 
(Mr. Souder) that he sent to Members of Congress, and I think the 
gentleman would be interested to know that some of the figures that the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder) has cited we believe are totally 
inaccurate.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Meeks).

                              {time}  1730

  Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I am rising in support of this 
amendment partly because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
refuse to include reasonable amendments that direct or redirect funds 
to help the most in need in Colombia. In fact, they refuse to move on 
to a more balanced policy on Colombia.
  For example, Afro-Colombians comprise approximately 26 percent of 
Colombia's total population. Nevertheless, they are overrepresented 
amongst the poorest of the poor. Eighty-two percent of this 
disadvantaged minority lack even basic public services.
  There are problems with this bill, and we should not continue to 
throw good money after bad. Plan Colombia had 5 or 6 years to prove 
itself, and what it has proven is that the plan has caused more harm 
than good. Eighty percent of U.S. assistance to Colombia goes to the 
military and police. We need a more balanced policy on Colombia.
  Plan Colombia's aerial fumigation strategy has forced coca growers 
not to stop growing but to move their coca crops further west and north 
to Afro-Colombian and indigenous territories. Fumigation is ruining 
food crops, animals and livestock, while threatening the health and 
environment of Afro-Colombians, especially in the department of Choco.
  In 2002, only two municipalities in the department of Choco 
registered some sort of coca crops. Today, all 31 municipalities in 
that region have coca crops. Plan Colombia is destroying the 
traditional cultures of Afro-Colombians and their communities while 
providing little or no alternative development aid.
  Furthermore, a primary U.S. objective for Plan Colombia has been to 
prevent the flow of illegal drugs into the United States. In my 
district in southeastern Queens, New York, and on the streets of the 
United States of America, cocaine remains available today and at lower 
prices than ever and the levels of use are stable, if not rising.
  Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment, and I ask my colleagues in conference to support alternative 
development and social programs that work and can make our policy in 
Colombia more balanced and thereby giving the American people a better 
bang for their buck in Colombia.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Kirk), a distinguished member of the subcommittee.
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, this amendment will be defeated later on 
today because it would snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 
Colombia. We see a close connection between narcotics and terrorism.
  The people of Colombia saw that. When the Medellin cartel killed 
three major candidates for president, the people elected the last 
candidate left who wanted to fight the narcoterrorists. In their last 
election, the people of Colombia chose the candidate who took the 
hardest line against narcoterrorists, and after September 11, who could 
blame them?
  President Uribe of Colombia has asked for our help, and so far, what 
has our assistance accomplished? Coca growing is down, kidnappings are 
down, terrorist attacks are down, opium growing is down, several 
hundred drug kingpins extradited to the United States, and desertions 
among terrorist groups are up.
  In a recent poll, 73 percent of Colombians said they supported the 
U.S. assistance under Plan Colombia. We have seen narcoterrorists in 
Colombia offer training to other terror groups in other countries; and 
with these international links, we see Colombian drugs not only 
poisoning our kids but the profits from their sale are now supporting 
international terror.
  If we give up on Colombia, a new narcoterrorist state will rise in 
our hemisphere, and when a narco-state took power in 1991 in Panama, it 
took the direct action of the U.S. military to restore democracy.
  I think we should not give up on democracy in Colombia. We should 
listen to the voices of their people through their elected president 
and make sure that he and his team remain in power and that this stays 
as a Colombian struggle and is not surrendered to become a full blown 
American one.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Let me just respond to the gentleman, Mr. Chairman, if I can, by 
saying, if the Colombian people support this policy so much, then why 
is it that only 740,000 Colombians pay income tax in a country of 42 
million people? That is a fact. That was stated in the Council on 
Foreign Relations report that came out last year.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Paul).
  (Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment. I would 
only ask my colleagues on this side of the aisle, where have all the 
conservatives gone? Where are the fiscal conservatives? A decade or so 
ago, the conservatives on this side of the aisle voted against all 
foreign aid. Now they are the champion of foreign aid.
  We are running a national debt increase right now of nearly $600 
billion a year, and the gentleman from this side of the aisle suggests 
that maybe we can spend $100 million less out of a budget that is over 
$20.3 billion, suggesting we could save $100 million, which sounds like 
pretty good sense, and all we hear are complaints about why we need 
this program.
  One gentleman asked the question, what are we for if we are against 
this program down in Colombia, Plan Colombia? Well, I'll tell my 
colleagues what I am for. I am for the American taxpayer, and I will 
tell my colleagues one thing. I will bet them I am right on this. I 
will bet my colleagues, on either side of the aisle ever goes home and 
ever puts it into their campaign brochure and say, you know what, I 
voted $20 billion for foreign aid; and I know nobody over here will go 
home and brag about $100 million that they were able to vote against 
cutting from this side of the aisle. They will not do it.
  I was here in 2000 when this debate was going on and strongly opposed 
it for various reasons, but I remember the pretext for Plan Colombia. 
The pretext was the drug war and this is what we have heard about 
today. The evidence is very flimsy. If there was any success on the 
drug war, production would be down and prices would be up. Production 
is up and prices are down, and that is an economic absolute.
  So there has been nothing accomplished. There has been more 
production in other countries in the Andes, but the pretext there was 
only the drugs, but I remember so clearly in the year 2000 who lobbied 
for this bill.
  Does anybody remember oil companies coming here to get their oil 
pipelines protected, and we still protect them? This is a little 
private army that we sent down there. We have 800 troops and advisers 
in Colombia and spending these huge sums of money.
  Who else lobbied for Plan Colombia? Do my colleagues remember the 
debate on who would get to sell the helicopters? Would they be Black 
Hawks or Hueys?
  Then we wonder where the lobby is from. It is not from the American 
people. I will bet my colleagues nobody wrote to anybody on this side 
and said please make sure you spend this $100 million dollars; this 
would be tragic if you would not spend it because it is doing so much 
good. That does not happen. It is the lobbying behind the scenes of the 
special interests whose interests are served by us being down there. It 
is part of this military industrial complex which exists, and I do not

[[Page H5312]]

believe it has had one ounce of success. I think it is a complete waste 
of money; and besides, just incidentally it is unconstitutional for us 
to do this.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).
  (Mr. HAYWORTH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Arizona for the 
time.
  I rise in opposition to the amendment. I do not doubt the sincerity 
of proponents of the amendment on either side of the aisle. Many 
compelling questions have been asked.
  In the final analysis, it is my firmly held conviction that what many 
maintain would be re-evaluation, that this immediate reduction would 
send the signal of retreat.
  We have heard criticisms of the taxation policies of Colombia. We 
have heard criticisms based on different political ideologies in the 
United States; but in the final analysis, as we conduct a worldwide war 
on terror, I would remind all in this House we are not just talking 
about Islamic fascism. We are talking about the rise of narcoterror.
  For that reason I oppose the amendment.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  I want to commend the gentleman for offering this amendment, and I 
certainly agree with his intent, which is to minimize United States 
investment in failed counternarcotics programs.
  For far too long, we have supported policies and funded programs in 
Colombia that simply do not work. Our counternarcotics programs in 
Colombia have long been an inefficient use of taxpayer dollars.
  The data we have from the National Drug Intelligence Center at the 
Department of Justice with respect to the success of this program is 
negative. It shows that the program has not decreased the amount of 
cocaine coming into the United States. In fact, the quantity of cocaine 
on our streets is increasing, and the price is decreasing, making it 
all the more affordable and attractive to our youth.
  The billions that we have put into Plan Colombia have not been 
effective in substantially decreasing the amount of coca being grown in 
Colombia either. After spending over $4 billion and spending nearly 6 
years, have we even cut coca production in half? No. We have decreased 
by less than 7 percent the number of hectares of coca in Colombia.
  It is becoming even more difficult and costly to eliminate each 
hectare of coca. The U.N., whose own surveys found a small decrease in 
Colombian coca in 2004, found that for every acre of coca reduced in 
2004, 22.8 acres of coca had to be sprayed. This ratio has never been 
so high.
  U.N. statistics indicate that the overall amount of coca grown in the 
Andes increased by 3 percent last year, led by substantial increases in 
Bolivia, 17 percent; Peru, 14 percent.
  Finally, the failure of this program to solve the problem of coca 
production is all the more compounded by the heavy toll it imposes on 
the rural communities in Colombia that are already suffering from armed 
conflict. Continuing to fund it at such a high level is simply bad 
policy.
  I am troubled by the fact that this amendment cuts $100 million from 
the foreign operations bill without adding it back for one of the many 
programs that could use it. The allocation with which the gentleman 
from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) and I had to contend is already $2.5 
billion short of the President's request; and with the increased needs 
we face around the world, to combat the HIV/AIDS virus and other 
diseases, fight hunger, improve child health and education, and promote 
peace and security in the Middle East and elsewhere around the globe, I 
am concerned that this amendment further reduces our funding in the 
bill.
  Again, I support the gentleman for raising these important issues, 
and I thank him for all the time he has spent really understanding the 
issue, working on the issue and trying to stress how useless this 
funding really is in making a dent in the coca operation.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Mica), who is a member of the Task Force on Drugs.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  I also had the privilege of chairing the Criminal Justice Drug Policy 
Subcommittee before the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder) and 
inherited those responsibilities, actually, from the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hastert), the Speaker of the House. All during that era, 
the Clinton era, we saw really the beginning of this incredible problem 
in Colombia.
  During the 8 years of the Clinton administration, the other side of 
the aisle, even some of the folks that have spoken today, did 
everything they could to keep resources from going to Colombia; and 
when you do not have the resources to combat narcoterrorism, what 
happens?
  I have a little map here, and it shows where the drugs come from. 
This is not a guessing game. We know from chemical analysis even the 
fields the cocaine and heroin came from.
  So they blocked helicopters, they blocked assistance, they blocked 
eradication, interdiction, anything they could, because they did not 
want to harm the hair on a single leftist terrorist in that region.

                              {time}  1745

  But we are now trying to get a handle on that with the efforts of 
Speaker Hastert, with this President.
  They said Plan Colombia has not worked, when kidnappings are down a 
third in Colombia; they say it has not worked when murder is down a 
third; it has not worked when pipeline attacks from 2000, which were at 
177 that year, to 20 last year. It has not worked?
  Human rights? My colleague is concerned about human rights? Tens of 
thousands of people died, judges, legislators, thousands of police were 
slaughtered, and their human rights were not considered while you 
blocked aid and assistance.
  We have a President of the United States who has a firm policy, we 
have a Speaker who has developed Plan Colombia and we are initiating 
that. We have success in that land because we have a President who is 
also getting the resources to another president, in Colombia, who has a 
tough stance against narco-terrorism.
  The drugs in the United States are still killing our young people. We 
had over 26,000 people die, the silent deaths on our street. Our 
biggest social problem. This is where our few dollars and resources 
need to go, and that is where the drugs are, at their source, and we 
can eradicate them.
  Talk to one mother or father who has had a child die of a drug 
overdose and you will see the worth of what we are doing here today. We 
know where these drugs are. We can eradicate them. And we can do that 
continuing Plan Colombia in an effective manner and not having the legs 
cut out from under us when we have made such great progress.
  I urge defeat of the McGovern amendment. I urge defeat of attempts to 
again thwart the effort to stop drugs coming in across our borders.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time and for his leadership on this important issue.
  I rise in strong support of the McGovern-McCollum-Moore amendment to 
cut $100 million from the Andean counterdrug initiative account, which, 
by the way, still leaves $634.5 million in the account. I am not 
against helping create a more peaceful nation for the people of 
Colombia, and of course we want to reduce the flow of drugs to this 
country and the use of them by Americans, but I do not support throwing 
good money after bad in the quagmire that is our Colombia policy.
  I wanted to read from an article today in the L.A. Times written by 
Sonni Efron, the headline being ``Drug War Fails to Dent U.S. Supply.''
  ``The Bush administration and congressional allies are gearing up to 
renew a plan for drug eradication in Latin America despite some grim 
news. The $5.4 billion spent on the plan since 2000 has made no dent in 
the availability of cocaine on American streets, and prices are at all-
time lows. United Nations figures released this month show that coca 
cultivation in the Andean region increased by 2 percent in

[[Page H5313]]

2004 as declines in Colombia were swamped by massive increases in Peru 
and Bolivia. And the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service said 
last week that the antidrug effort has had 'no effect' on the price or 
purity of drugs in the United States. The findings have fueled 
skepticism in Congress where conservative groups have joined efforts to 
lobby against continued funding.''
  Let me underscore that: ``Conservative groups have joined efforts to 
lobby against continued funding. The National Taxpayers Union calls the 
antidrug program a 'boondoggle.' '' That is from The L.A. Times.
  And the policy of fumigation is not only ineffective, but it is 
inhumane. The majority of small farm families whose crops are sprayed 
do not receive assistance to transition to food crops from either the 
Colombian or the U.S. Governments. They are given no incentive to 
change their behavior, no alternative to make a living that will help 
them survive.
  There are areas in Colombia where massive spraying is occurring and 
little or no development aid is provided. Even legal crops in those 
areas are killed. They are subsistence crops, and there is nothing 
given to replace that loss for those families. This is inhumane and it 
is also remarkably ineffective. Sixty-two percent of the coca fields 
detected by the U.N. in Colombia in 2004 were new; evidence that 
fumigation, in the absence of alternatives, is not moving farmers away 
from planting coca.
  If we want a long-term and effective plan, it has to be a new one. It 
is not enough to send a report to our constituents each year and detail 
how much we are spending to go fight drugs. And it is not a real 
success when we reduce coca in one country while cultivation soars in 
another. We need to show them results, and this plan has provided none.
  So if you truly care, you are going to support the McGovern-McCollum-
Moore amendment and send a message that we need a new approach.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I find this debate most interesting, especially the 
statement made by the previous speaker, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Mica). It has been my experience on this floor through the years that 
the most baffling moments come not when we are talking about things we 
do not know, but when we are talking about things that we do know that 
``ain't'' so.
  I think the gentleman from Florida just illustrated what I mean. He 
stood here on the floor and suggested that somehow those of us on this 
side of the aisle who are skeptical about Plan Colombia had blocked all 
kinds of initiatives. He also suggested that this plan was a plan which 
had been forged into a successful program by President Bush and Speaker 
Hastert.
  Well, the fact is that I remember when Plan Colombia was first pushed 
through the Committee on Appropriations, because I opposed it 
vehemently. I thought, based on my experience in chairing the 
Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, for 10 years, that our drug 
interdiction programs were largely a flop. I know that I had officials 
from the Reagan administration tell me privately that we had 
intercepted less than 5 percent of the drugs that came across the 
southern borders from not just Mexico, but from elsewhere in this 
hemisphere.
  I would ask what initiatives did we block? I wish we had blocked 
some, but what I remember is getting run over. And I was not run over 
by President Bush and Speaker Hastert, I was run over by President 
Clinton and Speaker Hastert. They were the two who pushed it down the 
throats of the Committee on Appropriations, each trying to compete with 
each other to show who was most zealous in their resistance to the drug 
problem.
  So I would simply say I do not mind each of us rewriting a little 
history, if it is on purpose, but I hate to see history being rewritten 
by accident. That gets to be more than a little dangerous.
  So I would simply suggest that on the merits, this program has had a 
long time to prove itself. In the end, the only way it could succeed is 
if you had a Colombian society that was determined to make it succeed, 
and that society has not been willing to do that. They have not been 
able to muster the forces necessary to deal with the problem 
effectively.
  So we are left to ask what is ordinarily spoken of as a good 
conservative question, and that question would be: No matter how 
desirable this program is, does it work? And the answer is clear. This 
program has, at best, had only marginal success, very hard to see 
certainly, night or day. So I would simply suggest that with all of our 
challenges in the foreign aid area, even if we confine those challenges 
just to the Western Hemisphere, there are a lot of other places where 
we could more productively spend this money than we are in this 
initiative.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa 
(Mr. Latham), a distinguished member of the Committee on 
Appropriations.
  Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me this 
time, and first of all, I want to commend him and the ranking member 
for bringing this bill to the floor and for all their hard work. It is 
a very difficult bill, as we can see by the debate here.
  Mr. Chairman, today I rise in strong opposition to the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern). The Andean 
Counterdrug Initiative is an important antidrug effort that supports 
Colombia and the countries in the Andean region. After years of steady 
increases, cocaine and heroin production in the Andean Region is 
decreasing. For the third straight year, from 2002 to 2004, the ACI has 
helped reduce coca production by 33 percent in Colombia and 21 percent 
in the region. Opium poppy cultivation in Colombia dropped 52 percent 
in the year 2004 alone. The total land under coca cultivation in 
Colombia decreased 7 percent in 2004, the fourth consecutive annual 
decrease.
  The United States and our allies disrupted the transport of 248 
metric tons of cocaine headed through the transit zone before it could 
reach U.S. shores in 2004 alone. The ACI has helped streamline 
extradition procedures resulting in over 250 extraditions to the U.S. 
since August of 2002, including FARC leader Simon Trinidad and ex-Cali 
cartel leaders.
  Over 60,000 families have received alternative crop development 
assistance, and almost 1,000 infrastructure projects have been built 
using ACI funds. Even as detractors cite individual instances of human 
rights' abuses, overall kidnappings dropped by almost 35 percent in 
2004 and fell another 60 percent through May of this year. Homicides 
are down 14 percent in 2004 and dropped another 22 percent since May of 
this year.
  Mr. Chairman, I would urge the Members to strongly oppose this 
amendment which would very much harm our ability to fight this scourge 
in our country.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Farr).
  Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I rise with a great deal of concern about 
Colombia and in support of this amendment, because I think the facts I 
have heard here on the floor just misconstrue what is really going on 
down there.
  We need to wake up and smell the coffee. The debate here should be 
about improving sales of Colombian coffee, not about the increased 
sales of Colombian coca. What was Plan Colombia has now become Plan K 
Street. What was supposed to help Colombians help themselves has now 
become Help American Corporations Stay in Business in Colombia. What 
should be money to eradicate the poverty that drives drugs in the first 
place has become a program to give Dyna Corporation $80 million, to 
give 16 U.S. contractors money to maintain Colombian helicopters and 
money to U.S. firms to own and fly the eradication aircraft. This is 
not about Plan Colombia anymore. This is about Plan K Street. Lockheed 
Martin got $9 million.
  Congress Members here travel to Colombia almost monthly on what I 
have now called the Narcotourism Tour that American Congressmen like to 
have. They come home thinking that they have seen the problems in 
Colombia and that all we need to do is give more money. I am all for a 
real Plan Colombia, a plan that invests in Colombia, that lets 
Colombians do the jobs that Americans should be working themselves out 
of. For 5 years the same companies are doing the same things they have 
been doing; 5 years without

[[Page H5314]]

the Colombians owning those companies, without the Colombians doing 
that work.
  It is time that we make a statement. Cut this $100 million, put it 
into alternative development, do something that helps Colombians help 
themselves so that we do not have to keep American corporations on the 
handout from American Congress Members to keep their businesses going 
in the guise of trying to eradicate drugs in Colombia. It is time to 
stop.
  Mr. Chairman, it doesn't take an inside-the-beltway policy work to 
understand that the current policy towards Colombia is broken.
  My district on the Central Coast of California is filled with 
compassionate people who closely follow US foreign policy towards our 
southern neighbors and they recognize that our current policy towards 
Colombia is broken.
  They are well aware that only eradicating a farmer's crops and not 
providing for alternative livelihoods is not a sustainable solution to 
the coca growing problem in the Andean region.
  US assistance to Colombia is reflective of this flawed policy: 80 
percent of funds have gone for military assistance and been eaten up by 
coca eradication.
  Only 20 percent of funds have gone to social and economic programs. 
These programs are what build local economies and communities and 
provide alternatives to coca production.
  This distribution of assistance is not a recipe for permanent coca 
eradication. It's not a recipe for peace. It's a recipe for disaster.
  And that disaster is reflected in the Administration's own figures 
for coca production. The White House Office of National Drug Control 
Policy statistics for 2004 show that, despite a record number of crops 
sprayed in Colombia, data shows that coca production remains 
``statistically unchanged'' and the US street prices of cocaine and 
heroin are at or near all-time lows.
  I'd like to quote a constituent and friend of mine, Bert Muhly, who 
has traveled extensively throughout Latin America for decades and has 
been a tireless advocate for the downtrodden throughout the Western 
Hemisphere.
  Bert correctly states:
  ``Plan Colombia must be abandoned in favor of a Plan for Peace where 
the billions our government spends on shoring up the military 
establishment of countries of Latin America that are used to suppress 
the hopes of their people is diverted to programs that will alleviate 
poverty and give hope to the people within those countries.''
  I was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Colombia in the 1960s and have 
visited Colombia many times since then. I have seen first hand that 
Colombians are resilient and bright people who desperately want peace.
  Yet U.S. assistance and the Colombian government have not laid the 
ground work for peace.
  The Colombian government has failed to focus on creating a rural 
development strategy to address the underlying causes of poverty.
  With such a lop-sided policy that fails to invest in the innate 
capabilities of rural Colombians so that they can build a life for 
themselves that doesn't involve coca production, I am sad that my 
adopted country will remain stuck in this quagmire of civil war.
  House rules prevent the $100 million from the McGovern-Moore-McCollum 
amendment to be reallocated to alternative development, which would be 
my preference. Absent that option, I strongly urge my colleagues to 
vote in support of this amendment which is a step in the right 
direction to encourage reform of U.S. policy in Colombia.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Weller), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means and 
also an individual who has spent a great deal of time in Central 
America and Latin America studying this issue.
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) 
and who I have great respect for, but disagree on some things, 
particularly this amendment. This amendment, I believe, would cut the 
rug out from under our democratically elected ally in Colombia.
  Let us look at the facts. The facts are that Colombia is a democracy. 
The facts are that Colombia is our hemisphere's second oldest 
continuous democracy. The facts are that 90 percent of the cocaine and 
50 percent of the heroin that comes into my home State of Illinois 
comes from the Andean region, particularly Colombia. The facts tell us 
that Colombian drugs in 2001 killed more Americans than the attack on 
the World Trade Center. The facts tell us that the criminal sale of 
narcotrafficking of drugs supports almost 30,000 terrorists, terrorists 
who are affiliated with two leftist terrorist groups, FARC and the ELN, 
and one right wing terrorist group, AUC.
  I would note that these are terrorist groups that enslave child 
soldiers, sending children into battle against the democratically 
elected government of Colombia.
  Today, 65 elected officials, judges, and a presidential candidate are 
held hostage. They are political prisoners, held by the FARC. These 65 
political prisoners are the only political prisoners held in our 
hemisphere outside of Cuba, that brutal dictatorship.
  We have a partner in President Uribe, and Colombia is making progress 
under Plan Colombia. Homicides are down, kidnappings are down, terror 
attacks are down, and 250 narcoterrorists and drug kingpins have been 
extradited to the United States for trial. Again, Plan Colombia is 
working.
  When it comes to intercepting drugs this past year, 475 tons of drugs 
were eradicated or seized in 2004. I would note just this past week the 
Colombian Government was successful. In one drug bust, they seized 15 
tons of street-quality cocaine, worth $400 million in Boston or 
Chicago. Again, progress is being made. Clearly, by voting ``yes'' for 
this amendment, Members pull the rug out from under the democratically 
elected government of Colombia.
  I have worked with many friends on both sides of the aisle. We have 
talked about finding alternative crops to help the farmers in Colombia 
make money and have a profitable alternative to becoming cocaleros, and 
I am proud that through USAID our investments are paying off. Today, 
thousands of former cocaleros are now cafeteros, growing coffee for a 
more profitable market as coffee prices have increased in the past 
year. As part of that commitment, the United States joined the 
International Coffee Organization. Since then, prices have gone up $1 a 
pound.
  Mr. Chairman, vote ``no'' on the McGovern amendment.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, let us look at the facts. The facts are that illegal 
drugs are cheaper today than they were 6 years ago and $4 billion ago 
when we began Plan Colombia. The facts are that the elites in Colombia 
want us to bankroll this war. It remains an embarrassing fact that only 
740,000 Colombians pay income tax in a country of 42 million. They are 
relying on us to bankroll this war.
  Mr. Chairman, the other fact is that widespread impunity for human 
rights abusers is getting worse. It has been widely publicized in our 
newspapers about the new law that the Colombian Government has passed 
to grant immunity and to grant amnesty, for the most part, to 
individuals in the paramilitaries who are guilty of crimes again 
humanity, many of them involved in the drug trade, and they are doing 
that right before our eyes.
  The facts are that the human rights situation is so bad that our own 
State Department has yet to certify human rights progress in Colombia. 
We are being drawn into a quagmire. The legal limit on the number of 
military and contractor personnel had to be increased in 2004 from 400 
to 800 military, from 400 to 600 contractors.
  Let us try to solve the problem of drug abuse, not just throw money 
at failing strategies. We need to invest in drug treatment and 
prevention here at home and in the Andes, in alternative development 
programs to help small farmers transition permanently from growing 
illicit drugs. But this policy has failed.
  Mr. Chairman, the question was raised before what are we for. I 
include for the Record a statement of what we are for.

                        Rethinking Plan Colombia

       Low-cost: use U.S. leverage far more vigorously in support 
     of human rights and the rule of law; support the 
     recommendations of the United Nations High Commissioner for 
     Human Rights for Colombia; insist upon the complete 
     dismantlement of paramilitary forces and structures, within 
     an effective legal framework for justice, truth, and 
     reparations; make trade consistent with sustainable drug 
     policy and human rights; encourage negotiations with the 
     guerrillas for a just and lasting peace; encourage Colombia's 
     elite to use more of its own resources to improve governance.
       Fund by reducing security assistance: support a strong 
     judiciary and an independent

[[Page H5315]]

     human rights sector; expand alternative development within a 
     comprehensive rural development strategy, and end aerial 
     spraying; encourage the strengthening of civilian governance 
     in rural areas, including local peace-building initiatives; 
     increase and improve humanitarian assistance, and expand 
     protection, to displaced persons and refugees; reduce U.S. 
     demand for drugs through evidence-based prevention strategies 
     and improved access to high-quality treatment.

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Kolbe) for yielding me this time. I rise in opposition to the McGovern 
amendment.
  This amendment would take valuable resources away from a program that 
is working to help keep drugs off our streets. The Andean Counterdrug 
Initiative was established to eliminate the cultivation and production 
of cocaine and opium, build Andean law enforcement infrastructure, 
arrest and prosecute traffickers, and seize their assets. The more we 
can disrupt the production of the drugs that are smuggled into our 
country, the safer our citizens will be.
  The Andean Counterdrug Initiative has provided resources necessary to 
fight the war on drugs where these drugs are grown and processed, and 
efforts to disrupt the drug trade are working.
  Aerial eradication efforts in Colombia have been impressive: 127,000 
hectares were sprayed in 2003; 136,000 in 2004; and 95,000 hectares, or 
nearly 250,000 acres, have already been sprayed in this year alone.
  Efforts like these, which are supported by resources from the Andean 
Counterdrug Initiative, have reduced coca cultivation in Colombia by 33 
percent. Opium poppy cultivation in Colombia dropped 52 percent in 
2004, which represents the third straight year of decline.
  Due to these types of efforts, traffickers have been forced to 
decentralize their crops of coca, which has worked to decrease the 
total amount of coca cultivation. Efforts to seize drugs in Colombia 
have also seen impressive strides with the help of this important 
program.
  Mr. Chairman, 114 metric tons of cocaine were seized in 2003, 178 
metric tons in 2004. Drugs seized in Colombia are drugs that do not 
make it to the United States. Now is not the time to reduce funding for 
such a successful program. I urge my colleagues to oppose this 
amendment.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, if this policy is succeeding, why does cocaine remain 
readily available on U.S. streets at lower prices than ever, and the 
levels of use are stable if not rising? There is increased 
availability.
  If this policy is such a success, why are there increased abuses by 
the army? Why are trade union murders on the rise? Murders of trade 
union leaders increased in 2004 over 2003.
  Let us look at the facts here. The bottom line is that this policy 
has not succeeded. It is time for us to take a fresh look at it and to 
change course.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the McGovern amendment. 
Assistance under Plan Colombia is not just about policies; it is about 
saving lives. It is about the countless judges and other innocent 
Colombians who have, throughout the years, perished under the violence 
of ruthless narcotrafficking networks.
  It is about fighting a threat to stability and security in our own 
hemisphere and addressing the drug activity and the related criminal 
enterprises that create an environment where terrorist activities can 
blossom. It is about assisting our democratic allies in confronting a 
threat that gradually erodes the institutional framework necessary for 
the survival of these relatively new and fragile democracies. It is 
about going to the source of the problem and providing for the welfare 
of our children and our Nation's future.
  Plan Colombia is working, and the funds appropriated in this 
legislation are vital for the continued success of this effort. If we 
truly care about the people of the Andean region, let us not abandon 
them. I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the amendment.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Souder).
  (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, first, let me make a couple of points 
clear. This amendment does not save a dime. It merely transfers money 
from counternarcotics efforts to other efforts. Those Members who act 
like it saves money are wrong.
  Secondly, it is about kids and families in America. It is not about 
contractors; it is about the cocaine on our streets and what is the 
best way to deal with it.
  Look, this is a tough problem. I am not going to admit that it is not 
a tough problem. Rape is a tough problem. Child abuse is a tough 
problem. Spouse abuse is a tough problem, but we do not say let us give 
up efforts; let us give in because we have not seen a drop in spouse 
abuse or child abuse; why do we not just surrender and give the fight 
up.
  Our problem is difficult here. This is a map of Colombia. If you look 
at the map, the reason you hear passing statistics going on here is 
because basically our policies have pushed the narcoterrorists out into 
the jungle, instead of on the streets of Bogota where they are 
assassinating elected officials, terrorizing individuals, as reported 
in Garcia Marquez's book, ``Diary of a Kidnapping.'' We have pushed 
them into the jungle, so we have seen a tremendous drop in kidnappings 
and a tremendous drop in murders and blockades and all other types of 
things in the populist areas of this part of the country.
  The fact is that now for the first time in modern history, every 
single city and town in this country has an elected official because he 
is not worried about being murdered.
  I am all for alternative development. Alternative development, 
however, first requires you to get the guy from the FARC and the 
ultraparamilitary rightist groups away from them with a machine gun 
saying, plant palm heart and I will kill you. As you talk to the 
individuals, you can offer all of the incentives you want; but, quite 
frankly, they can make more money in coca. And as long as they are 
being terrorized and as long as they think they can make the money in 
coca and the terrorists think they can make money in coca, they are not 
going to let them do alternative development.
  So we have to get control of the land. Just like in Afghanistan with 
heroin, it is fine for us to talk about alternative problems; but until 
you eradicate the heroin, it does not do any good to talk to them about 
planting a crop that will yield only about one-fifth the amount.
  Now, I want to put a couple of other charts up here to show Members 
the depth of this problem. This is the eastern Pacific and western 
Atlantic. In this map from southwest Colombia in the eastern Pacific, 
you see the main trafficking routes. This is a Caribbean route, 
basically, going over to Yucatan.
  The reason that is important is if you look at this map, the area we 
are trying to patrol in the eastern Pacific is basically as big as the 
continental United States. That does not even count the Caribbean.
  Now, facts are stubborn things. In 1993, we cut 75 percent of the 
interdiction budget. What we saw was cocaine and heroin pour in from 
Colombia in that region to the point where after basically 10 years of 
effort, we have steadily reduced it back to where we were. It jumped 50 
percent in 12 months when we cut the budget. We are now gradually 
working our way back down and trying to restabilize.
  Let me conclude with this. This is not a Colombian problem; it is our 
problem. It is our addictions and Europe's addictions that have 
terrorized this 200-year-old democracy. Because we have not licked drug 
abuse in America, they have had 30,000 police killed. President 
Clinton, while initially he had bad policies in his administration, he 
is the one who came up with the Andean Counterdrug Initiative and came 
up with the Colombian Initiative, working with this Congress, because 
he realized it did not work to cut back.

[[Page H5316]]

  It was terrorizing a legitimate democracy. An economy that has 
coffee, emeralds, oil, flowers, that had a flourishing middle class, 
that is an example of a country that fights for itself, where their 
police are dying. Unlike what it has taken in Afghanistan and Iraq to 
rebuild a police force, they had a police force. What they needed was 
helicopters, bullets, and communications systems. They needed help with 
their legal system and alternative development. They needed help with 
building roads into some of the rural areas where they had fled to. We 
provided that help to the Colombians.
  This is a model of what we are trying to do in Iraq and Afghanistan; 
but it shows that when the terrorists can get drug money, whether it be 
in Afghanistan or Colombia, they are a threat to the stability, to the 
law and order, and to the people who want to follow the law. We need to 
stand behind them because it is our habit that has caused the problem.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment will not cripple our military support 
for Colombia. Currently, there is $332 million in the Andean 
Counterdrug Initiative for Colombia.

                              {time}  1815

  This amendment reduces that amount by $100 million. There is an 
additional $152 million for alternative development, human rights, and 
rule of law programs for Colombia in the ACI. We are not touching that 
money. There is another $90 million in military aid for Colombia in the 
FMF account in this bill. We are not touching that money. In the 
defense appropriations bill that we passed just a few weeks ago, there 
was another $165 million in military aid for Colombia.
  And should this amendment prevail, I will be happy to work with the 
chairman, a gentleman I greatly admire, and the distinguished ranking 
member to ensure that the intent of this amendment is made clear in the 
final foreign operations conference report.
  Mr. Chairman, we have heard some talk today about the new law passed 
in Colombia last week to demobilize the paramilitary forces. Maybe we 
should call the law up here what they are calling it in Colombia: the 
Impunity and Immunity law. It fails to establish any mechanisms that 
will ensure the dismantling of the paramilitaries' organizational 
structures or financial structures. Commanders who are major narco-
traffickers and have committed crimes against humanity will get off 
with very limited, if any, sentences, probably spent under house arrest 
at their local hacienda, profits in hand.
  Mr. Chairman, 6 years, over $4 billion. We are paying for Colombia's 
war. As I pointed out over and over in this debate, there are 42 
million people who live in Colombia. Only 720,000 of them actually pay 
taxes. We are bankrolling this war. Maybe the elites in Colombia should 
put up some of their own money.
  We need to send a strong message: We are not Colombia's piggy-bank. 
We cannot just keep writing blank checks. This policy has failed. It 
has failed. The availability of cocaine on the streets of the United 
States of America has never been more plentiful. The price has never 
been lower. This policy has not made a difference to any of the people 
in this country.
  So I urge my colleagues to vote for the McGovern-McCollum-Moore 
amendment. Enough is enough.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I do rise in strong opposition to the gentleman's amendment. I think 
this is the wrong time to send the signal to the world that the United 
States Congress does not fully support President Bush in his fight 
against terrorism and narcotics in this hemisphere. I believe that the 
current mix of the ``hard side'' versus the ``soft side'' of programs 
in Colombia has been vital to our success. The aerial spraying 
eradication program enjoys strong public support in Colombia. Part of 
the support is due to the fact that we are offering alternatives to 
farmers who used to cultivate coca and poppy. Illicit cultivation is 
not now their only option.
  The soft-side programs promoting alternatives is even more effective 
in Colombia due to the realization if they do not stop cultivation and 
take advantage of legal opportunities, their coca or poppy will be 
sprayed and they will not have anything available to them. The carrot-
and-stick incentive structure has proven to be very effective in 
Colombia. I think we have gotten the mix right.
  The political will of the Uribe government is part of the reason for 
our success. However, Colombia has provided more than just political 
will. In the last 3 years, it has doubled its portion of the GDP that 
is devoted to public security and democracy. The narco-terrorists they 
face are smart, well financed, and ruthless. Therefore, both the 
government of Colombia and the United States must keep up the pressure 
to end narco-terrorism in Colombia.
  Our government has been a strong supporter of Colombia, and President 
Bush has confirmed to President Uribe our firm commitment to support 
Colombia in its efforts to combat narco-terrorism. Secretary Rice has 
also confirmed this commitment during a recent visit to Colombia.
  We need to consolidate the many successes of Plan Colombia. There has 
been almost a 33 percent reduction in coca cultivation in Colombia 
since 2001 and a 72 percent drop in poppy cultivation. We need to 
ensure that this trend continues.
  Our goals in Colombia are to eliminate narco-terrorism, promote 
respect for human rights, create economic alternatives and 
opportunities, respect for the rule of law, and achieving peace. 
Democracy is flourishing in this important ally and terrorism is being 
defeated. We cannot afford to lose the momentum.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. LEACH. Mr. Chairman, at issue in the case of Colombia are 
priorities, but in a different sense than is usually assumed. The 
``priority'' debate today is not about whether stemming the drug trade 
is appropriate, but the methodology of going about it. Military 
approaches fit war scenarios. Civil war is more problematic; criminal 
activities even more so. My concern is that when America enters into 
internal conflicts we change the nature of on-going struggles as well 
as the motivations of various combatants. We become implicitly 
accountable for a panoply of policies of any side we back and 
accordingly answerable to the people for that side's allegiance or lack 
thereof to social fairness and the rule of law itself.
  In this context, would it not be better to limit our military 
involvement in this struggling, divided country and focus our efforts 
instead on alternative crop production, democracy building programs and 
the effective prosecution of human rights abuses? And at home wouldn't 
we be better off emphasizing education to reduce the demand for drugs?
  Military involvement simply carries too many seeds of 
counterproductivity as well as the prospect of escalation if policies 
at one level of engagement prove insufficient.
  Accordingly, I support the amendment before us, not out of a 
conviction it is an adequate answer to a real dilemma for both of our 
societies, but out of a belief that more balanced social involvement 
holds a better prospect for more productive economic and social 
development in Colombia and hence more comprehensive drug curtailment 
through national law enforcement.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of the 
McGovern, McCollum and Moore Amendment to the FY06 Foreign Operations 
Appropriations Bill that will reduce counter-narcotics and military 
funding to Colombia by $100 million. The U.S./Colombia campaign against 
drugs and terrorism is not working. Not only have efforts to reduce the 
production of cocaine in Colombia not been effective, funds from the 
program that should have been used to fight terrorism are instead being 
used by paramilitary groups to commit human rights abuses.
  The U.S. has invested billions of dollars into Plan Colombia and 
successive programs since passing the FY 2000 budget. The Bush 
administration wants to continue this misguided policy with a request 
for $734 million in the FY06 Foreign Operations Appropriations request 
for the Andean Counter-drug Initiative.
  One of the main objectives of Plan Colombia has been to prevent the 
flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. At the center of this effort has 
been the aerial spraying of herbicides on Colombia's coca crops. But 
U.S. and UN reports confirm that aerial spraying has not produced any 
appreciable reduction in coca production. In fact, cocaine production 
in Colombia may even have increased. According to the UN, 62 percent of 
Colombian coca fields detected in 2004 were new!
  The lack of any appreciable reduction in production combined with an 
increase in production in countries such as Bolivia and Peru

[[Page H5317]]

has actually led to an increase of supply on the global market and a 
decrease in the cost of cocaine in the United States.
  Mr. Chairman, I am also troubled by reports in the news that recently 
the Colombian Congress, while approving a law governing the disarmament 
of its country's death squads, at the same time, granted generous 
concessions to paramilitary commanders accused of human rights abuses. 
I am concerned that U.S. assistance is being used by Colombian security 
forces that operate in conjunction with paramilitary forces targeting 
social leaders with threats, disappearance, and execution. The U.S. 
should not provide assistance to governments that refuse to hold 
perpetrators accountable for human rights abuses.
  Mr. Chairman, until I am convinced that the funds to Colombia are 
fixing the problem instead of making it worse, I cannot support full 
funding for aid to Colombia. That is why I support the McGovern, 
McCollum, Moore Amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
McGovern) will be postponed.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. 
Capps).
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding to 
me.
  Mr. Chairman, the Foreign Operations appropriations bill is one of 
the best vehicles Congress has to address an issue of paramount 
importance, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This bill contains 
important Middle East provisions, but I believe we could have done 
better in our efforts to bring peace to these two long-suffering 
peoples.
  I support our $2.3 billion package for Israel. Maintaining Israel's 
military superiority in the region is a prerequisite for any peace 
agreement, and I am pleased that the bill fulfills the President's 
request for an additional $150 million for the Palestinians. The 
President believes, as do I, that it is imperative to deliver U.S. 
assistance quickly to improve the Palestinians' quality of life and 
empower their democratically elected leadership. But I had hoped, Mr. 
Chairman, that the Committee on Appropriations could have seized this 
historic opportunity and provided direct funding to the Palestinian 
Authority. Instead, this bill prohibits direct funding and places 
excessive conditions and limitations on the aid package.
  Of course, we must ensure transparency and accountability. But the 
requirements in this legislation continue to go far beyond what we ever 
demanded in the Arafat era. This strikes me as shortsighted. We should 
join with President Bush in strengthening President Abbas, especially 
in the face of a strong challenge from Hamas in the upcoming 
parliamentary elections.
  As Israel and the Palestinian Authority prepare to implement the 
Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza, it is incumbent upon the United 
States to help both Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas confront 
the extremists on each side who seek to derail this process. I hope, 
Mr. Chairman, that when this bill comes to the conference with the 
Senate, we can redirect some of our assistance directly to the 
Palestinian Authority. Fragile as it may be, a flicker of hope and 
optimism has been kindled in the Middle East. It may truly be our last 
hope, and what a tragedy it would be for Israel, for the Palestinians, 
and for America if we did not do everything in our power to bring an 
end to this conflict.
  I thank, again, the ranking member for yielding to me.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                    Migration and Refugee Assistance

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary to 
     enable the Secretary of State to provide, as authorized by 
     law, a contribution to the International Committee of the Red 
     Cross, assistance to refugees, including contributions to the 
     International Organization for Migration and the United 
     Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and other activities 
     to meet refugee and migration needs; salaries and expenses of 
     personnel and dependents as authorized by the Foreign Service 
     Act of 1980; allowances as authorized by sections 5921 
     through 5925 of title 5, United States Code; purchase and 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; and services as authorized 
     by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, $790,720,000, 
     which shall remain available until expended: Provided, That 
     not more than $22,000,000 may be available for administrative 
     expenses: Provided further, That funds appropriated under 
     this heading may be made available for a headquarters 
     contribution to the International Committee of the Red Cross 
     only if the Secretary of State determines (and so reports to 
     the appropriate committees of Congress) that the Magen David 
     Adom Society of Israel is not being denied participation in 
     the activities of the International Red Cross and Red 
     Crescent Movement.


     United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     section 2(c) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 
     1962, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601(c)), $30,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended.


    Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and Related Programs

       For necessary expenses for nonproliferation, anti-
     terrorism, demining and related programs and activities, 
     $400,350,000, to carry out the provisions of chapter 8 of 
     part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for anti-
     terrorism assistance, chapter 9 of part II of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961, section 504 of the FREEDOM Support 
     Act, section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act or the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 for demining activities, the clearance 
     of unexploded ordnance, the destruction of small arms, and 
     related activities, notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law that restricts assistance to foreign countries, including 
     activities implemented through nongovernmental and 
     international organizations, and section 301 of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 for a voluntary contribution to the 
     International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and for a United 
     States contribution to the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban 
     Treaty Preparatory Commission: Provided, That of this amount 
     not to exceed $37,500,000, to remain available until 
     expended, may be made available for the Nonproliferation and 
     Disarmament Fund, notwithstanding any other provision of law 
     that restricts assistance to foreign countries, to promote 
     bilateral and multilateral activities relating to 
     nonproliferation and disarmament: Provided further, That such 
     funds may also be used for such countries other than the 
     Independent States of the former Soviet Union and 
     international organizations when it is in the national 
     security interest of the United States to do so: Provided 
     further, That funds appropriated under this heading may be 
     made available for the International Atomic Energy Agency 
     only if the Secretary of State determines (and so reports to 
     the Congress) that Israel is not being denied its right to 
     participate in the activities of that Agency: Provided 
     further, That of the funds made available for demining and 
     related activities, not to exceed $705,000, in addition to 
     funds otherwise available for such purposes, may be used for 
     administrative expenses related to the operation and 
     management of the demining program: Provided further, That 
     funds appropriated under this heading that are available for 
     ``Anti-terrorism Assistance'' and ``Export Control and Border 
     Security'' shall remain available until September 30, 2007: 
     Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading 
     shall be made available for programs and countries in the 
     amounts contained in the table included in the report 
     accompanying this Act: Provided further, That any proposed 
     increases or decreases to the amounts contained in such table 
     shall be subject to the regular notification procedures of 
     the Committee on Appropriations and section 634A of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and notifications shall be 
     transmitted at least 15 days in advance of the obligation of 
     funds.


                  Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Royce

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

       Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Royce:
       Page 34, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $7,000,000) (reduced by 
     $7,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce).
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This amendment seeks to direct $7 million in funding for the Small 
Arms/Light Weapons Destruction initiative that is housed within the 
Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and Related programs 
account. That account is called the NADR account, and the entire NADR 
account is reduced by approximately 1.75 percent in order to

[[Page H5318]]

account for the increase in this Small Arms/Light Weapons Destruction 
initiative.
  I am very pleased here to have worked with the gentleman from Arizona 
(Chairman Kolbe) and with the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), 
ranking member, to craft an amendment that I believe is acceptable to 
both of them. Seven million dollars is the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
level for this activity.
  And, Mr. Chairman, of growing concern to the United States are these 
shoulder-fired, anti-aircraft missiles, referred to as MANPADs, which 
have proliferated throughout the world, especially since the collapse 
of the Soviet Union. These are U.S.-made Stingers, they are British-
made Blowpipes, and most of them are Russian-made SA-7s. According to 
one report, 6,000 shoulder-fired missiles are outside of government 
control. There are known black markets for these shoulder-fired 
missiles throughout Africa, throughout the Middle East, and in Asia. 
And for between about $5,000 and $30,000, a MANPAD can be acquired; a 
low cost relative to the damage they could inflict in human loss as 
well as economic and psychological damage. A successful attack with one 
of these shoulder-fired missiles against an airliner could halt 
aviation, and recently we had a study done by RAND, and they released 
this report that found that the total economic loss resulting from an 
attack could be in the billions of dollars.
  The alarming news is that more than two dozen terrorist groups are 
believed to be in possession of these weapons. Several incidents have 
highlighted the danger that these weapons pose: the November, 2002, 
attempted missile attack on an Israeli commercial airliner in Mombassa, 
Kenya; the August, 2003 sting in which a man was arrested trying to 
sell Russian-made shoulder-fired missiles to FBI agents posing as 
terrorists. Also in 2003 we had the British government deploying 
approximately 450 troops at Heathrow Airport after intelligence 
indicated a possible al Qaeda plan to use these shoulder-fired missiles 
against their civilian flights. Al Qaeda training films recovered by 
allied forces in Afghanistan contained detailed instruction on how to 
use Russian-made shoulder-fired missiles.
  Most observers recommend a multi-layered approach to defend against 
possible terrorist attacks using these shoulder-fired missiles. An 
important piece of this strategy are U.S. efforts to take these deadly 
weapons out of play around the world. Last week the International 
Terrorism and Nonproliferation Subcommittee that I chair held a 
briefing with administration officials on the State Department's 
efforts to identify, secure, and then destroy these shoulder-fired 
anti-aircraft missile stocks.
  The Small Arms/Light Weapons Destruction initiative is one part of 
our effort against this threat. To reduce the number of shoulder-fired 
missiles that could fall into the hands of terrorists, we are providing 
bilateral assistance to foreign governments to identify and destroy 
their stocks in excess of their security needs as well as to improve 
security at their storage facilities. The State Department is now 
overseeing the destruction or pledges to destroy shoulder-fired 
missiles from Bosnia-Herzegovina, from Cambodia, Nigeria, Liberia, 
Serbia, and other countries. And most importantly, I think, since 2003, 
this program has destroyed over 10,500 of these shoulder-fired 
missiles.
  Unfortunately, there is a lot of work left to be done. This amendment 
helps to continue this work. At little cost these efforts are helping 
to mitigate a critical threat to our security.
  So I want to thank the chairman and I want to thank the ranking 
member for working with me on this amendment. They have a tough task on 
this bill, and I look forward to working with them on this legislation 
as it moves forward.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, 
although I am not in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I do rise to say that I think that the issue that has 
been raised by the gentleman from California is a very important one, 
and we do accept this amendment.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  And I want to thank the gentleman for raising this issue today. I 
strongly support continued funding for programs to secure and destroy 
small arms and light weapons around the world, and I join my chairman 
in delightfully accepting the amendment.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would just say simply 
that the program is certainly a worthwhile one and we have no problem 
with it. We simply did not earmark specific dollars from this account 
for it. This would suggest that certain dollars are to be spent, and we 
do support what is being done.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Royce).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder 
of the bill through page 70, line 19 be considered as read, printed in 
the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the bill from page 36, line 16 through page 70, line 19 
is as follows:

                       Department of the Treasury


               International Affairs Technical Assistance

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     section 129 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     $20,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009, 
     which shall be available notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law that restricts assistance to foreign countries.


                           Debt Restructuring

       For the cost, as defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, of modifying loans and loan 
     guarantees, as the President may determine, for which funds 
     have been appropriated or otherwise made available for 
     programs within the International Affairs Budget Function 
     150, including the cost of selling, reducing, or canceling 
     amounts owed to the United States as a result of concessional 
     loans made to eligible countries, pursuant to parts IV and V 
     of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, of modifying 
     concessional credit agreements with least developed 
     countries, as authorized under section 411 of the 
     Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, as 
     amended, of concessional loans, guarantees and credit 
     agreements, as authorized under section 572 of the Foreign 
     Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 
     Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461), and of 
     canceling amounts owed, as a result of loans or guarantees 
     made pursuant to the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, by 
     countries that are eligible for debt reduction pursuant to 
     title V of H.R. 3425 as enacted into law by section 
     1000(a)(5) of Public Law 106-113, $65,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2008: Provided, That not less 
     than $20,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading 
     shall be made available to carry out the provisions of part V 
     of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961: Provided further, That 
     up to $45,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this 
     heading may be used by the Secretary of the Treasury to pay 
     to the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Trust Fund 
     administered by the International Bank for Reconstruction and 
     Development amounts for the benefit of countries that are 
     eligible for debt reduction pursuant to title V of H.R. 3425 
     as enacted into law by section 1000(a)(5) of Public Law 106-
     113: Provided further, That amounts paid to the HIPC Trust 
     Fund may be used only to fund debt reduction under the 
     enhanced HIPC initiative by--
       (1) the Inter-American Development Bank;
       (2) the African Development Fund;
       (3) the African Development Bank; and
       (4) the Central American Bank for Economic Integration:

     Provided further, That funds may not be paid to the HIPC 
     Trust Fund for the benefit of any country if the Secretary of 
     State has credible evidence that the government of such 
     country is engaged in a consistent pattern of gross 
     violations of internationally recognized human rights or in 
     military or civil conflict that undermines its ability to 
     develop and implement measures to alleviate poverty and to 
     devote adequate human and financial resources to that end: 
     Provided further, That on the basis of final appropriations, 
     the Secretary of the Treasury shall consult with the 
     Committees on Appropriations concerning which countries and 
     international financial institutions are expected to benefit 
     from a United States contribution to the HIPC Trust Fund 
     during the fiscal year: Provided further, That the Secretary 
     of the Treasury shall inform the Committees on Appropriations 
     not less than 15 days in

[[Page H5319]]

     advance of the signature of an agreement by the United States 
     to make payments to the HIPC Trust Fund of amounts for such 
     countries and institutions: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary of the Treasury may disburse funds designated for 
     debt reduction through the HIPC Trust Fund only for the 
     benefit of countries that--
       (1) have committed, for a period of 24 months, not to 
     accept new market-rate loans from the international financial 
     institution receiving debt repayment as a result of such 
     disbursement, other than loans made by such institutions to 
     export-oriented commercial projects that generate foreign 
     exchange which are generally referred to as ``enclave'' 
     loans; and
       (2) have documented and demonstrated their commitment to 
     redirect their budgetary resources from international debt 
     repayments to programs to alleviate poverty and promote 
     economic growth that are additional to or expand upon those 
     previously available for such purposes:

     Provided further, That none of the funds made available under 
     this heading in this or any other appropriations Act shall be 
     made available for Sudan or Burma unless the Secretary of the 
     Treasury determines and notifies the Committees on 
     Appropriations that a democratically elected government has 
     taken office.

                     TITLE III--MILITARY ASSISTANCE

                  Funds Appropriated to the President


             International Military Education and Training

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     section 541 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     $86,744,000, of which up to $3,000,000 may remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That the civilian personnel for 
     whom military education and training may be provided under 
     this heading may include civilians who are not members of a 
     government whose participation would contribute to improved 
     civil-military relations, civilian control of the military, 
     or respect for human rights: Provided further, That funds 
     appropriated under this heading for military education and 
     training for Nigeria may only be provided through the regular 
     notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.


                   Foreign Military Financing Program

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For expenses necessary for grants to enable the President 
     to carry out the provisions of section 23 of the Arms Export 
     Control Act, $4,442,300,000: Provided, That of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading, not less than $2,280,000,000 
     shall be available for grants only for Israel, and not less 
     than $1,300,000,000 shall be made available for grants only 
     for Egypt: Provided further, That the funds appropriated by 
     this paragraph for Israel shall be disbursed within 30 days 
     of the enactment of this Act: Provided further, That to the 
     extent that the Government of Israel requests that funds be 
     used for such purposes, grants made available for Israel by 
     this paragraph shall, as agreed by Israel and the United 
     States, be available for advanced weapons systems, of which 
     not less than $595,000,000 shall be available for the 
     procurement in Israel of defense articles and defense 
     services, including research and development: Provided 
     further, That of the funds appropriated by this paragraph, 
     $206,000,000 should be made available for assistance for 
     Jordan: Provided further, That funds appropriated or 
     otherwise made available by this paragraph shall be 
     nonrepayable notwithstanding any requirement in section 23 of 
     the Arms Export Control Act: Provided further, That funds 
     made available under this paragraph shall be obligated upon 
     apportionment in accordance with paragraph (5)(C) of title 
     31, United States Code, section 1501(a).
       None of the funds made available under this heading shall 
     be available to finance the procurement of defense articles, 
     defense services, or design and construction services that 
     are not sold by the United States Government under the Arms 
     Export Control Act unless the foreign country proposing to 
     make such procurements has first signed an agreement with the 
     United States Government specifying the conditions under 
     which such procurements may be financed with such funds: 
     Provided, That all country and funding level increases in 
     allocations shall be submitted through the regular 
     notification procedures of section 515 of this Act: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds appropriated under this 
     heading shall be available for assistance for Sudan and 
     Guatemala: Provided further, That funds made available under 
     this heading may be used, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law that restricts assistance to foreign countries, for 
     demining, the clearance of unexploded ordnance, and related 
     activities, and may include activities implemented through 
     nongovernmental and international organizations: Provided 
     further, That only those countries for which assistance was 
     justified for the ``Foreign Military Sales Financing 
     Program'' in the fiscal year 1989 congressional presentation 
     for security assistance programs may utilize funds made 
     available under this heading for procurement of defense 
     articles, defense services or design and construction 
     services that are not sold by the United States Government 
     under the Arms Export Control Act: Provided further, That 
     funds appropriated under this heading shall be expended at 
     the minimum rate necessary to make timely payment for defense 
     articles and services: Provided further, That not more than 
     $41,600,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading may 
     be obligated for necessary expenses, including the purchase 
     of passenger motor vehicles for replacement only for use 
     outside of the United States, for the general costs of 
     administering military assistance and sales: Provided 
     further, That not more than $373,000,000 of funds realized 
     pursuant to section 21(e)(1)(A) of the Arms Export Control 
     Act may be obligated for expenses incurred by the Department 
     of Defense during fiscal year 2006 pursuant to section 43(b) 
     of the Arms Export Control Act, except that this limitation 
     may be exceeded only through the regular notification 
     procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: Provided 
     further, That foreign military financing program funds 
     estimated to be outlayed for Egypt during fiscal year 2006 
     shall be transferred to an interest bearing account for Egypt 
     in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York within 30 days of 
     enactment of this Act.


                        Peacekeeping Operations

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     section 551 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     $177,800,000: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated 
     under this heading shall be obligated or expended except as 
     provided through the regular notification procedures of the 
     Committees on Appropriations.

               TITLE IV--MULTILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE


                  funds appropriated to the president

                  International Financial Institutions

       Contribution to the International Development Association

       For payment to the International Development Association by 
     the Secretary of the Treasury, $950,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended.


      Contribution to the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency

       For payment to the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency 
     by the Secretary of the Treasury, $1,741,515, to remain 
     available until expended.


              Limitation on Callable Capital Subscriptions

       The United States Governor of the Multilateral Investment 
     Guarantee Agency may subscribe without fiscal year limitation 
     to the callable capital portion of the United States share of 
     such capital in an amount not to exceed $8,126,527.


       Contribution to the Inter-American Investment Corporation

       For payment to the Inter-American Investment Corporation by 
     the Secretary of the Treasury, $1,741,515, to remain 
     available until expended.


Contribution to the Enterprise for the Americas Multilateral Investment 
                                  Fund

       For payment to the Enterprise for the Americas Multilateral 
     Investment Fund by the Secretary of the Treasury, for the 
     United States contribution to the fund, $1,741,515, to remain 
     available until expended.


               Contribution to the Asian Development Fund

       For the United States contribution by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury to the increase in resources of the Asian 
     Development Fund, as authorized by the Asian Development Bank 
     Act, as amended, $115,250,000, to remain available until 
     expended.


              Contribution to the African Development Bank

       For payment to the African Development Bank by the 
     Secretary of the Treasury, $5,638,350, for the United States 
     paid-in share of the increase in capital stock, to remain 
     available until expended.


              limitation on callable capital subscriptions

       The United States Governor of the African Development Bank 
     may subscribe without fiscal year limitation for the callable 
     capital portion of the United States share of such capital 
     stock in an amount not to exceed $88,333,855.


              contribution to the african development fund

       For the United States contribution by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury to the increase in resources of the African 
     Development Fund, $135,700,000, to remain available until 
     expended.


  Contribution to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

       For payment to the European Bank for Reconstruction and 
     Development by the Secretary of the Treasury, $1,015,677 for 
     the United States share of the paid-in portion of the 
     increase in capital stock, to remain available until 
     expended.


              limitation on callable capital subscriptions

       The United States Governor of the European Bank for 
     Reconstruction and Development may subscribe without fiscal 
     year limitation to the callable capital portion of the United 
     States share of such capital stock in an amount not to exceed 
     $2,249,888.


  Contribution to the International Fund for Agricultural Development

       For the United States contribution by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury to increase the resources of the International Fund 
     for Agricultural Development, $15,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended.


                International Organizations and Programs

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     section 301 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and of 
     section 2 of the

[[Page H5320]]

     United Nations Environment Program Participation Act of 1973, 
     $328,958,000: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated 
     under this heading may be made available to the International 
     Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

                      TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS


  compensation for united states executive directors to international 
                         financial institutions

       Sec. 501. (a) No funds appropriated by this Act may be made 
     as payment to any international financial institution while 
     the United States Executive Director to such institution is 
     compensated by the institution at a rate which, together with 
     whatever compensation such Director receives from the United 
     States, is in excess of the rate provided for an individual 
     occupying a position at level IV of the Executive Schedule 
     under section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, or while 
     any alternate United States Director to such institution is 
     compensated by the institution at a rate in excess of the 
     rate provided for an individual occupying a position at level 
     V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       (b) For purposes of this section ``international financial 
     institutions'' are: the International Bank for Reconstruction 
     and Development, the Inter-American Development Bank, the 
     Asian Development Bank, the Asian Development Fund, the 
     African Development Bank, the African Development Fund, the 
     International Monetary Fund, the North American Development 
     Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and 
     Development.


   restrictions on voluntary contributions to united nations agencies

       Sec. 502. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 
     made available to pay any voluntary contribution of the 
     United States to the United Nations (including the United 
     Nations Development Program) if the United Nations implements 
     or imposes any taxation on any United States persons.


                    limitation on residence expenses

       Sec. 503. Of the funds appropriated or made available 
     pursuant to this Act, not to exceed $100,500 shall be for 
     official residence expenses of the United States Agency for 
     International Development during the current fiscal year: 
     Provided, That appropriate steps shall be taken to assure 
     that, to the maximum extent possible, United States-owned 
     foreign currencies are utilized in lieu of dollars.


                         limitation on expenses

       Sec. 504. Of the funds appropriated or made available 
     pursuant to this Act, not to exceed $5,000 shall be for 
     entertainment expenses of the United States Agency for 
     International Development during the current fiscal year.


               limitation on representational allowances

       Sec. 505. Of the funds appropriated or made available 
     pursuant to this Act, not to exceed $125,000 shall be 
     available for representation allowances for the United States 
     Agency for International Development during the current 
     fiscal year: Provided, That appropriate steps shall be taken 
     to assure that, to the maximum extent possible, United 
     States-owned foreign currencies are utilized in lieu of 
     dollars: Provided further, That of the funds made available 
     by this Act for general costs of administering military 
     assistance and sales under the heading ``Foreign Military 
     Financing Program'', not to exceed $4,000 shall be available 
     for entertainment expenses and not to exceed $130,000 shall 
     be available for representation allowances: Provided further, 
     That of the funds made available by this Act under the 
     heading ``International Military Education and Training'', 
     not to exceed $55,000 shall be available for entertainment 
     allowances: Provided further, That of the funds made 
     available by this Act for the Inter-American Foundation, not 
     to exceed $2,000 shall be available for entertainment and 
     representation allowances: Provided further, That of the 
     funds made available by this Act for the Peace Corps, not to 
     exceed a total of $4,000 shall be available for entertainment 
     expenses: Provided further, That of the funds made available 
     by this Act under the heading ``Trade and Development 
     Agency'', not to exceed $4,000 shall be available for 
     representation and entertainment allowances: Provided 
     further, That of the funds made available by this Act under 
     the heading ``Millennium Challenge Corporation'', not to 
     exceed $115,000 shall be available for representation and 
     entertainment allowances.


          prohibition on taxation of united states assistance

       Sec. 506. (a) Prohibition on Taxation.--None of the funds 
     appropriated by this Act may be made available to provide 
     assistance for a foreign country under a new bilateral 
     agreement governing the terms and conditions under which such 
     assistance is to be provided unless such agreement includes a 
     provision stating that assistance provided by the United 
     States shall be exempt from taxation, or reimbursed, by the 
     foreign government, and the Secretary of State shall 
     expeditiously seek to negotiate amendments to existing 
     bilateral agreements, as necessary, to conform with this 
     requirement.
       (b) Reimbursement of Foreign Taxes.--An amount equivalent 
     to 200 percent of the total taxes assessed during fiscal year 
     2006 on funds appropriated by this Act by a foreign 
     government or entity against commodities financed under 
     United States assistance programs for which funds are 
     appropriated by this Act, either directly or through 
     grantees, contractors and subcontractors shall be withheld 
     from obligation from funds appropriated for assistance for 
     fiscal year 2007 and allocated for the central government of 
     such country and for the West Bank and Gaza Program to the 
     extent that the Secretary of State certifies and reports in 
     writing to the Committees on Appropriations that such taxes 
     have not been reimbursed to the Government of the United 
     States.
       (c) De Minimis Exception.--Foreign taxes of a de minimis 
     nature shall not be subject to the provisions of subsection 
     (b).
       (d) Reprogramming of Funds.--Funds withheld from obligation 
     for each country or entity pursuant to subsection (b) shall 
     be reprogrammed for assistance to countries which do not 
     assess taxes on United States assistance or which have an 
     effective arrangement that is providing substantial 
     reimbursement of such taxes.
       (e) Determinations.--
       (1) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any 
     country or entity the Secretary of State determines--
       (A) does not assess taxes on United States assistance or 
     which has an effective arrangement that is providing 
     substantial reimbursement of such taxes; or
       (B) the foreign policy interests of the United States 
     outweigh the policy of this section to ensure that United 
     States assistance is not subject to taxation.
       (2) The Secretary of State shall consult with the 
     Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days prior to 
     exercising the authority of this subsection with regard to 
     any country or entity.
       (f) Implementation.--The Secretary of State shall issue 
     rules, regulations, or policy guidance, as appropriate, to 
     implement the prohibition against the taxation of assistance 
     contained in this section.
       (g) Definitions.--As used in this section--
       (1) the terms ``taxes'' and ``taxation'' refer to value 
     added taxes and customs duties imposed on commodities 
     financed with United States assistance for programs for which 
     funds are appropriated by this Act; and
       (2) the term ``bilateral agreement'' refers to a framework 
     bilateral agreement between the Government of the United 
     States and the government of the country receiving assistance 
     that describes the privileges and immunities applicable to 
     United States foreign assistance for such country generally, 
     or an individual agreement between the Government of the 
     United States and such government that describes, among other 
     things, the treatment for tax purposes that will be accorded 
     the United States assistance provided under that agreement.


        prohibition against direct funding for certain countries

       Sec. 507. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended 
     to finance directly any assistance or reparations to Cuba, 
     Libya, North Korea, Iran, or Syria: Provided, That for 
     purposes of this section, except with respect to Libya, the 
     prohibition on obligations or expenditures shall include 
     direct loans, credits, insurance and guarantees of the 
     Export-Import Bank or its agents.


                             military coups

       Sec. 508. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended 
     to finance directly any assistance to the government of any 
     country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by 
     military coup or decree: Provided, That assistance may be 
     resumed to such government if the President determines and 
     certifies to the Committees on Appropriations that subsequent 
     to the termination of assistance a democratically elected 
     government has taken office: Provided further, That the 
     provisions of this section shall not apply to assistance to 
     promote democratic elections or public participation in 
     democratic processes: Provided further, That funds made 
     available pursuant to the previous provisos shall be subject 
     to the regular notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations.


                               transfers

       Sec. 509. (a)(1) Limitation on Transfers Between 
     Agencies.--None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality 
     of the United States Government, except pursuant to a 
     transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act 
     or any other appropriation Act.
       (2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), in addition to transfers 
     made by, or authorized elsewhere in, this Act, funds 
     appropriated by this Act to carry out the purposes of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be allocated or 
     transferred to agencies of the United States Government 
     pursuant to the provisions of sections 109, 610, and 632 of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
       (b) Transfers Between Accounts.--None of the funds made 
     available by this Act may be obligated under an appropriation 
     account to which they were not appropriated, except for 
     transfers specifically provided for in this Act, unless the 
     President, not less than 5 days prior to the exercise of any 
     authority contained in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to 
     transfer funds, consults with and provides a written policy 
     justification to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate.
       (c) Audit of Inter-Agency Transfers.--Any agreement for the 
     transfer or allocation

[[Page H5321]]

     of funds appropriated by this Act, or prior Acts, entered 
     into between the United States Agency for International 
     Development and another agency of the United States 
     Government under the authority of section 632(a) of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 or any comparable provision of 
     law, shall expressly provide that the Office of the Inspector 
     General for the agency receiving the transfer or allocation 
     of such funds shall perform periodic program and financial 
     audits of the use of such funds: Provided, That funds 
     transferred under such authority may be made available for 
     the cost of such audits.


                 commercial leasing of defense articles

       Sec. 510. Notwithstanding any other provision of law that 
     restricts assistance to foreign countries, and subject to the 
     regular notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations, the authority of section 23(a) of the Arms 
     Export Control Act may be used to provide financing to 
     Israel, Egypt and NATO and major non-NATO allies for the 
     procurement by leasing (including leasing with an option to 
     purchase) of defense articles from United States commercial 
     suppliers, not including Major Defense Equipment (other than 
     helicopters and other types of aircraft having possible 
     civilian application), if the President determines that there 
     are compelling foreign policy or national security reasons 
     for those defense articles being provided by commercial lease 
     rather than by government-to-government sale under such Act.


                         availability of funds

       Sec. 511. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation after the 
     expiration of the current fiscal year unless expressly so 
     provided in this Act: Provided, That funds appropriated for 
     the purposes of chapters 1, 8, 11, and 12 of part I, section 
     667, chapters 4, 6, 8, and 9 of part II of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961, section 23 of the Arms Export Control 
     Act, and funds provided under the heading ``Assistance for 
     Eastern Europe and the Baltic States'', shall remain 
     available for an additional 4 years from the date on which 
     the availability of such funds would otherwise have expired, 
     if such funds are initially obligated before the expiration 
     of their respective periods of availability contained in this 
     Act: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of this Act, any funds made available for the 
     purposes of chapter 1 of part I and chapter 4 of part II of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 which are allocated or 
     obligated for cash disbursements in order to address balance 
     of payments or economic policy reform objectives, shall 
     remain available until expended.


            limitation on assistance to countries in default

       Sec. 512. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall be used to furnish assistance to the government of 
     any country which is in default during a period in excess of 
     1 calendar year in payment to the United States of principal 
     or interest on any loan made to the government of such 
     country by the United States pursuant to a program for which 
     funds are appropriated under this Act unless the President 
     determines, following consultations with the Committees on 
     Appropriations, that assistance to such country is in the 
     national interest of the United States.


                           commerce and trade

       Sec. 513. (a) None of the funds appropriated or made 
     available pursuant to this Act for direct assistance and none 
     of the funds otherwise made available pursuant to this Act to 
     the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment 
     Corporation shall be obligated or expended to finance any 
     loan, any assistance or any other financial commitments for 
     establishing or expanding production of any commodity for 
     export by any country other than the United States, if the 
     commodity is likely to be in surplus on world markets at the 
     time the resulting productive capacity is expected to become 
     operative and if the assistance will cause substantial injury 
     to United States producers of the same, similar, or competing 
     commodity: Provided, That such prohibition shall not apply to 
     the Export-Import Bank if in the judgment of its Board of 
     Directors the benefits to industry and employment in the 
     United States are likely to outweigh the injury to United 
     States producers of the same, similar, or competing 
     commodity, and the Chairman of the Board so notifies the 
     Committees on Appropriations.
       (b) None of the funds appropriated by this or any other Act 
     to carry out chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961 shall be available for any testing or breeding 
     feasibility study, variety improvement or introduction, 
     consultancy, publication, conference, or training in 
     connection with the growth or production in a foreign country 
     of an agricultural commodity for export which would compete 
     with a similar commodity grown or produced in the United 
     States: Provided, That this subsection shall not prohibit--
       (1) activities designed to increase food security in 
     developing countries where such activities will not have a 
     significant impact on the export of agricultural commodities 
     of the United States; or
       (2) research activities intended primarily to benefit 
     American producers.


                          surplus commodities

       Sec. 514. The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the 
     United States Executive Directors of the International Bank 
     for Reconstruction and Development, the International 
     Development Association, the International Finance 
     Corporation, the Inter-American Development Bank, the 
     International Monetary Fund, the Asian Development Bank, the 
     Inter-American Investment Corporation, the North American 
     Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and 
     Development, the African Development Bank, and the African 
     Development Fund to use the voice and vote of the United 
     States to oppose any assistance by these institutions, using 
     funds appropriated or made available pursuant to this Act, 
     for the production or extraction of any commodity or mineral 
     for export, if it is in surplus on world markets and if the 
     assistance will cause substantial injury to United States 
     producers of the same, similar, or competing commodity.


                       notification requirements

       Sec. 515. For the purposes of providing the executive 
     branch with the necessary administrative flexibility, none of 
     the funds made available under this Act for ``Child Survival 
     and Health Programs Fund'', ``Development Assistance'', 
     ``International Organizations and Programs'', ``Trade and 
     Development Agency'', ``International Narcotics Control and 
     Law Enforcement'', ``Andean Counterdrug Initiative'', 
     ``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States'', 
     ``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet 
     Union'', ``Economic Support Fund'', ``Global HIV/AIDS 
     Initiative'', ``Peacekeeping Operations'', ``Capital 
     Investment Fund'', ``Operating Expenses of the United States 
     Agency for International Development'', ``Operating Expenses 
     of the United States Agency for International Development 
     Office of Inspector General'', ``Nonproliferation, Anti-
     terrorism, Demining and Related Programs'', ``Millennium 
     Challenge Corporation'' (by country only), ``Foreign Military 
     Financing Program'', ``International Military Education and 
     Training'', ``Peace Corps'', and ``Migration and Refugee 
     Assistance'', shall be available for obligation for 
     activities, programs, projects, type of materiel assistance, 
     countries, or other operations not justified or in excess of 
     the amount justified to the Committees on Appropriations for 
     obligation under any of these specific headings unless the 
     Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress are 
     previously notified 15 days in advance: Provided, That the 
     President shall not enter into any commitment of funds 
     appropriated for the purposes of section 23 of the Arms 
     Export Control Act for the provision of major defense 
     equipment, other than conventional ammunition, or other major 
     defense items defined to be aircraft, ships, missiles, or 
     combat vehicles, not previously justified to Congress or 20 
     percent in excess of the quantities justified to Congress 
     unless the Committees on Appropriations are notified 15 days 
     in advance of such commitment: Provided further, That this 
     section shall not apply to any reprogramming for an activity, 
     program, or project for which funds are appropriated under 
     title II of this Act of less than 10 percent of the amount 
     previously justified to the Congress for obligation for such 
     activity, program, or project for the current fiscal year: 
     Provided further, That the requirements of this section or 
     any similar provision of this Act or any other Act, including 
     any prior Act requiring notification in accordance with the 
     regular notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations, may be waived if failure to do so would pose 
     a substantial risk to human health or welfare: Provided 
     further, That in case of any such waiver, notification to the 
     Congress, or the appropriate congressional committees, shall 
     be provided as early as practicable, but in no event later 
     than 3 days after taking the action to which such 
     notification requirement was applicable, in the context of 
     the circumstances necessitating such waiver: Provided 
     further, That any notification provided pursuant to such a 
     waiver shall contain an explanation of the emergency 
     circumstances.


limitation on availability of funds for international organizations and 
                                programs

       Sec. 516. Subject to the regular notification procedures of 
     the Committees on Appropriations, funds appropriated under 
     this Act or any previously enacted Act making appropriations 
     for foreign operations, export financing, and related 
     programs, which are returned or not made available for 
     organizations and programs because of the implementation of 
     section 307(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, shall 
     remain available for obligation until September 30, 2007.


             independent states of the former soviet union

       Sec. 517. (a) None of the funds appropriated under the 
     heading ``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former 
     Soviet Union'' shall be made available for assistance for a 
     government of an Independent State of the former Soviet 
     Union--
       (1) unless that government is making progress in 
     implementing comprehensive economic reforms based on market 
     principles, private ownership, respect for commercial 
     contracts, and equitable treatment of foreign private 
     investments; and
       (2) if that government applies or transfers United States 
     assistance to any entity for the purpose of expropriating or 
     seizing ownership or control of assets, investments, or 
     ventures.

     Assistance may be furnished without regard to this subsection 
     if the President determines that to do so is in the national 
     interest.

[[Page H5322]]

       (b) None of the funds appropriated under the heading 
     ``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet 
     Union'' shall be made available for assistance for a 
     government of an Independent State of the former Soviet Union 
     if that government directs any action in violation of the 
     territorial integrity or national sovereignty of any other 
     Independent State of the former Soviet Union, such as those 
     violations included in the Helsinki Final Act: Provided, That 
     such funds may be made available without regard to the 
     restriction in this subsection if the President determines 
     that to do so is in the national security interest of the 
     United States.
       (c) None of the funds appropriated under the heading 
     ``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet 
     Union'' shall be made available for any state to enhance its 
     military capability: Provided, That this restriction does not 
     apply to demilitarization, demining or nonproliferation 
     programs.
       (d) Funds appropriated under the heading ``Assistance for 
     the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union'' for the 
     Russian Federation, Armenia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan shall 
     be subject to the regular notification procedures of the 
     Committees on Appropriations.
       (e) Funds made available in this Act for assistance for the 
     Independent States of the former Soviet Union shall be 
     subject to the provisions of section 117 (relating to 
     environment and natural resources) of the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961.
       (f) In issuing new task orders, entering into contracts, or 
     making grants, with funds appropriated in this Act or prior 
     appropriations Acts under the heading ``Assistance for the 
     Independent States of the Former Soviet Union'' and under 
     comparable headings in prior appropriations Acts, for 
     projects or activities that have as one of their primary 
     purposes the fostering of private sector development, the 
     Coordinator for United States Assistance to Europe and 
     Eurasia and the implementing agency shall encourage the 
     participation of and give significant weight to contractors 
     and grantees who propose investing a significant amount of 
     their own resources (including volunteer services and in-kind 
     contributions) in such projects and activities.


   prohibition on funding for abortions and involuntary sterilization

       Sec. 518. None of the funds made available to carry out 
     part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may 
     be used to pay for the performance of abortions as a method 
     of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to 
     practice abortions. None of the funds made available to carry 
     out part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, 
     may be used to pay for the performance of involuntary 
     sterilization as a method of family planning or to coerce or 
     provide any financial incentive to any person to undergo 
     sterilizations. None of the funds made available to carry out 
     part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may 
     be used to pay for any biomedical research which relates in 
     whole or in part, to methods of, or the performance of, 
     abortions or involuntary sterilization as a means of family 
     planning. None of the funds made available to carry out part 
     I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may be 
     obligated or expended for any country or organization if the 
     President certifies that the use of these funds by any such 
     country or organization would violate any of the above 
     provisions related to abortions and involuntary 
     sterilizations.


                 export financing transfer authorities

       Sec. 519. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation 
     other than for administrative expenses made available for 
     fiscal year 2006, for programs under title I of this Act may 
     be transferred between such appropriations for use for any of 
     the purposes, programs, and activities for which the funds in 
     such receiving account may be used, but no such 
     appropriation, except as otherwise specifically provided, 
     shall be increased by more than 25 percent by any such 
     transfer: Provided, That the exercise of such authority shall 
     be subject to the regular notification procedures of the 
     Committees on Appropriations.


                   special notification requirements

       Sec. 520. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall 
     be obligated or expended for Serbia, Sudan, Zimbabwe, or 
     Pakistan, except as provided through the regular notification 
     procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.


              definition of program, project, and activity

       Sec. 521. For the purpose of this Act ``program, project, 
     and activity'' shall be defined at the appropriations Act 
     account level and shall include all appropriations and 
     authorizations Acts earmarks, ceilings, and limitations with 
     the exception that for the following accounts: Economic 
     Support Fund and Foreign Military Financing Program, 
     ``program, project, and activity'' shall also be considered 
     to include country, regional, and central program level 
     funding within each such account; for the development 
     assistance accounts of the United States Agency for 
     International Development ``program, project, and activity'' 
     shall also be considered to include central, country, 
     regional, and program level funding, either as: (1) justified 
     to the Congress; or (2) allocated by the executive branch in 
     accordance with a report, to be provided to the Committees on 
     Appropriations within 30 days of the enactment of this Act, 
     as required by section 653(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act 
     of 1961.


                  child survival and health activities

       Sec. 522. Up to $13,500,000 of the funds made available by 
     this Act for assistance under the heading ``Child Survival 
     and Health Programs Fund'', may be used to reimburse United 
     States Government agencies, agencies of State governments, 
     institutions of higher learning, and private and voluntary 
     organizations for the full cost of individuals (including for 
     the personal services of such individuals) detailed or 
     assigned to, or contracted by, as the case may be, the United 
     States Agency for International Development for the purpose 
     of carrying out activities under that heading: Provided, That 
     up to $3,500,000 of the funds made available by this Act for 
     assistance under the heading ``Development Assistance'' may 
     be used to reimburse such agencies, institutions, and 
     organizations for such costs of such individuals carrying out 
     other development assistance activities: Provided further, 
     That funds appropriated by titles II and III of this Act that 
     are made available for bilateral assistance for child 
     survival activities or disease programs including activities 
     relating to research on, and the prevention, treatment and 
     control of, HIV/AIDS may be made available notwithstanding 
     any provision of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and any 
     other provision of law that restricts assistance to foreign 
     countries except for the provisions under the heading ``Child 
     Survival and Health Programs Fund'' and the United States 
     Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 
     2003 (117 Stat. 711; 22 U.S.C. 7601 et seq.), as amended.


                              afghanistan

       Sec. 523. Of the funds appropriated by titles II and III of 
     this Act, not less than $954,000,000 should be made available 
     for humanitarian, reconstruction, and related assistance for 
     Afghanistan: Provided, That of the funds allocated for 
     assistance for Afghanistan from this Act and other Acts 
     making appropriations for foreign operations, export 
     financing, and related programs for fiscal year 2006, not 
     less than $50,000,000 should be made available to support 
     programs that directly address the needs of Afghan women and 
     girls.


                notification on excess defense equipment

       Sec. 524. Prior to providing excess Department of Defense 
     articles in accordance with section 516(a) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961, the Department of Defense shall 
     notify the Committees on Appropriations to the same extent 
     and under the same conditions as are other committees 
     pursuant to subsection (f) of that section: Provided, That 
     before issuing a letter of offer to sell excess defense 
     articles under the Arms Export Control Act, the Department of 
     Defense shall notify the Committees on Appropriations in 
     accordance with the regular notification procedures of such 
     Committees if such defense articles are significant military 
     equipment (as defined in section 47(9) of the Arms Export 
     Control Act) or are valued (in terms of original acquisition 
     cost) at $7,000,000 or more, or if notification is required 
     elsewhere in this Act for the use of appropriated funds for 
     specific countries that would receive such excess defense 
     articles: Provided further, That such Committees shall also 
     be informed of the original acquisition cost of such defense 
     articles.


                                HIV/AIDS

       Sec. 525. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     Act, 25 percent of the funds that are appropriated by this 
     Act for a contribution to support the Global Fund to Fight 
     AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (the ``Global Fund'') shall be 
     withheld from obligation to the Global Fund until the 
     Secretary of State certifies to the Committees on 
     Appropriations that the Global Fund--
       (1) has established clear progress indicators upon which to 
     determine the release of incremental disbursements;
       (2) is releasing such incremental disbursements only if 
     positive results have been attained based on those 
     indicators; and
       (3) is providing support and oversight to country-level 
     entities, such as country coordinating mechanisms, principal 
     recipients, and local Fund agents, to enable them to fulfill 
     their mandates.
       (b) The Secretary of State may waive paragraph (1) of this 
     subsection if she determines and reports to the Committees on 
     Appropriations that such waiver is important to the national 
     interest of the United States.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to this section of the bill?
  If not, the Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                           democracy programs

       Sec. 526. (a) Not less than $27,000,000 of the funds 
     appropriated by this Act under the heading ``Economic Support 
     Fund'' should be allocated for the Human Rights and Democracy 
     Fund: Provided, That up to $1,200,000 may be used for the 
     Reagan/Fascell Democracy Fellows program.
       (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law that 
     restricts assistance to foreign countries, up to $1,500,000 
     of the funds appropriated by this Act under the heading 
     ``Economic Support Fund'' may be provided to make grants to 
     educational, humanitarian, and nongovernmental organizations 
     and individuals inside Iran and Syria to support the 
     advancement of democracy and human rights in Iran and Syria, 
     and such funds may be provided through the National Endowment 
     for Democracy.

[[Page H5323]]

                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Schiff

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

       Amendment offered by Mr. Schiff:
       Page 70, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $9,000,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

                              {time}  1830

  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the promotion of democracy has been one of the 
cornerstones of American foreign policy throughout the history of this 
Nation, but especially during the last century.
  In his second inaugural address in January, President Bush committed 
this Nation ``to seek and support the growth of democratic movements 
and institutions in every nation and culture.'' In enunciating this 
goal, the President reiterated a long-standing core principle of 
American national security policy. Promotion of democracy is not just 
aspirational; political liberty and transparent government increase the 
chance that a nation will be economically successful and politically 
stable, a responsible member of the international community.
  I have been concerned for several months now at proposed reductions 
in funding for a whole range of our democracy promotion programs, many 
of which were deeply cut in the President's budget request. In March of 
this year, several of my colleagues joined me in asking the Congress to 
more fully fund these efforts. I understand the difficult circumstances 
that confront us on this bill. This is a tough environment for 
appropriators, and I know that we have prioritized efforts to expand 
the circle of democracy in the Islamic world as part of the war on 
terror.
  Unfortunately, though, other important democracy programs have 
suffered greatly. For example, the National Endowment for Democracy for 
which the President recommended an increase of $20 million over fiscal 
year 2005 levels was actually cut in the State Department bill that we 
passed this month. This and other similar cuts have made the job of 
promoting democracy more difficult for American policymakers and 
diplomats. I believe these cuts also endanger our national security by 
pulling needed resources out of countries and regions that are at 
critical stages in their political development.
  Other programs funded through the foreign operations bill have also 
been cut dramatically. The Support for the East European Democracy Act, 
SEED, has been an important act in the ongoing transition to democracy 
of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. In the current fiscal 
year, SEED received an appropriation of $396 million. For fiscal year 
2006, President Bush requested $382 million, but the bill funds SEED at 
only $357 million.
  Similarly, the Freedom Support Act has been central to our efforts to 
transform the states of the former Soviet Union. In the current fiscal 
year, FSA appropriations totaled $555 million. The President requested 
$482 million. But the bill provides for only $477 million.
  One of our most flexible tools, the State Department's Human Rights 
and Democracy Fund, promotes democracy, human rights and civil society 
in countries and regions of strategic importance to the United States. 
HRDF funds are important tools by which the Department of State 
maintains pressure for universal human rights, democratic processes, 
and civil liberties in all countries.
  These challenges will be addressed by funding programs that promote 
democratic reform and result in greater political pluralism and respect 
for fundamental freedoms in countries with significant Muslim 
populations, and that promote the protection and enforcement of legal 
rights and an independent judiciary, increase popular participation in 
government, and develop civil society in China. HRDF funds also support 
programs around the world that include political party building, 
promoting independent media and labor and worker rights, and supporting 
civil society and democratic institutions.
  In the current fiscal year, HRDF is being funded at $36 million; but 
the bill pares that back to just $27 million, a 25 percent reduction.
  My amendment is simple: it would increase the recommended funding 
level back to $36 million. It is a modest, but important, signal to the 
world that America's commitment to democracy in Eastern Europe, the 
former Soviet Union, Africa, and Asia remains a central pillar of 
American diplomacy and national security strategy.
  When he asked Congress to declare war on Germany in 1917, President 
Woodrow Wilson told the Nation that ``the world must be made safe for 
democracy. Its peace must be planted upon the tested foundations of 
political liberty.''
  In that war and in the other wars that this Nation has fought to 
preserve those ideals, we have paid a dear price. Our efforts to 
promote democracy hold forth the promise of widening the circle of 
freedom, while also reducing the prospect of failed states, terrorism 
and the horrific human rights abuses that so often require the 
intervention of American military force. Shortchanging these programs 
is shortsighted and dangerous.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for 
their interest and support in this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, though I am not in opposition, I will claim 
the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hefley). The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Kolbe) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I would just say the bill that we do have does provide 
that not less than $27 million of the funds appropriated under this 
section should be allocated for the Human Rights and the Democracy 
Fund. What the gentleman has been talking about I think is a very 
worthwhile program. The addition of the additional funds to that I 
think is worthwhile. For that reason, we would accept the amendment.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I, too, rise in support of the gentleman's 
amendment. Strengthening democracy and promoting human rights are at 
the heart of our national security strategy. The President has made 
these ideals central components of U.S. foreign policy.
  The State Department's Human Rights and Democracy Fund focuses on the 
countries and regions of greatest strategic interest to the United 
States, supporting those who seek to bolster human rights and promote 
democracy in key areas of the world.
  Unfortunately, the administration's request cut funding by $9 million 
below FY 2005 levels. This was in part because the administration 
requested increased funding for democracy programs through the National 
Endowment for Democracy in the Science-State-Justice-Commerce bill. 
However, the House did not grant the requested increases for NED; and, 
in fact, the SSJC appropriations bill cut funding for NED below the FY 
2005 enacted levels.
  I therefore am very pleased that the chairman will accept the 
gentleman's amendment so that we may ensure sufficient funding for 
democracy programs in the FY 2006 bill.
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank the chairman and the ranking 
member again.
  Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder 
of the bill through page 132, line 13, be considered as read, printed 
in the Record and open to amendment at any point.

[[Page H5324]]

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the bill from page 71, line 10, through page 132, line 
13, is as follows:


       Prohibition on bilateral assistance to terrorist countries

       Sec. 527. (a) Funds appropriated for bilateral assistance 
     under any heading of this Act and funds appropriated under 
     any such heading in a provision of law enacted prior to the 
     enactment of this Act, shall not be made available to any 
     country which the President determines--
       (1) grants sanctuary from prosecution to any individual or 
     group which has committed an act of international terrorism; 
     or
       (2) otherwise supports international terrorism.
       (b) The President may waive the application of subsection 
     (a) to a country if the President determines that national 
     security or humanitarian reasons justify such waiver. The 
     President shall publish each waiver in the Federal Register 
     and, at least 15 days before the waiver takes effect, shall 
     notify the Committees on Appropriations of the waiver 
     (including the justification for the waiver) in accordance 
     with the regular notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations.


                          debt-for-development

       Sec. 528. In order to enhance the continued participation 
     of nongovernmental organizations in debt-for-development and 
     debt-for-nature exchanges, a nongovernmental organization 
     which is a grantee or contractor of the United States Agency 
     for International Development may place in interest bearing 
     accounts local currencies which accrue to that organization 
     as a result of economic assistance provided under title II of 
     this Act and, subject to the regular notification procedures 
     of the Committees on Appropriations, any interest earned on 
     such investment shall be used for the purpose for which the 
     assistance was provided to that organization.


                           separate accounts

       Sec. 529. (a) Separate Accounts for Local Currencies.--(1) 
     If assistance is furnished to the government of a foreign 
     country under chapters 1 and 10 of part I or chapter 4 of 
     part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 under 
     agreements which result in the generation of local currencies 
     of that country, the Administrator of the United States 
     Agency for International Development shall--
       (A) require that local currencies be deposited in a 
     separate account established by that government;
       (B) enter into an agreement with that government which sets 
     forth--
       (i) the amount of the local currencies to be generated; and
       (ii) the terms and conditions under which the currencies so 
     deposited may be utilized, consistent with this section; and
       (C) establish by agreement with that government the 
     responsibilities of the United States Agency for 
     International Development and that government to monitor and 
     account for deposits into and disbursements from the separate 
     account.
       (2) Uses of local currencies.--As may be agreed upon with 
     the foreign government, local currencies deposited in a 
     separate account pursuant to subsection (a), or an equivalent 
     amount of local currencies, shall be used only--
       (A) to carry out chapter 1 or 10 of part I or chapter 4 of 
     part II (as the case may be), for such purposes as--
       (i) project and sector assistance activities; or
       (ii) debt and deficit financing; or
       (B) for the administrative requirements of the United 
     States Government.
       (3) Programming accountability.--The United States Agency 
     for International Development shall take all necessary steps 
     to ensure that the equivalent of the local currencies 
     disbursed pursuant to subsection (a)(2)(A) from the separate 
     account established pursuant to subsection (a)(1) are used 
     for the purposes agreed upon pursuant to subsection (a)(2).
       (4) Termination of assistance programs.--Upon termination 
     of assistance to a country under chapter 1 or 10 of part I or 
     chapter 4 of part II (as the case may be), any unencumbered 
     balances of funds which remain in a separate account 
     established pursuant to subsection (a) shall be disposed of 
     for such purposes as may be agreed to by the government of 
     that country and the United States Government.
       (5) Reporting requirement.--The Administrator of the United 
     States Agency for International Development shall report on 
     an annual basis as part of the justification documents 
     submitted to the Committees on Appropriations on the use of 
     local currencies for the administrative requirements of the 
     United States Government as authorized in subsection 
     (a)(2)(B), and such report shall include the amount of local 
     currency (and United States dollar equivalent) used and/or to 
     be used for such purpose in each applicable country.
       (b) Separate Accounts for Cash Transfers.--(1) If 
     assistance is made available to the government of a foreign 
     country, under chapter 1 or 10 of part I or chapter 4 of part 
     II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as cash transfer 
     assistance or as nonproject sector assistance, that country 
     shall be required to maintain such funds in a separate 
     account and not commingle them with any other funds.
       (2) Applicability of other provisions of law.--Such funds 
     may be obligated and expended notwithstanding provisions of 
     law which are inconsistent with the nature of this assistance 
     including provisions which are referenced in the Joint 
     Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference 
     accompanying House Joint Resolution 648 (House Report No. 98-
     1159).
       (3) Notification.--At least 15 days prior to obligating any 
     such cash transfer or nonproject sector assistance, the 
     President shall submit a notification through the regular 
     notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations, 
     which shall include a detailed description of how the funds 
     proposed to be made available will be used, with a discussion 
     of the United States interests that will be served by the 
     assistance (including, as appropriate, a description of the 
     economic policy reforms that will be promoted by such 
     assistance).
       (4) Exemption.--Nonproject sector assistance funds may be 
     exempt from the requirements of subsection (b)(1) only 
     through the notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations.


                      enterprise fund restrictions

       Sec. 530. (a) Prior to the distribution of any assets 
     resulting from any liquidation, dissolution, or winding up of 
     an Enterprise Fund, in whole or in part, the President shall 
     submit to the Committees on Appropriations, in accordance 
     with the regular notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations, a plan for the distribution of the assets of 
     the Enterprise Fund.
       (b) Funds made available by this Act for Enterprise Funds 
     shall be expended at the minimum rate necessary to make 
     timely payment for projects and activities.


          FINANCIAL MARKET ASSISTANCE IN TRANSITION COUNTRIES

       Sec. 531. Of the funds appropriated by this Act under the 
     headings ``Trade and Development Agency'', ``Development 
     Assistance'', ``Transition Initiatives'', ``Economic Support 
     Fund'', ``International Affairs Technical Assistance'', 
     ``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet 
     Union'', ``Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and 
     Related Programs'', and ``Assistance for Eastern Europe and 
     Baltic States'', not less than $40,000,000 should be made 
     available for building capital markets and financial systems 
     in countries in transition.


authorities for the peace corps, inter-american foundation and african 
                         development foundation

       Sec. 532. Unless expressly provided to the contrary, 
     provisions of this Act, and provisions contained in prior 
     Acts authorizing or making appropriations for foreign 
     operations, export financing, and related programs, shall not 
     be construed to prohibit activities authorized by or 
     conducted under the Peace Corps Act, the Inter-American 
     Foundation Act or the African Development Foundation Act. The 
     agency shall promptly report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations whenever it is conducting activities or is 
     proposing to conduct activities in a country for which 
     assistance is prohibited.


                  impact on jobs in the united states

       Sec. 533. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 
     obligated or expended to provide--
       (1) any financial incentive to a business enterprise 
     currently located in the United States for the purpose of 
     inducing such an enterprise to relocate outside the United 
     States if such incentive or inducement is likely to reduce 
     the number of employees of such business enterprise in the 
     United States because United States production is being 
     replaced by such enterprise outside the United States; or
       (2) assistance for any program, project, or activity that 
     contributes to the violation of internationally recognized 
     workers rights, as defined in section 507(4) of the Trade Act 
     of 1974, of workers in the recipient country, including any 
     designated zone or area in that country: Provided, That the 
     application of section 507(4)(D) and (E) of such Act should 
     be commensurate with the level of development of the 
     recipient country and sector, and shall not preclude 
     assistance for the informal sector in such country, micro and 
     small-scale enterprise, and smallholder agriculture.


                          special authorities

       Sec. 534. (a) Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon, Montenegro, 
     Victims of War, Displaced Children, and Displaced Burmese.--
     Funds appropriated by this Act that are made available for 
     assistance for Afghanistan may be made available 
     notwithstanding section 512 of this Act or any similar 
     provision of law and section 660 of the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961, and funds appropriated in titles I and II of 
     this Act that are made available for Lebanon, Montenegro, 
     Pakistan, and for victims of war, displaced children, and 
     displaced Burmese, and to assist victims of trafficking in 
     persons and, subject to the regular notification procedures 
     of the Committees on Appropriations, to combat such 
     trafficking, may be made available notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law that restricts assistance to foreign 
     countries and section 660 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961.
       (b) Tropical Forestry and Biodiversity Conservation 
     Activities.--Funds appropriated by this Act to carry out the 
     provisions of sections 103 through 106, and chapter

[[Page H5325]]

     4 of part II, of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be 
     used, notwithstanding any other provision of law that 
     restricts assistance to foreign countries and section 660 of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, for the purpose of 
     supporting tropical forestry and biodiversity conservation 
     activities and energy programs aimed at reducing greenhouse 
     gas emissions: Provided, That such assistance shall be 
     subject to sections 116, 502B, and 620A of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961.
       (c) Personal Services Contractors.--Funds appropriated by 
     this Act to carry out chapter 1 of part I, chapter 4 of part 
     II, and section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     and title II of the Agricultural Trade Development and 
     Assistance Act of 1954, may be used by the United States 
     Agency for International Development to employ up to 25 
     personal services contractors in the United States, for the 
     purpose of providing direct, interim support for new or 
     expanded overseas programs and activities managed by the 
     agency until permanent direct hire personnel are hired and 
     trained: Provided, That not more than 10 of such contractors 
     shall be assigned to any bureau or office: Provided further, 
     That such funds appropriated to carry out title II of the 
     Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, 
     may be made available only for personal services contractors 
     assigned to the Office of Food for Peace.
       (d)(1) Waiver.--The President may waive the provisions of 
     section 1003 of Public Law 100-204 if the President 
     determines and certifies in writing to the Speaker of the 
     House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the 
     Senate that it is important to the national security 
     interests of the United States.
       (2) Period of Application of Waiver.--Any waiver pursuant 
     to paragraph (1) shall be effective for no more than a period 
     of 6 months at a time and shall not apply beyond 12 months 
     after the enactment of this Act.
       (e) Small Business.--In entering into multiple award 
     indefinite-quantity contracts with funds appropriated by this 
     Act, the United States Agency for International Development 
     may provide an exception to the fair opportunity process for 
     placing task orders under such contracts when the order is 
     placed with any category of small or small disadvantaged 
     business.
       (f) Contingencies.--During fiscal year 2006, the President 
     may use up to $45,000,000 under the authority of section 451 
     of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, notwithstanding the 
     funding ceiling in section 451(a).
       (g) Reconstituting Civilian Police Authority.--In providing 
     assistance with funds appropriated by this Act under section 
     660(b)(6) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, support for 
     a nation emerging from instability may be deemed to mean 
     support for regional, district, municipal, or other sub-
     national entity emerging from instability, as well as a 
     nation emerging from instability.
       (h) World Food Program.--Of the funds managed by the Bureau 
     for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance of the 
     United States Agency for International Development, from this 
     or any other Act, not less than $6,000,000 shall be made 
     available as a general contribution to the World Food 
     Program, notwithstanding any other provision of law that 
     restricts assistance to foreign countries.
       (i) National Endowment for Democracy.--Funds appropriated 
     by this Act that are provided to the National Endowment for 
     Democracy may be provided notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law or regulation that restricts assistance to foreign 
     countries.


                     arab league boycott of israel

       Sec. 535. It is the sense of the Congress that--
       (1) the Arab League boycott of Israel, and the secondary 
     boycott of American firms that have commercial ties with 
     Israel, is an impediment to peace in the region and to United 
     States investment and trade in the Middle East and North 
     Africa;
       (2) the Arab League boycott, which was regrettably 
     reinstated in 1997, should be immediately and publicly 
     terminated, and the Central Office for the Boycott of Israel 
     immediately disbanded;
       (3) all Arab League states should normalize relations with 
     their neighbor Israel;
       (4) the President and the Secretary of State should 
     continue to vigorously oppose the Arab League boycott of 
     Israel and find concrete steps to demonstrate that opposition 
     by, for example, taking into consideration the participation 
     of any recipient country in the boycott when determining to 
     sell weapons to said country; and
       (5) the President should report to Congress annually on 
     specific steps being taken by the United States to encourage 
     Arab League states to normalize their relations with Israel 
     to bring about the termination of the Arab League boycott of 
     Israel, including those to encourage allies and trading 
     partners of the United States to enact laws prohibiting 
     businesses from complying with the boycott and penalizing 
     businesses that do comply.


                       eligibility for assistance

       Sec. 536. (a) Assistance Through Nongovernmental 
     Organizations.--Restrictions on assistance for foreign 
     countries contained in this or any other Act shall not be 
     construed to restrict assistance in support of programs of 
     nongovernmental organizations from funds appropriated by this 
     Act to carry out the provisions of chapters 1, 10, 11, and 12 
     of part I and chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961, and from funds appropriated under the heading 
     ``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States'': 
     Provided, That before using the authority of this subsection 
     to furnish assistance in support of programs of 
     nongovernmental organizations, the President shall notify the 
     Committees on Appropriations under the regular notification 
     procedures of those committees, including a description of 
     the program to be assisted, the assistance to be provided, 
     and the reasons for furnishing such assistance: Provided 
     further, That nothing in this subsection shall be construed 
     to alter any existing statutory prohibitions against abortion 
     or involuntary sterilizations contained in this or any other 
     Act.
       (b) Public Law 480.--During fiscal year 2006, restrictions 
     on assistance to foreign countries contained in this or any 
     other Act shall not be construed to restrict assistance under 
     the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 
     1954: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated to carry 
     out title I of such Act and made available pursuant to this 
     subsection may be obligated or expended except as provided 
     through the regular notification procedures of the Committees 
     on Appropriations.
       (c) Exception.--This section shall not apply--
       (1) with respect to section 620A of the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961 or any comparable provision of law prohibiting 
     assistance to countries that support international terrorism; 
     or
       (2) with respect to section 116 of the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961 or any comparable provision of law prohibiting 
     assistance to the government of a country that violates 
     internationally recognized human rights.


                         reservations of funds

       Sec. 537. (a) Funds appropriated by this Act which are 
     earmarked may be reprogrammed for other programs within the 
     same account notwithstanding the earmark if compliance with 
     the earmark is made impossible by operation of any provision 
     of this Act or any other provision contained in prior Acts 
     authorizing or making appropriations for foreign operations, 
     export financing, and related programs: Provided, That any 
     such reprogramming shall be subject to the regular 
     notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: 
     Provided further, That assistance that is reprogrammed 
     pursuant to this subsection shall be made available under the 
     same terms and conditions as originally provided.
       (b) In addition to the authority contained in subsection 
     (a), the original period of availability of funds 
     appropriated by this Act and administered by the United 
     States Agency for International Development that are 
     earmarked for particular programs or activities by this or 
     any other Act shall be extended for an additional fiscal year 
     if the Administrator of such agency determines and reports 
     promptly to the Committees on Appropriations that the 
     termination of assistance to a country or a significant 
     change in circumstances makes it unlikely that such earmarked 
     funds can be obligated during the original period of 
     availability: Provided, That such earmarked funds that are 
     continued available for an additional fiscal year shall be 
     obligated only for the purpose of such earmark.


                         ceilings and earmarks

       Sec. 538. Ceilings and earmarks contained in this Act shall 
     not be applicable to funds or authorities appropriated or 
     otherwise made available by any subsequent Act unless such 
     Act specifically so directs. Earmarks or minimum funding 
     requirements contained in any other Act shall not be 
     applicable to funds appropriated by this Act.


                 prohibition on publicity or propaganda

       Sec. 539. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within 
     the United States not authorized before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act by the Congress.


           prohibition of payments to united nations members

       Sec. 540. None of the funds appropriated or made available 
     pursuant to this Act for carrying out the Foreign Assistance 
     Act of 1961, may be used to pay in whole or in part any 
     assessments, arrearages, or dues of any member of the United 
     Nations or, from funds appropriated by this Act to carry out 
     chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     the costs for participation of another country's delegation 
     at international conferences held under the auspices of 
     multilateral or international organizations.


              nongovernmental organizations--documentation

       Sec. 541. None of the funds appropriated or made available 
     pursuant to this Act shall be available to a nongovernmental 
     organization which fails to provide upon timely request any 
     document, file, or record necessary to the auditing 
     requirements of the United States Agency for International 
     Development.


  prohibition on assistance to foreign governments that export lethal 
   military equipment to countries supporting international terrorism

       Sec. 542. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise 
     made available by this Act may be available to any foreign 
     government which provides lethal military equipment to a 
     country the government of which the Secretary of State has 
     determined is a terrorist government for purposes of section 
     6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979. The 
     prohibition under this section with respect to a

[[Page H5326]]

     foreign government shall terminate 12 months after that 
     government ceases to provide such military equipment. This 
     section applies with respect to lethal military equipment 
     provided under a contract entered into after October 1, 1997.
       (b) Assistance restricted by subsection (a) or any other 
     similar provision of law, may be furnished if the President 
     determines that furnishing such assistance is important to 
     the national interests of the United States.
       (c) Whenever the waiver authority of subsection (b) is 
     exercised, the President shall submit to the appropriate 
     congressional committees a report with respect to the 
     furnishing of such assistance. Any such report shall include 
     a detailed explanation of the assistance to be provided, 
     including the estimated dollar amount of such assistance, and 
     an explanation of how the assistance furthers United States 
     national interests.


  withholding of assistance for parking fines and real property taxes 
                       owed by foreign countries

       Sec. 543. (a) Subject to subsection (c), of the funds 
     appropriated by this Act that are made available for 
     assistance for a foreign country, an amount equal to 110 
     percent of the total amount of the unpaid fully adjudicated 
     parking fines and penalties and unpaid property taxes owed by 
     the central government of such country shall be withheld from 
     obligation for assistance for the central government of such 
     country until the Secretary of State submits a certification 
     to the appropriate congressional committees stating that such 
     parking fines and penalties and unpaid property taxes are 
     fully paid.
       (b) Funds withheld from obligation pursuant to subsection 
     (a) may be made available for other programs or activities 
     funded by this Act, after consultation with and subject to 
     the regular notification procedures of the appropriate 
     congressional committees, provided that no such funds shall 
     be made available for assistance for the central government 
     of a foreign country that has not paid the total amount of 
     the fully adjudicated parking fines and penalties and unpaid 
     property taxes owed by such country.
       (c) Subsection (a) shall not include amounts that have been 
     withheld under any other provision of law.
       (d)(1) The Secretary of State may waive the requirements 
     set forth in subsection (a) with respect to parking fines and 
     penalties no sooner than 60 days from the date of enactment 
     of this Act, or at any time with respect to a particular 
     country, if the Secretary determines that it is in the 
     national interests of the United States to do so.
       (2) The Secretary of State may waive the requirements set 
     forth in subsection (a) with respect to the unpaid property 
     taxes if the Secretary of State determines that it is in the 
     national interests of the United States to do so.
       (e) Not later than 6 months after the initial exercise of 
     the waiver authority in subsection (d), the Secretary of 
     State, after consultations with the City of New York, shall 
     submit a report to the Committees on Appropriations 
     describing a strategy, including a timetable and steps 
     currently being taken, to collect the parking fines and 
     penalties and unpaid property taxes and interest owed by 
     nations receiving foreign assistance under this Act.
       (f) In this section:
       (1) The term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means 
     the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
       (2) The term ``fully adjudicated'' includes circumstances 
     in which the person to whom the vehicle is registered--
       (A)(i) has not responded to the parking violation summons; 
     or
       (ii) has not followed the appropriate adjudication 
     procedure to challenge the summons; and
       (B) the period of time for payment of or challenge to the 
     summons has lapsed.
       (3) The term ``parking fines and penalties'' means parking 
     fines and penalties--
       (A) owed to--
       (i) the District of Columbia; or
       (ii) New York, New York; and
       (B) incurred during the period April 1, 1997, through 
     September 30, 2005.
       (4) The term ``unpaid property taxes'' means the amount of 
     unpaid taxes and interest determined to be owed by a foreign 
     country on real property in the District of Columbia or New 
     York, New York in a court order or judgment entered against 
     such country by a court of the United States or any State or 
     subdivision thereof.


    limitation on assistance for the plo for the west bank and gaza

       Sec. 544. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 
     obligated for assistance for the Palestine Liberation 
     Organization for the West Bank and Gaza unless the President 
     has exercised the authority under section 604(a) of the 
     Middle East Peace Facilitation Act of 1995 (title VI of 
     Public Law 104-107) or any other legislation to suspend or 
     make inapplicable section 307 of the Foreign Assistance Act 
     of 1961 and that suspension is still in effect: Provided, 
     That if the President fails to make the certification under 
     section 604(b)(2) of the Middle East Peace Facilitation Act 
     of 1995 or to suspend the prohibition under other 
     legislation, funds appropriated by this Act may not be 
     obligated for assistance for the Palestine Liberation 
     Organization for the West Bank and Gaza.


                     war crimes tribunals drawdown

       Sec. 545. If the President determines that doing so will 
     contribute to a just resolution of charges regarding genocide 
     or other violations of international humanitarian law, the 
     President may direct a drawdown pursuant to section 552(c) of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 of up to $30,000,000 of 
     commodities and services for the United Nations War Crimes 
     Tribunal established with regard to the former Yugoslavia by 
     the United Nations Security Council or such other tribunals 
     or commissions as the Council may establish or authorize to 
     deal with such violations, without regard to the ceiling 
     limitation contained in paragraph (2) thereof: Provided, That 
     the determination required under this section shall be in 
     lieu of any determinations otherwise required under section 
     552(c): Provided further, That the drawdown made under this 
     section for any tribunal shall not be construed as an 
     endorsement or precedent for the establishment of any 
     standing or permanent international criminal tribunal or 
     court: Provided further, That funds made available for 
     tribunals other than Yugoslavia, Rwanda, or the Special Court 
     for Sierra Leone shall be made available subject to the 
     regular notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations.


                               landmines

       Sec. 546. Notwithstanding any other provision of law that 
     restricts assistance to foreign countries, demining equipment 
     available to the United States Agency for International 
     Development and the Department of State and used in support 
     of the clearance of landmines and unexploded ordnance for 
     humanitarian purposes may be disposed of on a grant basis in 
     foreign countries, subject to such terms and conditions as 
     the President may prescribe.


           restrictions concerning the palestinian authority

       Sec. 547. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 
     obligated or expended to create in any part of Jerusalem a 
     new office of any department or agency of the United States 
     Government for the purpose of conducting official United 
     States Government business with the Palestinian Authority 
     over Gaza and Jericho or any successor Palestinian governing 
     entity provided for in the Israel-PLO Declaration of 
     Principles: Provided, That this restriction shall not apply 
     to the acquisition of additional space for the existing 
     Consulate General in Jerusalem: Provided further, That 
     meetings between officers and employees of the United States 
     and officials of the Palestinian Authority, or any successor 
     Palestinian governing entity provided for in the Israel-PLO 
     Declaration of Principles, for the purpose of conducting 
     official United States Government business with such 
     authority should continue to take place in locations other 
     than Jerusalem. As has been true in the past, officers and 
     employees of the United States Government may continue to 
     meet in Jerusalem on other subjects with Palestinians 
     (including those who now occupy positions in the Palestinian 
     Authority), have social contacts, and have incidental 
     discussions.


               prohibition of payment of certain expenses

       Sec. 548. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act under the heading ``International 
     Military Education and Training'' or ``Foreign Military 
     Financing Program'' for Informational Program activities or 
     under the headings ``Child Survival and Health Programs 
     Fund'', ``Development Assistance'', and ``Economic Support 
     Fund'' may be obligated or expended to pay for--
       (1) alcoholic beverages; or
       (2) entertainment expenses for activities that are 
     substantially of a recreational character, including but not 
     limited to entrance fees at sporting events, theatrical and 
     musical productions, and amusement parks.


                                 Haiti

       Sec. 549. The Government of Haiti shall be eligible to 
     purchase defense articles and services under the Arms Export 
     Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), for the Coast Guard.


         limitation on assistance to the palestinian authority

       Sec. 550. (a) Prohibition of Funds.--None of the funds 
     appropriated by this Act to carry out the provisions of 
     chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 
     may be obligated or expended with respect to providing funds 
     to the Palestinian Authority.
       (b) Waiver.--The prohibition included in subsection (a) 
     shall not apply if the President certifies in writing to the 
     Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro 
     tempore of the Senate that waiving such prohibition is 
     important to the national security interests of the United 
     States.
       (c) Period of Application of Waiver.--Any waiver pursuant 
     to subsection (b) shall be effective for no more than a 
     period of 6 months at a time and shall not apply beyond 12 
     months after the enactment of this Act.
       (d) Report.--Whenever the waiver authority pursuant to 
     subsection (b) is exercised, the President shall submit a 
     report to the Committees on Appropriations detailing the 
     steps the Palestinian Authority has taken to arrest 
     terrorists, confiscate weapons and dismantle the terrorist 
     infrastructure. The report shall also include a description 
     of how funds will be spent and the accounting procedures in 
     place to ensure that they are properly disbursed.

[[Page H5327]]

              limitation on assistance to security forces

       Sec. 551. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be provided to any unit of the security forces of a foreign 
     country if the Secretary of State has credible evidence that 
     such unit has committed gross violations of human rights, 
     unless the Secretary determines and reports to the Committees 
     on Appropriations that the government of such country is 
     taking effective measures to bring the responsible members of 
     the security forces unit to justice: Provided, That nothing 
     in this section shall be construed to withhold funds made 
     available by this Act from any unit of the security forces of 
     a foreign country not credibly alleged to be involved in 
     gross violations of human rights: Provided further, That in 
     the event that funds are withheld from any unit pursuant to 
     this section, the Secretary of State shall promptly inform 
     the foreign government of the basis for such action and 
     shall, to the maximum extent practicable, assist the foreign 
     government in taking effective measures to bring the 
     responsible members of the security forces to justice.


                    foreign military training report

       Sec. 552. The annual foreign military training report 
     required by section 656 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 
     shall be submitted by the Secretary of Defense and the 
     Secretary of State to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate by the date specified 
     in that section.


                       authorization requirement

       Sec. 553. Funds appropriated by this Act, except funds 
     appropriated under the headings ``Trade and Development 
     Agency'', ``Overseas Private Investment Corporation'', and 
     ``Global HIV/AIDS Initiative'', may be obligated and expended 
     notwithstanding section 10 of Public Law 91-672 and section 
     15 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956.


                                cambodia

       Sec. 554. The Secretary of the Treasury should instruct the 
     United States executive directors of the international 
     financial institutions to use the voice and vote of the 
     United States to oppose loans to the Central Government of 
     Cambodia, except loans to meet basic human needs.


                         palestinian statehood

       Sec. 555. (a) Limitation on Assistance.--None of the funds 
     appropriated by this Act may be provided to support a 
     Palestinian state unless the Secretary of State determines 
     and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees 
     that--
       (1) a new leadership of a Palestinian governing entity has 
     been democratically elected through credible and competitive 
     elections;
       (2) the elected governing entity of a new Palestinian 
     state--
       (A) has demonstrated a firm commitment to peaceful co-
     existence with the State of Israel;
       (B) is taking appropriate measures to counter terrorism and 
     terrorist financing in the West Bank and Gaza, including the 
     dismantling of terrorist infrastructures;
       (C) is establishing a new Palestinian security entity that 
     is cooperative with appropriate Israeli and other appropriate 
     security organizations; and
       (3) the Palestinian Authority (or the governing body of a 
     new Palestinian state) is working with other countries in the 
     region to vigorously pursue efforts to establish a just, 
     lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East that will 
     enable Israel and an independent Palestinian state to exist 
     within the context of full and normal relationships, which 
     should include--
       (A) termination of all claims or states of belligerency;
       (B) respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, 
     territorial integrity, and political independence of every 
     state in the area through measures including the 
     establishment of demilitarized zones;
       (C) their right to live in peace within secure and 
     recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
       (D) freedom of navigation through international waterways 
     in the area; and
       (E) a framework for achieving a just settlement of the 
     refugee problem.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the newly-elected governing entity should enact a 
     constitution assuring the rule of law, an independent 
     judiciary, and respect for human rights for its citizens, and 
     should enact other laws and regulations assuring transparent 
     and accountable governance.
       (c) Waiver.--The President may waive subsection (a) if he 
     determines that it is vital to the national security 
     interests of the United States to do so.
       (d) Exemption.--The restriction in subsection (a) shall not 
     apply to assistance intended to help reform the Palestinian 
     Authority and affiliated institutions, or a newly-elected 
     governing entity, in order to help meet the requirements of 
     subsection (a), consistent with the provisions of section 550 
     of this Act (``Limitation on Assistance to the Palestinian 
     Authority'').


                                colombia

       Sec. 556. (a) Determination and Certification Required.--
     Funds appropriated by this Act that are available for 
     assistance for the Colombian Armed Forces, may be made 
     available as follows:
       (1) Up to 75 percent of such funds may be obligated prior 
     to a determination and certification by the Secretary of 
     State pursuant to paragraph (2).
       (2) Up to 12.5 percent of such funds may be obligated only 
     after the Secretary of State certifies and reports to the 
     appropriate congressional committees that:
       (A) The Commander General of the Colombian Armed Forces is 
     suspending from the Armed Forces those members, of whatever 
     rank who, according to the Minister of Defense or the 
     Procuraduria General de la Nacion, have been credibly alleged 
     to have committed gross violations of human rights, including 
     extra-judicial killings, or to have aided or abetted 
     paramilitary organizations.
       (B) The Colombian Government is vigorously investigating 
     and prosecuting those members of the Colombian Armed Forces, 
     of whatever rank, who have been credibly alleged to have 
     committed gross violations of human rights, including extra-
     judicial killings, or to have aided or abetted paramilitary 
     organizations, and is promptly punishing those members of the 
     Colombian Armed Forces found to have committed such 
     violations of human rights or to have aided or abetted 
     paramilitary organizations.
       (C) The Colombian Armed Forces have made substantial 
     progress in cooperating with civilian prosecutors and 
     judicial authorities in such cases (including providing 
     requested information, such as the identity of persons 
     suspended from the Armed Forces and the nature and cause of 
     the suspension, and access to witnesses, relevant military 
     documents, and other requested information).
       (D) The Colombian Armed Forces have made substantial 
     progress in severing links (including denying access to 
     military intelligence, vehicles, and other equipment or 
     supplies, and ceasing other forms of active or tacit 
     cooperation) at the command, battalion, and brigade levels, 
     with paramilitary organizations, especially in regions where 
     these organizations have a significant presence.
       (E) The Colombian Government is dismantling paramilitary 
     leadership and financial networks by arresting commanders and 
     financial backers, especially in regions where these networks 
     have a significant presence.
       (3) The balance of such funds may be obligated after July 
     31, 2006, if the Secretary of State certifies and reports to 
     the appropriate congressional committees, after such date, 
     that the Colombian Armed Forces are continuing to meet the 
     conditions contained in paragraph (2) and are conducting 
     vigorous operations to restore government authority and 
     respect for human rights in areas under the effective control 
     of paramilitary and guerrilla organizations.
       (b) Congressional Notification.--Funds made available by 
     this Act for the Colombian Armed Forces shall be subject to 
     the regular notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations.
       (c) Consultative Process.--Not later than 60 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter 
     until September 30, 2007, the Secretary of State shall 
     consult with internationally recognized human rights 
     organizations regarding progress in meeting the conditions 
     contained in that subsection.
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Aided or abetted.--The term ``aided or abetted'' means 
     to provide any support to paramilitary groups, including 
     taking actions which allow, facilitate, or otherwise foster 
     the activities of such groups.
       (2) Paramilitary groups.--The term ``paramilitary groups'' 
     means illegal self-defense groups and illegal security 
     cooperatives.


                          illegal armed groups

       Sec. 557. (a) Denial of Visas to Supporters of Colombian 
     Illegal Armed Groups.--Subject to subsection (b), the 
     Secretary of State shall not issue a visa to any alien who 
     the Secretary determines, based on credible evidence--
       (1) has willfully provided any support to the Revolutionary 
     Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the National Liberation Army 
     (ELN), or the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), 
     including taking actions or failing to take actions which 
     allow, facilitate, or otherwise foster the activities of such 
     groups; or
       (2) has committed, ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise 
     participated in the commission of gross violations of human 
     rights, including extra-judicial killings, in Colombia.
       (b) Waiver.--Subsection (a) shall not apply if the 
     Secretary of State determines and certifies to the 
     appropriate congressional committees, on a case-by-case 
     basis, that the issuance of a visa to the alien is necessary 
     to support the peace process in Colombia or for urgent 
     humanitarian reasons.


 prohibition on assistance to the palestinian broadcasting corporation

       Sec. 558. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used to provide equipment, 
     technical support, consulting services, or any other form of 
     assistance to the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation.


                       west bank and gaza program

       Sec. 559. (a) Oversight.--For fiscal year 2006, 30 days 
     prior to the initial obligation of funds for the bilateral 
     West Bank and Gaza Program, the Secretary of State shall 
     certify to the appropriate committees of Congress that 
     procedures have been established to assure the Comptroller 
     General of the United

[[Page H5328]]

     States will have access to appropriate United States 
     financial information in order to review the uses of United 
     States assistance for the Program funded under the heading 
     ``Economic Support Fund'' for the West Bank and Gaza.
       (b) Vetting.--Prior to the obligation of funds appropriated 
     by this Act under the heading ``Economic Support Fund'' for 
     assistance for the West Bank and Gaza, the Secretary of State 
     shall take all appropriate steps to ensure that such 
     assistance is not provided to or through any individual, 
     private or government entity, or educational institution that 
     the Secretary knows or has reason to believe advocates, 
     plans, sponsors, engages in, or has engaged in, terrorist 
     activity. The Secretary of State shall, as appropriate, 
     establish procedures specifying the steps to be taken in 
     carrying out this subsection and shall terminate assistance 
     to any individual, entity, or educational institution which 
     he has determined to be involved in or advocating terrorist 
     activity.
       (c) Prohibition.--None of the funds appropriated by this 
     Act for assistance under the West Bank and Gaza program may 
     be made available for the purpose of recognizing or otherwise 
     honoring individuals who commit, or have committed, acts of 
     terrorism.
       (d) Audits.--
       (1) The Administrator of the United States Agency for 
     International Development shall ensure that Federal or non-
     Federal audits of all contractors and grantees, and 
     significant subcontractors and subgrantees, under the West 
     Bank and Gaza Program, are conducted at least on an annual 
     basis to ensure, among other things, compliance with this 
     section.
       (2) Of the funds appropriated by this Act under the heading 
     ``Economic Support Fund'' that are made available for 
     assistance for the West Bank and Gaza, up to $1,000,000 may 
     be used by the Office of the Inspector General of the United 
     States Agency for International Development for audits, 
     inspections, and other activities in furtherance of the 
     requirements of this subsection. Such funds are in addition 
     to funds otherwise available for such purposes.
       (e) Subsequent to the certification specified in subsection 
     (a), the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
     conduct an audit and an investigation of the treatment, 
     handling, and uses of all funds for the bilateral West Bank 
     and Gaza Program in fiscal year 2006 under the heading 
     ``Economic Support Fund''. The audit shall address--
       (1) the extent to which such Program complies with the 
     requirements of subsections (b) and (c), and
       (2) an examination of all programs, projects, and 
     activities carried out under such Program, including both 
     obligations and expenditures.


            contributions to united nations population fund

       Sec. 560. (a) Limitations on Amount of Contribution.--Of 
     the amounts made available under ``International 
     Organizations and Programs'' and ``Child Survival and Health 
     Programs Fund'' for fiscal year 2006, $34,000,000 shall be 
     made available for the United Nations Population Fund 
     (hereafter in this section referred to as the ``UNFPA''): 
     Provided, That of this amount, not less than $25,000,000 
     shall be derived from funds appropriated under the heading 
     ``International Organizations and Programs''.
       (b) Availability of Funds.--Funds appropriated under the 
     heading ``International Organizations and Programs'' in this 
     Act that are available for UNFPA, that are not made available 
     for UNFPA because of the operation of any provision of law, 
     shall be transferred to ``Child Survival and Health Programs 
     Fund'' and shall be made available for family planning, 
     maternal, and reproductive health activities, subject to the 
     regular notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations.
       (c) Prohibition on Use of Funds in China.--None of the 
     funds made available under ``International Organizations and 
     Programs'' may be made available for the UNFPA for a country 
     program in the People's Republic of China.
       (d) Conditions on Availability of Funds.--Amounts made 
     available under ``International Organizations and Programs'' 
     for fiscal year 2006 for the UNFPA may not be made available 
     to UNFPA unless--
       (1) the UNFPA maintains amounts made available to the UNFPA 
     under this section in an account separate from other accounts 
     of the UNFPA;
       (2) the UNFPA does not commingle amounts made available to 
     the UNFPA under this section with other sums; and
       (3) the UNFPA does not fund abortions.


                             war criminals

       Sec. 561. (a)(1) None of the funds appropriated or 
     otherwise made available pursuant to this Act may be made 
     available for assistance, and the Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall instruct the United States executive directors to the 
     international financial institutions to vote against any new 
     project involving the extension by such institutions of any 
     financial or technical assistance, to any country, entity, or 
     municipality whose competent authorities have failed, as 
     determined by the Secretary of State, to take necessary and 
     significant steps to implement its international legal 
     obligations to apprehend and transfer to the International 
     Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (the 
     ``Tribunal'') all persons in their territory who have been 
     indicted by the Tribunal and to otherwise cooperate with the 
     Tribunal.
       (2) The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to 
     humanitarian assistance or assistance for democratization.
       (b) The provisions of subsection (a) shall apply unless the 
     Secretary of State determines and reports to the appropriate 
     congressional committees that the competent authorities of 
     such country, entity, or municipality are--
       (1) cooperating with the Tribunal, including access for 
     investigators to archives and witnesses, the provision of 
     documents, and the surrender and transfer of indictees or 
     assistance in their apprehension; and
       (2) are acting consistently with the Dayton Accords.
       (c) Not less than 10 days before any vote in an 
     international financial institution regarding the extension 
     of any new project involving financial or technical 
     assistance or grants to any country or entity described in 
     subsection (a), the Secretary of the Treasury, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of State, shall provide to 
     the Committees on Appropriations a written justification for 
     the proposed assistance, including an explanation of the 
     United States position regarding any such vote, as well as a 
     description of the location of the proposed assistance by 
     municipality, its purpose, and its intended beneficiaries.
       (d) In carrying out this section, the Secretary of State, 
     the Administrator of the United States Agency for 
     International Development, and the Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall consult with representatives of human rights 
     organizations and all government agencies with relevant 
     information to help prevent indicted war criminals from 
     benefiting from any financial or technical assistance or 
     grants provided to any country or entity described in 
     subsection (a).
       (e) The Secretary of State may waive the application of 
     subsection (a) with respect to projects within a country, 
     entity, or municipality upon a written determination to the 
     Committees on Appropriations that such assistance directly 
     supports the implementation of the Dayton Accords.
       (f) Definitions.--As used in this section:
       (1) Country.--The term ``country'' means Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia.
       (2) Entity.--The term ``entity'' refers to the Federation 
     of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro and the 
     Republika Srpska.
       (3) Municipality.--The term ``municipality'' means a city, 
     town or other subdivision within a country or entity as 
     defined herein.
       (4) Dayton accords.--The term ``Dayton Accords'' means the 
     General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina, together with annexes relating thereto, done at 
     Dayton, November 10 through 16, 1995.


                               user fees

       Sec. 562. The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the 
     United States Executive Director at each international 
     financial institution (as defined in section 1701(c)(2) of 
     the International Financial Institutions Act) and the 
     International Monetary Fund to oppose any loan, grant, 
     strategy or policy of these institutions that would require 
     user fees or service charges on poor people for primary 
     education or primary healthcare, including prevention and 
     treatment efforts for HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, and 
     infant, child, and maternal well-being, in connection with 
     the institutions' financing programs.


                           funding for serbia

       Sec. 563. (a) Funds appropriated by this Act may be made 
     available for assistance for the central Government of Serbia 
     after May 31, 2006, if the President has made the 
     determination and certification contained in subsection (c).
       (b) After May 31, 2006, the Secretary of the Treasury 
     should instruct the United States executive directors to the 
     international financial institutions to support loans and 
     assistance to the Government of Serbia and Montenegro subject 
     to the conditions in subsection (c): Provided, That section 
     576 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related 
     Programs Appropriations Act, 1997, as amended, shall not 
     apply to the provision of loans and assistance to the 
     Government of Serbia and Montenegro through international 
     financial institutions.
       (c) The determination and certification referred to in 
     subsection (a) is a determination by the President and a 
     certification to the Committees on Appropriations that the 
     Government of Serbia and Montenegro is--
       (1) cooperating with the International Criminal Tribunal 
     for the former Yugoslavia including access for investigators, 
     the provision of documents, and the surrender and transfer of 
     indictees or assistance in their apprehension, including 
     making all practicable efforts to apprehend and transfer 
     Ratko Mladic;
       (2) taking steps that are consistent with the Dayton 
     Accords to end Serbian financial, political, security and 
     other support which has served to maintain separate Republika 
     Srpska institutions; and
       (3) taking steps to implement policies which reflect a 
     respect for minority rights and the rule of law.
       (d) This section shall not apply to Montenegro, Kosovo, 
     humanitarian assistance or assistance to promote democracy.


                   community-based police assistance

       Sec. 564. (a) Authority.--Funds made available by this Act 
     to carry out the provisions of chapter 1 of part I and 
     chapter 4 of

[[Page H5329]]

     part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, may be used, 
     notwithstanding section 660 of that Act, to enhance the 
     effectiveness and accountability of civilian police authority 
     through training and technical assistance in human rights, 
     the rule of law, strategic planning, and through assistance 
     to foster civilian police roles that support democratic 
     governance including assistance for programs to prevent 
     conflict, respond to disasters, address gender-based 
     violence, and foster improved police relations with the 
     communities they serve.
       (b) Notification.--Assistance provided under subsection (a) 
     shall be subject to prior consultation with, and the regular 
     notification procedures of, the Committees on Appropriations.


                  Special Debt Relief for the Poorest

       Sec. 565. (a) Authority To Reduce Debt.--The President may 
     reduce amounts owed to the United States (or any agency of 
     the United States) by an eligible country as a result of--
       (1) guarantees issued under sections 221 and 222 of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961;
       (2) credits extended or guarantees issued under the Arms 
     Export Control Act; or
       (3) any obligation or portion of such obligation, to pay 
     for purchases of United States agricultural commodities 
     guaranteed by the Commodity Credit Corporation under export 
     credit guarantee programs authorized pursuant to section 5(f) 
     of the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act of June 29, 
     1948, as amended, section 4(b) of the Food for Peace Act of 
     1966, as amended (Public Law 89-808), or section 202 of the 
     Agricultural Trade Act of 1978, as amended (Public Law 95-
     501).
       (b) Limitations.--
       (1) The authority provided by subsection (a) may be 
     exercised only to implement multilateral official debt relief 
     and referendum agreements, commonly referred to as ``Paris 
     Club Agreed Minutes''.
       (2) The authority provided by subsection (a) may be 
     exercised only in such amounts or to such extent as is 
     provided in advance by appropriations Acts.
       (3) The authority provided by subsection (a) may be 
     exercised only with respect to countries with heavy debt 
     burdens that are eligible to borrow from the International 
     Development Association, but not from the International Bank 
     for Reconstruction and Development, commonly referred to as 
     ``IDA-only'' countries.
       (c) Conditions.--The authority provided by subsection (a) 
     may be exercised only with respect to a country whose 
     government--
       (1) does not have an excessive level of military 
     expenditures;
       (2) has not repeatedly provided support for acts of 
     international terrorism;
       (3) is not failing to cooperate on international narcotics 
     control matters;
       (4) (including its military or other security forces) does 
     not engage in a consistent pattern of gross violations of 
     internationally recognized human rights; and
       (5) is not ineligible for assistance because of the 
     application of section 527 of the Foreign Relations 
     Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995.
       (d) Availability of Funds.--The authority provided by 
     subsection (a) may be used only with regard to the funds 
     appropriated by this Act under the heading ``Debt 
     Restructuring''.
       (e) Certain Prohibitions Inapplicable.--A reduction of debt 
     pursuant to subsection (a) shall not be considered assistance 
     for the purposes of any provision of law limiting assistance 
     to a country. The authority provided by subsection (a) may be 
     exercised notwithstanding section 620(r) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 or section 321 of the International 
     Development and Food Assistance Act of 1975.


             Authority to Engage in Debt Buybacks or Sales

       Sec. 566. (a) Loans Eligible for Sale, Reduction, or 
     Cancellation.--
       (1) Authority to sell, reduce, or cancel certain loans.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law that restricts 
     assistance to foreign countries, the President may, in 
     accordance with this section, sell to any eligible purchaser 
     any concessional loan or portion thereof made before January 
     1, 1995, pursuant to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, to 
     the government of any eligible country as defined in section 
     702(6) of that Act or on receipt of payment from an eligible 
     purchaser, reduce or cancel such loan or portion thereof, 
     only for the purpose of facilitating--
       (A) debt-for-equity swaps, debt-for-development swaps, or 
     debt-for-nature swaps; or
       (B) a debt buyback by an eligible country of its own 
     qualified debt, only if the eligible country uses an 
     additional amount of the local currency of the eligible 
     country, equal to not less than 40 percent of the price paid 
     for such debt by such eligible country, or the difference 
     between the price paid for such debt and the face value of 
     such debt, to support activities that link conservation and 
     sustainable use of natural resources with local community 
     development, and child survival and other child development, 
     in a manner consistent with sections 707 through 710 of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, if the sale, reduction, or 
     cancellation would not contravene any term or condition of 
     any prior agreement relating to such loan.
       (2) Terms and conditions.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the President shall, in accordance with 
     this section, establish the terms and conditions under which 
     loans may be sold, reduced, or canceled pursuant to this 
     section.
       (3) Administration.--The Facility, as defined in section 
     702(8) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, shall notify 
     the administrator of the agency primarily responsible for 
     administering part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 of 
     purchasers that the President has determined to be eligible, 
     and shall direct such agency to carry out the sale, 
     reduction, or cancellation of a loan pursuant to this 
     section. Such agency shall make adjustment in its accounts to 
     reflect the sale, reduction, or cancellation.
       (4) Limitation.--The authorities of this subsection shall 
     be available only to the extent that appropriations for the 
     cost of the modification, as defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, are made in advance.
       (b) Deposit of Proceeds.--The proceeds from the sale, 
     reduction, or cancellation of any loan sold, reduced, or 
     canceled pursuant to this section shall be deposited in the 
     United States Government account or accounts established for 
     the repayment of such loan.
       (c) Eligible Purchasers.--A loan may be sold pursuant to 
     subsection (a)(1)(A) only to a purchaser who presents plans 
     satisfactory to the President for using the loan for the 
     purpose of engaging in debt-for-equity swaps, debt-for-
     development swaps, or debt-for-nature swaps.
       (d) Debtor Consultations.--Before the sale to any eligible 
     purchaser, or any reduction or cancellation pursuant to this 
     section, of any loan made to an eligible country, the 
     President should consult with the country concerning the 
     amount of loans to be sold, reduced, or canceled and their 
     uses for debt-for-equity swaps, debt-for-development swaps, 
     or debt-for-nature swaps.
       (e) Availability of Funds.--The authority provided by 
     subsection (a) may be used only with regard to funds 
     appropriated by this Act under the heading ``Debt 
     Restructuring''.


                            Basic Education

       Sec. 567. Of the funds appropriated by title II of this 
     Act, not less than $465,000,000 shall be made available for 
     basic education, of which not less than $250,000 shall be 
     provided to the Comptroller General of the United States to 
     prepare an analysis of United States funded international 
     basic education programs: Provided, That the analysis, which 
     should be submitted to the Committee within nine months of 
     enactment of this Act, shall include, but not be limited to:
       (1) the amount of funds provided for basic education by all 
     United States Government agencies in fiscal years 2001, 2002, 
     2003, 2004, and 2005;
       (2) a country-by-country and project-by-project breakdown 
     of such funds;
       (3) an analysis of host country contributions to education 
     at the local, provincial, and federal level;
       (4) the amount of funds, including loans, provided for 
     basic education by other major bilateral donors and 
     multilateral institutions, including United Nations agencies 
     and the World Bank Group, including a historical view of such 
     levels;
       (5) an analysis of United States efforts to increase the 
     commitment of other major bilateral donors and multilateral 
     institutions to basic education;
       (6) an analysis of how various United States Government 
     agencies coordinate in the provision of such assistance, 
     including how such coordination contributes to achievement of 
     the Millennium Development Goals with respect to basic 
     education;
       (7) an analysis of the effect of the quadrupling of United 
     States assistance for basic education since fiscal year 2001 
     on education programs in the developing world; and
       (8) recommendations on the content and structure of United 
     States assistance that would increase its effectiveness in 
     promoting literary and numeracy.


                        reconciliation programs

       Sec. 568. Of the funds appropriated under the heading 
     ``Economic Support Fund'', not less than $15,000,000 should 
     be made available to support reconciliation programs and 
     activities which bring together individuals of different 
     ethnic, religious, and political backgrounds from areas of 
     civil conflict and war.


                                 sudan

       Sec. 569. (a) Availability of Funds.--Of the funds 
     appropriated by title II of this Act, not less than 
     $367,000,000 should be made available for assistance for 
     Sudan.
       (b) Limitation on Assistance.--Subject to subsection (c):
       (1) Notwithstanding section 501(a) of the International 
     Malaria Control Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-570) or any other 
     provision of law that restricts funds for foreign countries, 
     none of the funds appropriated by this Act may be made 
     available for assistance for the Government of Sudan.
       (2) None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be made 
     available for the cost, as defined in section 502, of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, of modifying loans and loan 
     guarantees held by the Government of Sudan, including the 
     cost of selling, reducing, or canceling amounts owed to the 
     United States, and modifying concessional loans, guarantees, 
     and credit agreements.
       (c) Subsection (b) shall not apply if the Secretary of 
     State determines and certifies to the Committees on 
     Appropriations that--
       (1) the Government of Sudan has taken significant steps to 
     disarm and disband government-supported militia groups in the 
     Darfur region;

[[Page H5330]]

       (2) the Government of Sudan and all government-supported 
     militia groups are honoring their commitments made in the 
     cease-fire agreement of April 8, 2004; and
       (3) the Government of Sudan is allowing unimpeded access to 
     Darfur to humanitarian aid organizations, the human rights 
     investigation and humanitarian teams of the United Nations, 
     including protection officers, and an international 
     monitoring team that is based in Darfur and that has the 
     support of the United States.
       (d) Exceptions.--The provisions of subsection (b) shall not 
     apply to--
       (1) humanitarian assistance;
       (2) assistance for Darfur and for areas outside the control 
     of the Government of Sudan; and
       (3) assistance to support implementation of the 
     Comprehensive Peace Agreement.
       (e) Definitions.--For the purposes of this Act and section 
     501 of Public Law 106-570, the terms ``Government of Sudan'', 
     ``areas outside of control of the Government of Sudan'', and 
     ``area in Sudan outside of control of the Government of 
     Sudan'' shall have the same meaning and application as was 
     the case immediately prior to June 5, 2004, and, Southern 
     Kordofan/Nuba Mountains State, Blue Nile State and Abyei 
     shall be deemed ``areas outside of control of the Government 
     of Sudan''.


                        trade capacity building

       Sec. 570. Of the funds appropriated by this Act, under the 
     headings ``Trade and Development Agency'', ``Development 
     Assistance'', ``Transition Initiatives'', ``Economic Support 
     Fund'', ``International Affairs Technical Assistance'', and 
     ``International Organizations and Programs'', not less than 
     $522,000,000 should be made available for trade capacity 
     building assistance: Provided, That $20,000,000 of the funds 
     appropriated in this Act under the heading ``Economic Support 
     Fund'' shall be made available for labor and environmental 
     capacity building activities relating to the free trade 
     agreement with the countries of Central America and the 
     Dominican Republic.


 excess defense articles for central and south european countries and 
                        certain other countries

       Sec. 571. Notwithstanding section 516(e) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j(e)), during fiscal 
     year 2006, funds available to the Department of Defense may 
     be expended for crating, packing, handling, and 
     transportation of excess defense articles transferred under 
     the authority of section 516 of such Act to Albania, 
     Afghanistan, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Former Yugoslavian 
     Republic of Macedonia, Georgia, India, Iraq, Kazakhstan, 
     Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Mongolia, Pakistan, 
     Romania, Slovakia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and 
     Uzbekistan.


                                  CUBA

       Sec. 572. None of the funds appropriated by this Act under 
     the heading ``International Narcotics Control and Law 
     Enforcement'' may be made available for assistance to the 
     Government of Cuba.


                     GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE TRAINING

       Sec. 573. Programs funded under titles II and III of this 
     Act that provide training for foreign police, judicial, and 
     military officials, shall include instruction on how to 
     address incidences and victims of gender-based violence: 
     Provided, That the Secretary of State, in consultation with 
     the Secretary of Defense, shall report to the Committee on 
     Appropriations, no later than 180 days after enactment of 
     this Act, how such instruction is being incorporated into 
     programs funded under titles II and III of this Act.


  limitation on economic support fund assistance for certain foreign 
    governments that are parties to the international criminal court

       Sec. 574. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act 
     in title II under the heading ``Economic Support Fund'' may 
     be used to provide assistance to the government of a country 
     that is a party to the International Criminal Court and has 
     not entered into an agreement with the United States pursuant 
     to Article 98 of the Rome Statute preventing the 
     International Criminal Court from proceeding against United 
     States personnel present in such country.
       (b) The President may, with prior notice to Congress, waive 
     the prohibition of subsection (a) with respect to a North 
     Atlantic Treaty Organization (``NATO'') member country, a 
     major non-NATO ally (including Australia, Egypt, Israel, 
     Japan, Jordan, Argentina, the Republic of Korea, and New 
     Zealand), Taiwan, or such other country as he may determine 
     if he determines and reports to the appropriate congressional 
     committees that it is important to the national interests of 
     the United States to waive such prohibition.
       (c) The President may, with prior notice to Congress, waive 
     the prohibition of subsection (a) with respect to a 
     particular country if he determines and reports to the 
     appropriate congressional committees that such country has 
     entered into an agreement with the United States pursuant to 
     Article 98 of the Rome Statute preventing the International 
     Criminal Court from proceeding against United States 
     personnel present in such country.
       (d) The prohibition of this section shall not apply to 
     countries otherwise eligible for assistance under the 
     Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, notwithstanding section 
     606(a)(2)(B) of such Act.


                                 tibet

       Sec. 575. (a) The Secretary of the Treasury should instruct 
     the United States executive director to each international 
     financial institution to use the voice and vote of the United 
     States to support projects in Tibet if such projects do not 
     provide incentives for the migration and settlement of non-
     Tibetans into Tibet or facilitate the transfer of ownership 
     of Tibetan land and natural resources to non-Tibetans; are 
     based on a thorough needs-assessment; foster self-sufficiency 
     of the Tibetan people and respect Tibetan culture and 
     traditions; and are subject to effective monitoring.
       (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law that 
     restricts assistance to foreign countries, not less than 
     $4,000,000 of the funds appropriated by this Act under the 
     heading ``Economic Support Fund'' should be made available to 
     nongovernmental organizations to support activities which 
     preserve cultural traditions and promote sustainable 
     development and environmental conservation in Tibetan 
     communities in the Tibetan Autonomous Region and in other 
     Tibetan communities in China.


                            central america

       Sec. 576. Of the funds appropriated by this Act under the 
     headings ``Child Survival and Health Programs Fund'' and 
     ``Development Assistance'', not less than the amount of funds 
     initially allocated pursuant to section 653(a) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 for fiscal year 2005 should be made 
     available for El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Honduras.


     united states agency for international development management

       Sec. 577. (a) Authority.--Up to $75,000,000 of the funds 
     made available in this Act to carry out the provisions of 
     part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, including funds 
     appropriated under the heading ``Assistance for Eastern 
     Europe and the Baltic States'', may be used by the United 
     States Agency for International Development (USAID) to hire 
     and employ individuals in the United States and overseas on a 
     limited appointment basis pursuant to the authority of 
     sections 308 and 309 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980.
       (b) Restrictions.--
       (1) The number of individuals hired in any fiscal year 
     pursuant to the authority contained in subsection (a) may not 
     exceed 175.
       (2) The authority to hire individuals contained in 
     subsection (a) shall expire on September 30, 2008.
       (c) Conditions.--The authority of this section may only be 
     used to the extent that an equivalent number of positions 
     that are filled by personal services contractors or other 
     nondirect-hire employees of USAID, who are compensated with 
     funds appropriated to carry out part I of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961, including funds appropriated under 
     the heading ``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic 
     States'', are eliminated.
       (d) Priority Sectors.--In exercising the authority of this 
     section, primary emphasis shall be placed on enabling USAID 
     to meet personnel positions in technical skill areas 
     currently encumbered by contractor or other nondirect-hire 
     personnel.
       (e) Consultations.--The USAID Administrator shall consult 
     with the Committees on Appropriations at least on a quarterly 
     basis concerning the implementation of this section.
       (f) Program Account Charged.--The account charged for the 
     cost of an individual hired and employed under the authority 
     of this section shall be the account to which such 
     individual's responsibilities primarily relate. Funds made 
     available to carry out this section may be transferred to and 
     merged and consolidated with funds appropriated for 
     ``Operating Expenses of the United States Agency for 
     International Development''.
       (g) Disaster Surge Capacity.--Funds appropriated by this 
     Act to carry out part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961, including funds appropriated under the heading 
     ``Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States'', may 
     be used, in addition to funds otherwise available for such 
     purposes, for the cost (including the support costs) of 
     individuals detailed to or employed by the United States 
     Agency for International Development whose primary 
     responsibility is to carry out programs in response to 
     natural disasters.


                          hipc debt reduction

       Sec. 578. Section 501(b) of H.R. 3425, as enacted into law 
     by section 1000(a)(5) of division B of Public Law 106-113 
     (113 Stat. 1501A-311), is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(5) The Act of March 11, 1941 (chapter 11; 55 Stat. 31; 
     22 U.S.C. 411 et seq.; commonly known as the `Lend-Lease 
     Act').''


                        opic transfer authority

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 579. Whenever the President determines that it is in 
     furtherance of the purposes of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961, up to a total of $20,000,000 of the funds appropriated 
     under title II of this Act may be transferred to and merged 
     with funds appropriated by this Act for the Overseas Private 
     Investment Corporation Program Account, to be subject to the 
     terms and conditions of that account: Provided, That such 
     funds shall not be available for administrative expenses of 
     the Overseas Private Investment Corporation: Provided 
     further, That funds earmarked by this Act shall not be 
     transferred pursuant

[[Page H5331]]

     to this section: Provided further, That the exercise of such 
     authority shall be subject to the regular notification 
     procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.


                           conflict response

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 580. Whenever the Secretary of State determines that 
     it is in the national interest of the United States, the 
     Secretary is authorized to furnish reconstruction and 
     stabilization assistance, on such terms and conditions as the 
     Secretary may determine, for the purpose of preventing, 
     responding to, or enabling transition from conflict or civil 
     strife in foreign countries or regions: Provided, That the 
     Secretary may transfer up to $100,000,000 among accounts of 
     the Department of State and to other Federal agencies as 
     necessary to carry out these authorities: Provided further, 
     That pursuant to a determination by the Secretary of State 
     that it is in the national interest of the United States to 
     prevent or respond to conflict or civil strife in foreign 
     countries or regions, or to enable transition from such 
     strife assistance provided under this paragraph, as well as 
     assistance provided with funds appropriated under titles II 
     and III of this Act for countries subject to a determination 
     made under this paragraph, may be used: Provided further, 
     That the exercise of such authority shall be subject to the 
     regular notification procedures of the Committees on 
     Appropriations.


                               rescission

       Sec. 581. Of the funds provided in title II of Public Law 
     108-447, under the heading ``Other Bilateral Economic 
     Assistance, Economic Support Fund'', $64,000,000 is hereby 
     rescinded.


                       anticorruption provisions

       Sec. 582. Twenty-five percent of the funds appropriated by 
     this Act under the headings ``International Development 
     Association'', shall be withheld from obligation until the 
     Secretary of the Treasury certifies to the appropriate 
     congressional committees that--
       (a) World Bank procurement guidelines are applied to all 
     procurement financed in whole or in part by a loan from the 
     International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) 
     or a credit agreement or grant from the International 
     Development Association (IDA);
       (b) the World Bank proposal ``Increasing the Use of Country 
     Systems in Procurement'' dated March 2005 has been withdrawn;
       (c) the World Bank is maintaining a strong central 
     procurement office staffed with senior experts who are 
     designated to address commercial concerns, questions, and 
     complaints regarding procurement procedures and payments 
     under IDA and IBRD projects;
       (d) thresholds for international competitive bidding are 
     established to maximize international competitive bidding in 
     accordance with sound procurement practices, including 
     transparency, competition, and cost-effective results for the 
     Borrowers;
       (e) all tenders under the World Bank's national competitive 
     bidding provisions are subject to the same advertisement 
     requirements as tenders under international competitive 
     bidding; and
       (f) loan agreements are made public between the World Bank 
     and the Borrowers.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Are there any points of order?


                             Point of Order

  Mr. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against what was 
left unprotected by H. Res. 341 in section 565 that begins on page 113, 
line 26, through page 114, line 10, for the reason that it violates 
rule XXI, clause 2, which prohibits legislative language in a general 
appropriations bill.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the 
point of order?
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I concede the point of order.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained. 
The provision is stricken from the bill.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Beauprez

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

       Amendment offered by Mr. Beauprez:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


limitation on assistance to foreign countries that refuse to extradite 
  to the United States any individual accused in the United States of 
                   killing a law enforcement officer

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act for 
     the Department of State may be used to provide assistance to 
     any country the government of which has notified the 
     Department of State of its refusal to extradite to the United 
     States any individual accused in the United States of killing 
     a law enforcement officer, as specified in a United States 
     extradition request.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Beauprez) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Beauprez).
  Mr. BEAUPREZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to first of all acknowledge the hard work and 
dedication of the chairman, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), and 
the ranking member, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), for 
their dedication and the construction of a very, very good bill.
  But I rise tonight with an amendment, and the intent of this 
amendment is very, very simple. It is to return cop killers back to the 
United States to stand trial in our country, the same country in which 
they committed their unthinkable crime.
  The problem was brought to my attention last month after Denver 
Police Detective Donnie Young was allegedly executed by Raul Gomez-
Garcia. After killing Detective Young and shooting and wounding his 
partner, Gomez-Garcia fled to Mexico, where he was tracked down and 
arrested weeks later. The Mexican Government now refuses to extradite 
him back to the U.S. if there is any chance he could spend life in 
prison without parole. Detective Young's widow and his two children now 
face the further tragedy of either partial justice or no justice at all 
being served to her husband's killer.
  In another case, in 2002, a convicted felon who had been deported 
three times allegedly shot and killed a Los Angeles County sheriff 
following a routine traffic stop before fleeing to Mexico, where he 
remains today, essentially escaping justice.
  The U.S. should not be forced to plea bargain with other countries in 
order to try criminals, especially cop killers, in our own courts. As a 
good neighbor, Mexico should live up to their end of our extradition 
treaty. Killing a police officer is one of the most egregious crimes, 
and we should have the right to seek justice for the families of the 
slain officers.
  The U.S. is not obliged to give foreign aid, and we should not reward 
nations giving safe haven to cop killers. I ask my colleagues to vote 
for this commonsense amendment that will bring help and peace and 
justice to those who deserve it most.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina 
(Mr. McHenry).
  Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate the gentleman's 
leadership in the State of Colorado and here in Washington, D.C. on 
this issue, about fighting to protect our law enforcement officers.
  There is a growing problem in this Nation where criminals will commit 
violent crimes, including murdering law enforcement officers, and flee 
to nations that refuse to extradite to the United States those 
criminals because of our tough sentencing laws, including mandatory 
minimum sentences.
  This amendment is simple: it will not allow taxpayer funds to go to 
nations that refuse to stand with us against the vile act of murdering 
law enforcement officers.
  Law enforcement officers across this country are bravely fighting 
crime, responding to emergencies, and protecting our rights. We have an 
opportunity to stand up for them with this amendment here today. When 
countries do not extradite their criminals, it actually creates a 
twisted incentive to be even more violent in their crimes. The more 
violent the crime, the tougher the sentence here in the United States; 
and the tougher the sentence, the less likely they are to be subject to 
extradition.
  The Beauprez-McHenry amendment will apply the pressure that usually 
gets the best results, and that is withholding tax dollars to those 
countries. I, for one, think it is prudent and just that we require 
nations to extradite cop killers before receiving aid through this 
appropriations process.
  Again, I applaud my colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Beauprez). I certainly appreciate his representation of his 
constituents in Colorado, I thank him for his leadership and 
friendship, and I urge my colleagues to vote for the Beauprez-McHenry 
amendment when the time comes and protect our law enforcement officers 
across this Nation.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to 
the amendment.

[[Page H5332]]

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I do rise in strong opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment that would cut off assistance for U.S. programs in Mexico, 
and let us make it clear that Mexico is the country we are talking 
about today, no other.
  The amendment is based on the wrong assumption that U.S. foreign 
assistance to Mexico is only in Mexico's national interests. I am here 
to say that the funding in this amendment prohibits the United States' 
national interest, so I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no''.
  President Bush and his Office of National Drug Control Policy are 
fully supportive of the assistance we provide in this bill for the 
country of Mexico. The bulk of that assistance takes the form of 
international narcotics and law enforcement, roughly around $40 
million. There is another $11 million in ESF funds that support 
democracy and the rule-of-law programs. Around $22 million supports 
child survival and development programs. All of these resources are 
central to the U.S. national interest.
  This amendment could directly cut off $40 million in resources that 
are essential for our counternarcotics assistance, law enforcement 
assistance, and border securities. We do not, in other words, with this 
amendment, gain any kind of leverage over the country of Mexico.
  I highlight the fact that this assistance is more for us than Mexico 
because the objective of this assistance is to increase U.S. national 
and border security, something I am acutely aware of, living along the 
border. Cutting off these funds would be very shortsighted and would 
serve to hurt U.S. interests, not the interests of Mexico.
  For decades, the U.S.-Mexico relationship was one of acrimony, 
distrust, and a lack of good working relationship to meet the 
challenges of the enormous border relationship between our two 
countries.
  Only with the passage of NAFTA, 10 years ago, were we able to write a 
new chapter in U.S.-Mexico relations. We started down a path of deeper 
cooperation in order to spur development in Mexico, secure our shared 
borders, and fight the flow of illegal drugs across our territories.

                              {time}  1845

  Passage of this amendment could have a devastating impact on that 
effort to stop the flow of drugs.
  I would point out that Mexico has offered tremendous cooperation in 
improving border security and counterterrorism efforts. Let me cite 
just a couple of things. During the threat to aviation security at the 
end of 2003, Mexico worked closely with the U.S. Government canceling 
some flights, Air Mexico flights to Los Angeles and stepping up 
passenger screening. They stopped those flights in direct response to 
our request. At the commencement of the war in Iraq, the Government of 
Mexico implemented a plan and its military assumed a higher state of 
alert for potential targets of international terrorism, including key 
infrastructure sites and centers of tourism. Third, multilaterally, 
Mexico is party to all 12 United States conventions and protocols 
against terrorism and has hosted several conferences on security.
  I believe this amendment would undermine the spirit of cooperation 
and the degree of cooperation that we have achieved, and I do not think 
this amendment reflects the priorities of the national interest of the 
United States. I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on it.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to associate myself with the 
comments of the chairman. I think that this amendment would be 
detrimental to the national security, and I urge my colleagues to 
defeat it.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BEAUPREZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time.
  I could not agree more with the chairman that this is more for the 
U.S. than it is for our neighbors. I also want to state for the record 
that I have enormous fondness for our neighbors to the south. I have 20 
percent Hispanics in my district and many of them came from Mexico. One 
of my earliest childhood memories is of migrant workers sitting around 
our kitchen table at our farm, my mother cooking them lunch as they 
harvested our crops, thrashing the grain crop from our dairy farm. I 
have great fondness for them but, I also believe, as the gentleman 
stated, in the rule of law.
  Let me quote Steve Cooley, the Los Angeles District Attorney. ``As 
you are aware, the Mexican Supreme Court unilaterally altered the 
Extradition Treaty in 2001.'' He goes on to say, ``This decision and 
its application to the Extradition Treaty between the United States and 
Mexico is clearly violative of the Treaty.''
  That is what we are talking about tonight. We have a treaty in place. 
Good neighbors mean what they say and say what they mean, and live by 
treaties that are reached.
  This amendment is all about just being honest and fair-dealing with 
good friends. We intend to be a good friend of Mexico and other nations 
around the globe. We will live by our treaties, and we ask that they 
live by theirs.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time.
  I would just briefly close by citing just a few statistics on 
extraditions. I have had the privilege over the last 10 years now of 
serving as chairman of the U.S.-Mexico Interparliamentary meeting. I 
can remember when I first started attending 20 years ago, extradition 
was the issue that we are always talking about. We do not talk about 
that very much anymore, and the reason is very simple.
  The first 14 years of the Extradition Treaty with Mexico, from 1980 
to 1994, a total of 14 years, Mexico extradited eight, a total of eight 
fugitives to the United States. Between 1996 and 2000, Mexico 
extradited an annual average of 13 fugitives each year to the United 
States.
  Mexico has extradited more fugitives every year between 1996 and 2000 
than in the first 15 years of the Bilateral Extradition Treaty 
combined. In 2004 they extradited a record 34 fugitives to the U.S., up 
from the record numbers of 17 in 2001, a record number of 25 in 2002, 
and 31 in 2003. These include 19 Mexican nationals and 17 narcotics 
defendants.
  So I think there is no question that Mexico is doing what they can 
do. Can there be more done? Can they do better? Do we have areas of 
disagreement? Yes, we do, and one of these issues is the matter of the 
length of term for which a person may be sentenced to prison. We are 
working with them on that.
  But I would urge my colleagues that this amendment is certainly not 
going to help us get a cooperative attitude with Mexico if it were to 
pass. I urge its defeat.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hefley). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Beauprez).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. BEAUPREZ. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. Beauprez) will be postponed.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. WEINER. Is this the appropriate place in the reading for a 
limiting amendment?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman may offer his amendment.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Weiner

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

       Amendment offered by Mr. Weiner:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:


          prohibition against direct funding for saudi arabia

       Sec. __. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available pursuant to this

[[Page H5333]]

     Act shall be obligated or expended to finance any assistance 
     to Saudi Arabia.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner) and the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Kolbe) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).
  Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, perhaps the more appropriate question about this 
amendment is not why should we restrict any funds in this bill from 
going to the Nation of Saudi Arabia, but why should we allow any funds 
from this or any other budget to be going to Saudi Arabia.
  There is not much in the bill, but there is $25,000 for the Saudis, 
the IMET program. More importantly, that money triggers allocations in 
future bills that permit the Saudis to buy U.S. arms at a discounted 
rate.
  The administration, when they were asked to justify why we would give 
any money to a nation that exports terror, a nation that is getting 
almost $60 for a barrel of crude oil, here is what they say in their 
State Department budget justification: ``While Saudi Arabia controls 
the world's largest oil reserve, it faces an increasing budget 
pressure.''
  So I guess one of the reasons we are providing aid to the Saudis is 
because of their budget pressures.
  Frankly, we have heard a great deal over the course of years; in 
fact, the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, who has done a 
terrific job on this bill in many ways, has argued in the past that the 
Saudis are doing better, they are doing better at cracking down on 
crime. But on May 28 of 2005, Syria arrested 300 Saudis trying to cross 
the border into Iraq to join the Jihad against the United States. I 
would say to my colleagues in the House that if you are relying on 
Syria to crack down on terrorism against Saudi Arabia, you know you 
have trouble.
  Recently, a report in The Washington Post analyzed all of the Web 
sites where Jihadists brag about their so-called martyrdom, places 
where they list those who have given their lives so that they can blow 
up others, including our troops. They concluded that 70 percent of the 
homicide bombers on Islamic extremist Web sites are Saudis. Sixty-one 
percent of the Arab martyrs in Iraq are Saudis. This is just in recent 
months, in recent times since our last bill passed.
  According to Ambassador Dory Gold, in testimony before a Subcommittee 
of the House Committee on International Relations in July of 2003, at 
least 50 percent of the funding for Hamas is Saudi blood money.
  We all know the history of Osama bin Laden. When he left Saudi 
Arabia, he did so with, by some estimates, nearly $1 billion of Saudi 
blood money which was subsequently used, as we know, to attack my city, 
and others.
  The time has come for us to say once again, just as we did last year 
in this bill, no aid to Saudi Arabia, no aid to a country that exports 
Wahabisim, no aid to a country that exports terrorism, no aid to a 
country that has been worse than uncooperative in our efforts to 
control worldwide oil prices.
  There is no other way to view the Saudis except as our enemies, not 
as our friends. Nothing, I think, was more troubling for many of us 
than to see the President waiting in Crawford, Texas for over an hour 
while the Crown Prince came and then gave a lecture to our President on 
the way to fight terrorism.
  The way we in the House should fight terrorism is to not provide any 
more aid to the Saudis, and my amendment would do that.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, and I 
yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This is another one of those amendments that is difficult to speak 
against, I suppose, because we all have our problems with the record in 
Saudi Arabia. But it is also one that when we look at it in the cold 
light, I think we recognize that it does not do what it says it is 
going to do, it is symbolic, and the symbolism comes down on the wrong 
side.
  In the past there have been elements, certainly, of the Saudi 
Government that have not been helpful to the United States in its 
Global War on Terrorism but, in the past few years, the Government of 
Saudi Arabia has greatly increased its efforts to root out terrorism 
and has increased its cooperation with the United States Government.
  Now, this bill provides a really very small sum of $25,000 to the 
International Military Education and Training program, or IMET, to help 
train and increase military contracts with the Saudi military. Some 
would say, what could you possibly do for $25,000, and why do we not 
charge the Saudi Government for this training? In fact, that is exactly 
what we do. By providing this sum of $25,000, about the cost of 
training one officer, we allow them access to the program, and this 
results in Saudi Arabia spending approximately $13 million of its own 
funds on an annual basis to train over 400 students at U.S. military 
schools. This training exposes Saudi officers to U.S. military 
doctrines, training regimes, systems and, most importantly, to U.S. 
values.
  With the Global War on Terrorism, now is not the time to turn our 
backs on those who have albeit belatedly, turned to us for assistance 
and cooperation. We need all the friends and the allies that we can get 
in this fight against terrorism. There is no question that the Saudi 
Arabian government has been remiss in the past in its commitments to 
combating terrorism, but that is changing and, above all, we need to be 
encouraging the change, not discouraging it, which is precisely, of 
course, what this amendment would do.
  So let us not drive a wedge between the United States and the Arab 
regimes that are cooperating with us on the War on Terrorism. I urge 
that we defeat this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Weiner amendment. This 
provision was included in the fiscal year 2005 Foreign Operations bill, 
and I believe it should be included again.
  This is a common sense amendment. It sends a message to Saudi Arabia 
that the United States is serious about reform.
  We impatiently await Saudi Government efforts to eliminate anti-
Semitic and anti-Israel propaganda from its state-controlled media. We 
are looking for democratic reforms in Saudi Arabia, including reforms 
that would allow the women of that country a voice in shaping their 
country.
  We still have not seen Saudi Arabia disavow its propaganda campaign 
against Christians and Jews, a campaign that is alive and well here in 
our very own country, as Saudi-exported materials inciting hatred and 
prejudice are made available at Saudi-supported American mosques.
  In short, it is all carrot these days and too little sticks. The 
Weiner amendment provides some incentive for change in Saudi Arabia. I 
urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. 
Berkley).
  Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman, and I want to 
thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner) for introducing this 
amendment yet again, which I have supported year after year. I rise in 
strong support of this amendment.
  No one is born knowing how to hate; it needs to be taught. The Saudi 
Kingdom, our purported partner in peace, have turned teaching hatred 
into a perverted art form. Saudi textbooks, official publications of 
the Education Ministry, paint a hate-filled, distorted portrait of a 
world in which Israel does not exist, the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated 
by a worldwide Zionist conspiracy, and the protocols of the Elders of 
Zion is taught as history.
  Saudi Arabia's religious beliefs have banned Barbie dolls, calling 
them Jewish toys that are offensive to Islam.
  Last year, Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah was quoted as telling Saudi 
television that ``Zionists'' were behind the attack at the oil facility 
at Yanbu. The Crown Prince was also quoted as saying, ``Our country is 
targeted, you know who is behind all of this. It is Zionism.''
  Fifteen of the 19 9/11 attackers were Saudi nationals; we all know 
that.

[[Page H5334]]

Knowing this, did the Saudi government express one word of remorse or 
regret to the families of the victims? No, not one word.
  The Saudis and President Bush are constantly declaring to the United 
States that they are our partners in the War on Terrorism. We are 
talking about the same Saudis that support, encourage, and finance 
terrorism, the same Saudis that exude racist and anti-Semitic hatred, 
the same Saudis that have the worst record on the planet when it comes 
to religious intolerance, racial intolerance, and discrimination 
against women.
  Our world will never be safe when children are taught hatred and 
disdain, when the terrorist mission of death and destruction is being 
funded by the Saudis.
  It is unbelievable to me that we continue to pretend that they are 
our allies, and it is completely inexplicable that one penny of 
American taxpayer money is going to Saudi Arabia.
  I do not want my taxpayer dollars going to the Saudis, and I do not 
want anyone else's. Let us pass this and send a strong message to our 
so-called partner in peace that either they are with us or they are 
against us. They cannot have it both ways, and neither can our 
administration.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Weiner).
  Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I want to respond to a couple of things 
that the chairman said.
  For 3 years now, I have heard the argument for continued support for 
the Saudis as two somewhat contradictory positions. One, it is not a 
lot of money; and two, they are getting better.
  Well, I think it is incumbent upon all of us, particularly in this 
bill when we are already short-funded, to justify why it is we provide 
any money at all if they are not an ally. If they are not espousing 
U.S. American views, if they are not improving democracy, what are they 
doing? I will tell you what they are doing, Mr. Chairman. They are 
traveling to Iraq and blowing up our troops.

                              {time}  1900

  That is not according to me; that is according to their own bragging 
Web sites and The Washington Post assessment about who they are. There 
is a dramatic increase in the amount of violence since we offered this 
bill last year, not a decline. There is a dramatic increase in the 
exporting of Wahabiism, not a decline. And there is no sign of greater 
cooperation. You know, a sign of great cooperation is not hiring a very 
expensive lobbyist here, running TV ads, running newspaper ads. A sign 
of cooperation is saying we are going to start cracking down on terror, 
not moving it out of our country into someone else's problem.
  The problem that we face here, whether it is $25,000, $25 million or 
$25 billion, is we articulate our values in this bill. And our values 
are simply not to be supportive of the Saudi Arabian Government.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Ferguson).
  Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time. 
I want to thank the chairman for his very good work on this bill. It is 
an excellent bill. I know they put an enormous amount of work into it, 
and I rise in support of this amendment because I think we can make it 
even better; and that is why I am joining the gentleman from New York 
in offering this amendment, the Weiner/Ferguson amendment; and I rise 
in strong support of the amendment.
  The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia continues to be one of the largest 
financers of terrorism in the world. And the fact that this bill 
provides American dollars to this country for U.S.-subsidized military 
training is nothing short of astounding.
  Our own government's reports chronicle Saudi Arabia's continuing 
human rights abuses, ongoing financing of terrorist groups, and 
exporting of terrorist ideologies. It is amazing that we are looking to 
Saudi Arabia, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, and giving 
them money out of our legislation. Now is not the time to reduce 
pressure on Saudi Arabia. Instead of rewarding the Saudi Government for 
financing terrorism and harboring terrorists, we should be holding them 
accountable for well-documented human rights abuses and terrorist 
connections.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Weiner/Ferguson 
amendment.
  Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  First of all, let me just say to the chairman and the ranking member, 
they have done an excellent job with a limited budget. But I think we 
should give them an extra $25,000 to work with by saying that we are 
not going to provide comfort to the Saudis, we are not going to provide 
aid, taxpayer aid to the Saudi Arabians.
  This is not just the position of a bipartisan group here in Congress. 
The Council on Foreign Relations has said for years individuals and 
charities based in Saudi Arabia have been the most important source of 
funds for al Qaeda.
  The 9/11 Commission said Saudi Arabia is ``a problematic ally in 
fighting Islamic extremism.'' Our own State Department says Hamas 
receives funding from ``private benefactors in Saudi Arabia.''
  There is not probably an observer of the scene today that does not 
recognize that Saudi Arabia has done a very deft two-face game. They 
come here, they send us a moderate face. They have convinced, 
obviously, our State Department, who walks along almost in lock step 
with everything that they say.
  We here in Congress should say we understand that we are going to 
start judging nations in the post-September 11 world by what they do, 
not by what they say. And what the Saudi Arabians have done is export 
Wahabiism to the United States, export terrorism to the troops in Iraq, 
and export terror all around the world.
  Vote ``yes'' on the Weiner/Ferguson amendment. Let us finally put an 
end to it.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I just want to try to reiterate one argument and add a point on 
another argument that has just been made by the gentleman from the 
other side. First, on the issue of the funding, the financing of this 
program, I hope that the comments that I made have dispensed with that. 
For $25,000, in other words, the country has access to the program, 
they become a part of the IMET program, we get a $13 million payment 
from the country. So it is not as though we are giving money to the 
country of Saudi Arabia. It is a legal process that they have to do to 
access the program; and to do that we have to provide training for one 
officer, then they are able to provide training for the hundreds of 
other officers that come to the United States, and they pay fully for 
them.
  And that money is here in the United States and stays here in the 
United States where these people are being trained. So I think that is 
a pretty good rate of return on the investment, $25,000 getting you $13 
million. The foreign aid argument is untrue. It has nothing to do with 
whether Saudi Arabia is a rich country or not. It has to do with 
whether or not these countries should be getting any kind of training. 
And I think the kind of training that we give in the IMET program is 
exactly the kind of training we ought to be giving to military officers 
of other countries including Saudi Arabia.
  And on the last point, the gentleman from New York made the 
suggestion that these people from Saudi, he said, where are they going. 
We know where they are going. They are going to Iraq and blowing up our 
troops. The implication that somehow the Saudi Government is involved 
in an official way in blowing up our troops in Iraq is an absolutely 
outrageous statement and has no basis in fact whatsoever. And so I 
would reject this statement.
  And I think on this basis alone this amendment ought to be defeated 
because we should not be saying to the Saudi Government that we believe 
that somehow you are involved in blowing up troops in Iraq.
  Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make it very clear that it 
has been the Saudi policy to export their worst troublemakers like bin 
Laden, like Wahabiism, so that the problem is not turned inward. That 
is their policy.

[[Page H5335]]

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, the statement is made. 
The gentleman from New York has just confirmed what I thought. The 
statement is that the Saudi Government is officially involved in 
helping to kill American troops in Iraq. And I think that statement is 
an absolute outrage, and I do not think there is any basis of fact 
whatever for that.
  I would urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment. It does not 
belong here. We should not do it. We should not be sending this kind of 
signal. I urge defeat of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner) 
will be postponed.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Otter

  Mr. OTTER. 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. Otter:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


Limitation on assistance for Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian 
                                 people

       Sec. __.  (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law--
       (1) of the total amount of funds that are available in this 
     Act for assistance for the Palestinian Authority (or any 
     other Palestinian entity) or for the Palestinian people, not 
     more than 25 percent of such amount may be obligated and 
     expended during each quarter of fiscal year 2006; and
       (2) none of the funds made available in this Act may be 
     made available for assistance for the Palestinian Authority 
     (or any other Palestinian entity) or for the Palestinian 
     people during any quarter of fiscal year 2006 unless the 
     Secretary of State determines that the Palestinian Authority 
     has not provided support for acts of international terrorism 
     during the three-month period preceding the first day of that 
     quarter.
       (b) In this section, the term ``quarter of fiscal year 
     2006'' means any three-month period beginning on--
       (1) October 1, 2005;
       (2) January 1, 2006;
       (3) April 1, 2006; or
       (4) July 1, 2006.

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman reserves a point of order.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentleman from Idaho 
(Mr. Otter) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter).
  Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I want to join with my other colleagues in congratulating both the 
chairman and the ranking member for having put together a foreign ops 
bill that certainly had to be an arduous task. But like the amendment 
that preceded me, I think that my amendment can improve on a near-
perfect piece of legislation.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I rise today to correct what I believe to be a 
fatal flaw in the way we administer our foreign aid. We cannot truly be 
effective, either domestically or in our role as the world leader on 
the world stage, when our foreign aid policy forces us to support our 
friends while we are indiscriminately doling out money to our and their 
enemies at the same time.
  All the effort we put into promoting peace and cooperation is 
meaningless without requiring accountability from the recipients of our 
assistance. U.S. foreign aid should be based on a recipient's 
demonstrated willingness to support the ideals and the aspirations for 
their regions. When we provide aid to a country, we should be able to 
expect a marked change in that country's behavior in keeping with our 
and their goals.
  Let me give you an example of what I am talking about here. When my 
children were younger, I gave them a monthly allowance. Unlike gifts 
that they got at Christmastime and holidays, this was money that they 
had to earn themselves. And this allowance came with certain strings 
attached. It came with an understanding that I could expect certain 
behavior from them. On occasion, they would forget our bargain, and 
their behavior would not reflect the expectations that I had set for 
them. But when they did not receive their allowance the next month, 
they were quick to fix the problem so that we could all then once again 
live peacefully together.
  Foreign aid is like an allowance which the United States is neither 
obligated to offer nor give, and which does not come without strings 
attached. And yet we continue to act as if we are required to hand out 
money to nations and people who actively oppose the principles of 
democracy and peace. And this practice must end.
  Today we have a golden opportunity to change the way we address the 
issue of foreign aid because of some important changes and changes in 
leadership of the Palestinian Authority. We have an opportunity to 
further the development for a partnership for peace between our 
countries. In light of the renewed request on foreign aid, we should 
act now to infuse any aid with common sense and accountability so that 
we can advance the realistic goals that the President has set for the 
Middle East.
  My amendment, Mr. Chairman, is the first step. It states that no more 
than 25 percent of the funds appropriated to the Palestinian Authority 
or any other Palestinian entities will be available to the Palestinians 
during each financial quarter. What that means is that every quarter, 
the four quarters of the year, one fourth of the money in this bill 
that would otherwise go in one lump sum to the Palestinian Authority, 
but one fourth is all that will be able to be advanced to them during 
any one quarter. And then it will be advanced to them so long as we 
have the Secretary of State who will determine that the Palestinian 
Authority has not participated in or supported any acts of 
international terrorism during the previous 3 months.
  In other words, our expectation is that they should quit killing 
people. They should quit creating acts of terrorism. And for that, we 
will pay them.
  We know right now that those folks are being paid $25,000 a piece to 
wrap a bomb around themselves and go get on a bus in their so-called 
enemy's territory. And so that is why, with that expectation, then we 
make the payment.
  The President is working to achieve lasting peace in this region, 
realistically and, I believe, in good faith; and I applaud his efforts. 
But if we are going to see a change in the Middle East, our approach to 
foreign aid must change as well. What better time than now to change 
our attitude and the way that we hand out foreign aid.
  I encourage you to take advantage of this opportunity to assist in 
the peace process by making sure that our assistance carries with it 
the weight of our principles.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I do not have 
any comments. I would make a point of order, though, if the gentleman 
is not prepared to withdraw his amendment.
  Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the chairman giving me the 
opportunity to make the point. One of these days, one of these years, 
perhaps during my lifetime in the United States House of 
Representatives, I will be able to frame this amendment so that it will 
not have a point of order successfully placed against it. And I thank 
the chairman for that opportunity to explain my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Idaho?
  There was no objection.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Sanders

  Mr. SANDERS. 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. Sanders:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:

                TITLE VI--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS


  Prohibition on use of funds by the Export-Import Bank of the United 
States to approve an application for a long-term loan or loan guarantee 
  with respect to a nuclear project in the People's Republic of China

       Sec. 601. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Export-Import Bank of the United States to 
     approve an

[[Page H5336]]

     application for a long-term loan or loan guarantee with 
     respect to a nuclear project in the People's Republic of 
     China.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) and a Member opposed each will 
control 15 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders).
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This tri-partisan amendment has widespread support across the 
ideological spectrum, from Democrats and Republicans, from progressives 
to conservatives. It is being cosponsored today by the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Rohrabacher), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Kucinich). It also is being supported by a number of leading national 
organizations including the National Taxpayers Union; Friends of the 
Earth; Citizens Against Government Waste; the Green Scissors Coalition; 
Taxpayers For Common Sense; and U.S. PIRG, the U.S. Public Interest 
Research Group.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is simple and straightforward. It would 
prohibit the Export-Import Bank from providing corporate welfare for 
the construction of nuclear power plants in China.
  Mr. Chairman, I think the rationale for supporting this amendment is 
obvious. At a time when we have a $7.7 trillion national debt and a 
record-breaking Federal deficit, it is not only absurd, but it is 
dangerous for the taxpayers of this country to be subsidizing the 
construction of nuclear power plants in China.

                              {time}  1915

  Mr. Chairman, amazingly enough, the company involved here, 
Westinghouse Electric, which builds nuclear technology is owned by 
British National Fuels which itself is a company wholly owned by the 
British government. So we are dealing with the absurdity of American 
taxpayers who are in the midst of a record breaking deficit, 
subsidizing the British government, a nation which, to the best of my 
knowledge, is not made up of starving, desperate people in the 
developing world.
  Mr. Chairman, there is no debate, but that when these four nuclear 
power plants will be built at a cost which involves an Export-Import 
loan of some $5 billion, that when these nuclear power plants will be 
built, the Chinese will own the technology. And a question that every 
Member of this Congress should be asking is, is it really in the best 
interest of the United States of America to provide advanced nuclear 
technology to China. Furthermore, the Chinese company which is building 
these four nuclear power plants, the Chinese national nuclear company 
has been tied to at least three instances of weapons proliferation 
involving Iran and Pakistan.
  Mr. Chairman, I do not always agree with the National Taxpayers 
Union. But let me briefly summarize what they say in a letter that they 
sent to me today.
  NTU has long advocated total elimination of taxpayer funding of the 
Export-Import Bank for the simple fact that American taxpayers should 
not be forced to subsidize the overseas operation of U.S. corporation 
or foreign governments. Considering the rapid pace of economic growth 
in China and its emergence as a strong force in the global business 
environment, it is particularly egregious to waste taxpayer dollars on 
such a project.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) seek to 
control the time in opposition?
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I do.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) is recognized 
for 15 minutes.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment. As he said, this amendment would prohibit the Export-Import 
Bank from supporting the sale of nuclear power plant and technology in 
China.
  It was 6 years ago in 1998 during the Clinton administration that the 
U.S. lifted the ban on the export of civilian nuclear power plants and 
fuel to China. After we became satisfied that China had met the 
conditions of the 1985 U.S.-China agreement on peaceful nuclear 
cooperation.
  Last September the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Commerce 
expressed their support for increasing trade with China in nuclear 
energy technology and for the export of U.S. civilian nuclear power 
plants. In February of this year the Ex-Im Board of Directors approved 
a preliminary commitment of $5 million from Westinghouse Electric 
Company to enable it to make a bid on the design and construction of 
four 1,000 megawatt commercial power reactors on two sites in China.
  These reactors will be the first in a series of 26 new commercial 
power plants planned for construction through the year 2020. So we are 
looking at a very large possible export in business for United States 
businesses. We are in heavy competition. Westinghouse is in heavy 
competition with companies from France and from Russia to provide the 
same or similar kind of technology. This order would create or sustain, 
according to Westinghouse, about 5,000 jobs; 5,000 jobs in the United 
States at Westinghouse and its American suppliers.
  Because I have heard the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) on the 
floor railing against outsourcing and the China trade deficit, I 
thought, here is an opportunity for us to do something about that, to 
create jobs here at home for us to make sure that we are selling things 
to China. But this amendment of course would make it impossible for 
Westinghouse conduct this business while, other countries would get the 
kind of commitments that they need from the government to protect those 
kind of investments. We, the U.S. Government, would not be doing so for 
Westinghouse.
  There can be no question about it. Prohibiting the Export-Import Bank 
from supporting this and future transactions is going to have a 
tremendously negative impact on U.S. exporters and U.S. employment. And 
it is going to send a signal to businesses that they better not be 
doing business in China. Nothing could be worse for us.
  I strongly urge us to defeat this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this 
amendment. And with all due respect, we have been hearing this type of 
argument for 20 years. When are the American people going to demand 
that the Members of the United States Congress start watching out for 
the interests of the people of the United States and not some small 
group of elite Americans and international financiers who will make a 
profit off this in the short run, but in the long run will create the 
situation that we have found in China today and the situation we find 
ourselves in here.
  For 20 years we have been told by trading and having economic 
relations with this monstrous dictatorship that we would see 
liberalization, that we would see a change in the policies that the 
Chinese government has towards its own people. What have we seen 
instead? It is the same massive dictatorship. This is the world's worst 
human rights abuser, and it is the last country in the world that we 
should be subsidizing American business in order to create business in 
that country.
  The fact is we have seen jobs and businessmen in this country go to 
China because business leaders in this country will personally make a 
quick buck by betraying the American working people. That is what is 
happening here. How can we think they would do anything else?
  This government, as we are hearing today, is subsidizing this. Now, 
when it comes to Westinghouse, when it comes to Westinghouse, this is 
not even an American company. And we are going to have the United 
States taxpayers subsidizing a British company in order to build a 
nuclear power plant or a series of nuclear power plants for communist 
China? This makes no sense at all. We should not be subsidizing it even 
if it was an American company.
  What are the Chinese going to do when they get this technology from 
Westinghouse? I can tell you right now, it is certainly something that 
is

[[Page H5337]]

acknowledged in the business community, they will start building those 
plants and they will copy every piece of technology that we have spent, 
the American taxpayers have spent, developing the technology, and the 
Chinese will just take it and copy it. That is why today the greatest 
threat to our freedom, the greatest threat to America's prosperity is 
not radical Islam, although that is a challenge we have to face, but in 
the long run it is a China that is emerging on the scene that is 
belligerent to everything we stand for as a people.
  The last thing we should be doing is building up their economy as we 
have been doing as a policy of this government for the last 20 years. 
And let me note, nuclear power plants? Has anyone looked at the 
proliferation record of the communist Chinese? Why do you think we are 
having a challenge right now to the world peace in Korea? Do you think 
the North Koreans just discovered all this technology on their own.
  No, the fact is that the Chinese are the ones who are behind the 
nuclear development in Korea and the development of weapons that 
threaten Japan and the United States. The last thing we should be doing 
is helping them develop and perfect their technology that deals with 
nuclear energy.
  This is, again, a no-brainer for me, but the American people need to 
find out whose side the Congress is on. The policies we have had to 
China in these last 20 years have created a Frankenstein monster that 
threatens not only the peace on the world, but threatens the prosperity 
of our people and the freedom of those who would seek freedom in China 
itself.
  We have been cutting a deal with the devil and we are now coming to a 
point where everybody recognizes that threat, except perhaps the 
leadership, unfortunately, in the United States Congress.
  So I would commend the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders). I look 
forward to working with him on this.
  Let us get the word out to the American people whose side we are on.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt), a member of the Committee on Appropriations.
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me time. 
I appreciate the good job of leadership that he is providing on this 
issue.
  I think a question seems to be resonating here and that is, who is 
going to look out for U.S. jobs? I think that is a very good question. 
Here we have on one side Westinghouse, who is working as an American 
company, a conglomerate, with other corporations trying to build some 
of the product to be able to export that product in order to create 
jobs here in America and provide something to China that they are going 
to get one way or another.
  What are the options of that? Well, we can ignore the opportunities 
we have for American jobs. We can say, let us give the jobs to France. 
France is also bidding on this. Let France have the jobs.
  We have a good example of how France is gaining ground on us in the 
aircraft industry. They have a government that is willing to do what is 
necessary in order to move the aerospace industry in France forward. 
And here we have an opportunity to move forward with the technology 
that we happen to have that other countries want. So we can either 
create the jobs here or we can allow them to be created in France. Or 
there is the other Russia company that is bidding on it as well. We 
could let the jobs be created in Russia.
  So who is looking out for U.S. jobs? This supply of finance from the 
Export-Import Bank would meet all the guidelines that have been 
established and it would provide the funding for an American company to 
move forward and make jobs for here in America. And that is a good 
motive. But the overall question is, what is Congress going to do about 
United States jobs?
  We hear a lot about outsourcing American jobs. Nobody ever stops to 
say, why are we outsourcing American jobs? We keep putting barriers in 
place for American jobs to be created. Here is a good example. We could 
have Westinghouse jobs or we could have French and Russian jobs. But it 
goes beyond that.
  Congress has created barriers over the last generation that have 
driven this economy to a very difficult point. Our trade deficit was 
$670 billion last year. Our Federal deficit is going to be about $300 
billion this year. And we are seeing the loss, the outsourcing of high-
quality, high-paying jobs.
  If you look at what we have done here in Congress, we have created 
barriers that have made it difficult for people who create jobs. Health 
care policy, driven largely by Medicaid and Medicare, is a socialist 
health care policy that has driven a whole lot of paperwork and a whole 
lot of unnecessary practices. For example, the Hospital Association in 
Kansas says for every hour of health care it takes an hour of paperwork 
to comply with it.
  We have litigation here that drives up the cost of building products 
here. We have regulation that costs $8,000 for every American worker, 
12 percent of every product driven up by Congress' rules, and that 
pushing jobs overseas.
  Our tax policy ends up on the bottom line of our products. Our energy 
policy, that cannot to make law. We could create 700,000 American jobs 
but we cannot get an energy bill through the Senate. We have trade 
policy that is unenforced. When there is a violation of our trade 
policy, we do not get the proper support.
  The one thing that we have a surplus of in this country that we do 
not export is lawsuits. The only way you export lawsuits is through 
trade policy. You have got to have a trade policy in place to do that.
  We also need to improve our research and development and our lifelong 
learning, but we have got to protect American jobs and this is one way 
to do that.
  I just want to finish this up by saying, we could do a lot in 
Congress to create an environment here in the U.S. that would keep and 
create jobs, but we put barrier after barrier in place, and here is one 
more opportunity for us to drive jobs to France, give the jobs to 
France.
  Let's say no, let us not do it this time. Let us oppose this 
amendment. Let us support Westinghouse. Let us do something for an 
American company for once. Just because it has the name China as the 
destination for the product we shouldn't go into shock. That is not the 
point.
  The point is American jobs, either you will have them in 
Westinghouse, or you will have them in Russia or you will have them in 
France. I say bring the jobs back to America. Let us remove these 
barriers that we have put in place. Let us create jobs in America. We 
can do it and we can do it today by defeating this amendment.
  I thank the Chairman Kolbe for doing a fine job.

                              {time}  1930

  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In another time and place, I would like to deal with many of the 
assertions made by my friend who just spoke, but now is not the time.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Vermont for 
yielding me time.
  Why should the American taxpayers underwrite a British company to 
build nuclear power plants in China? That is exactly the transaction 
the Export-Import Bank has already given preliminary approval for. 
British Nuclear Fuel's U.S. division would receive loans of about $5 
billion to build four nuclear power plants in China. Why should 
American taxpayers underwrite a British company to build nuclear power 
plants in China? According to the Export-Import Bank, ``The nuclear 
power plants are being purchased to meet the increased demand for power 
in the heavy industrialized region of the country.''
  This is not the sort of transaction the Export-Import Bank, read 
American taxpayers, should be funding. First, the purpose of Export-
Import Bank financing is to enable manufacturing sales to countries 
that are too poor to afford those U.S. goods without financing. But 
China has no shortage of U.S. dollars that they have earned mounting 
the largest trade deficit the United States has with any single 
country.
  In the last 4 years alone, China added net $472 billion to its bank 
holding of U.S. dollars. Poor China. According to

[[Page H5338]]

the International Trade Agency, that is the amount by which Chinese 
exports to the U.S. exceeded Chinese imports from the U.S.
  Mr. Chairman, when I was growing up in Cleveland, there was a myth 
that, if you dug a hole deep enough, you could get to China. Well, you 
know what, we have succeeded in doing that with our trade deficit; and 
we will keep digging this hole with this proposal unless the Sanders 
amendment passes.
  China does not lack access to substantial amounts of U.S. currency to 
enable it to buy U.S.-manufactured nuclear power plants without a 
taxpayer subsidy. Yet the Export-Import Bank is subsidizing China to 
buy nuclear power plants.
  Now, if anyone here doubts China's wealth and thinks that we have to 
help China further, consider that just this last week a Chinese oil 
company offered $16.5 billion to buy Unocal. If they have that kind of 
wealth to spend on energy, do my colleagues not think they can afford 
nuclear power plants without a taxpayer subsidy?
  Some might say that the sale of nuclear power plants to China would 
improve the trade imbalance with China and is therefore, beneficial; 
but do not believe it. If U.S. taxpayers have to buy the nuclear power 
plant, that is what the Export-Import Bank financing is, then we give 
it to China, and that will not make a difference in the fundamental 
imbalance of trade.
  Unless the Sanders amendment passes, American taxpayers will be 
giving a gift of at least $5 billion for nuclear power plants in China.
  The applicant for the Ex-Im Bank funding is a wholly-owned division 
of a British conglomerate. For those watching the trade deficit, the 
U.S. is already in hock to Britain as well as China. In the last 4 
years, the U.K. has accrued $27 billion in surpluses. The profits from 
the sale of the nuclear power plants to China will flow to Britain, not 
to the U.S.
  If my colleagues think the American taxpayers should not be buying 
nuclear power plants for China, then vote for the Sanders amendment.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time to close. I 
am the only other speaker at the moment that is here.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, how much time remains for either side?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) has 3\1/2\ 
minutes, and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) has 8 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. SANDERS. The gentleman from Arizona closes; is that correct?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time.
  The American middle class is shrinking, and one of the reasons that 
we are losing good-paying jobs is that corporation after corporation is 
throwing American workers out on the street and moving to countries 
like China where desperate people are paid 30 cents an hour, 20 cents 
an hour and go to jail when they stand up for their political rights or 
stand up for their right to form a union.
  There is increasing concern by people from all walks of life that the 
economy of China, which is growing in leaps and bounds, is threatening 
the American standard of living. Whether it is blue collar jobs or 
white collar, information technology jobs, China is growing while our 
jobs are shrinking; and we are losing good-paying jobs and providing 
our young people with low-wage jobs, with minimal benefits.
  If it makes sense to anybody in this country to be putting $5 billion 
of American taxpayer money at risk, to be subsidizing the development 
of nuclear power plants in China, providing them with the technology 
that can be used for military purposes, with a company that is owned by 
the British Government, if somebody got up here and proposed subsidies 
for a federally owned company, people on the other side would go 
ballistic; but it is okay to be subsidizing a nationalized company in 
Great Britain providing and building nuclear power plants in China.
  I think that the time is long overdue that the United States Congress 
took a very hard look at Export-Import Bank in general. Over the years, 
what we have seen is they are providing huge subsidies to large 
corporations who are outsourcing American jobs. In this instance, they 
are providing a subsidy to a British company owned by their own 
government building nuclear power plants in China.
  I think that is a very bad deal. I think the American people would be 
shocked if we allowed this to go through, and I hope that we can 
support this tri-partisan amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I will not take that much time to close this debate.
  The gentleman from Vermont talked about outsourcing jobs and jobs 
being moved to other countries in order for them to get this business. 
The exact opposite is the case here.
  If we do not support this kind of business, it is a legitimate thing 
for a government, I think, to have an export-import kind of 
relationship. Virtually every major country in the world does that. It 
is a way of saying, without putting at risk the taxpayers' dollars, and 
so far Ex-Im Bank has never cost the taxpayers' dollars, any real money 
in terms of lost loans that we have had to pay for as taxpayers, it is 
a way of us making sure that we get jobs here in the United States, of 
keeping businesses here in the United States, and that is exactly what 
this would do: high-paying technology jobs, high-paying engineering 
jobs, high paying work, design work that would be done by engineers and 
others to support the construction of nuclear power plants in China, a 
very large project.
  What we are talking about here today is only the tip of the iceberg. 
We are talking about building a large number of these plants over many 
years. No doubt whoever wins the initial contract, it will be like 
doing cookie cutters after that. They will get the rest of them. So I 
think we are talking about something much, much larger than is shown 
here today.
  It is for that reason that the State Department has strongly opposed 
this amendment, because they believe that it affects jobs that will 
result, and Westinghouse has said about the loss of 5,000 jobs if they 
are not able to get this contract. We think we have the technology to 
get it. We think we can get this contract, and we expect that we will 
win those jobs as a result of that.
  I think it is ironic that even at a moment when my colleagues are 
talking about the weak economy or they are talking about the fact that 
we are losing jobs overseas because of the trade deficit that they want 
to create a larger trade deficit. They want to stop jobs from being 
created here at home. They want to stop American companies from 
exporting this kind of technology, all of which has been decided that 
it is safe and politically safe as well as technologically safe. They 
want us to stop us from exporting these kinds of jobs.
  The last point I would make, Mr. Chairman, is that one of the reasons 
we want to do this, we should be so anxious that China increases its 
reliance on nuclear power, is that if they fail to do that, they are 
going to have to continue to use more and more fossil fuels, 
particularly petroleum; and we know it already is occurring. Virtually 
all of the incremental production in the world is being consumed by 
China which has a rapidly growing economy, and that is what is helping 
to drive up the price of oil in the world to the sky-rocketing, the 
sky-high levels that it is today.
  If we are not able to help with this kind of technology, China would 
perhaps have to go back to other kinds of fossil fuel-using plants. Not 
only does it have environmental degradation, but it obviously has 
enormous impact on the economy of the rest of the world.
  For all of those reasons, this is a very bad amendment, ill designed, 
ill directed, and ill timed; and I urge its defeat.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SANDERS. 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 Vermont (Mr. Sanders) 
will be postponed.

[[Page H5339]]

                Amendment Offered by Mr. Deal of Georgia

  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. 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. Deal of Georgia:
       Page 132, insert the following after line 13:


      Governments that have failed to permit certain extraditions

       Sec. 583. None of the funds made available in this Act for 
     the Department of State, other than funds provided under the 
     heading ``international narcotics control and law 
     enforcement'', may be used to provide assistance to any 
     country with whom the United States has an extradition treaty 
     and whose government has notified the Department of State of 
     its refusal to extradite to the United States any individual 
     accused of committing a criminal offense for which the 
     maximum penalty is life imprisonment without the possibility 
     of parole, or a lesser term of imprisonment.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Kolbe) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal).
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment that I have at the desk relates to the 
growing problem of lack of extradition of criminals who committed 
violent offenses in the United States and then flee across our borders 
and are not able to be returned by way of extradition.
  This is a growing problem. It is a problem for a country such as ours 
that now has an estimated 11 million people illegally in our country. 
Mexico to our south has become a point of refuge. Many of the 
individuals who are committing these offenses are committing them and 
immediately fleeing to their home country of Mexico.
  Some are not quite so quick. Some are offenses such as the one we 
have heard in a previous amendment as it relates to the killing of a 
police officer in the line of duty, but it is a growing concern for all 
of the citizens of the States of this country and one that I think we 
need to begin to point a finger at.
  This amendment says that if you refuse to extradite for an offense 
that would have a life imprisonment or less, then if funds flow through 
the State Department, those funds would be withheld if they are 
refusing to extradite.
  Let me give my colleagues a scenario. Let us assume that you have two 
men who rape and brutally murder a 4-year-old child. One is a citizen 
of the United States. The other one is a citizen of Mexico who is 
illegally in the country. Both flee across the border to Mexico. The 
district attorney or the prosecutor in the circuit indicts them, and of 
course, in those kind of cases, they face either life imprisonment or, 
in some cases, capital punishment. Mexico will extradite the United 
States citizen back here. They will not extradite the Mexican citizen 
back unless the prosecutor agrees to lower the offense to a crime that 
would be less than a life sentence.
  Now, that is a hypothetical case. I will allude to the facts as they 
now exist in my community in a few minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. 
King), my colleague.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Georgia 
for yielding me time and for bringing this amendment to the floor.
  This is a discussion and debate that this country needs to have, and 
it takes me back to about 6 weeks ago when the incident in Denver where 
the alleged shooter, Raul Gomez-Garcia, shot Officer Donny Young in the 
back of the head and killed him and wounded another officer. We 
suspected that he would abscond to the sanctuary of Mexico and he did, 
and the plea bargain has already taken place. I am not certain if he is 
back in the United States under that plea bargain; but this policy, 
this sanctuary policy that exists in Mexico is a policy that requires 
us to plea bargain down the crimes in this country and tells the 
shooters, you can shoot and run to Mexico.
  I will pose a hypothetical situation, but it is one that could 
happen.
  Just suppose Osama bin Laden was picked up by Mexican police in 
Mexico City. There is no way that Mexico extradites Osama bin Laden to 
the United States until we plea bargain that down to something less 
than life imprison, no capital punishment, no life in prison. Can my 
colleagues imagine sitting on the parole board for Osama bin Laden and 
having to release him into the streets of the United States of America 
because of a sanctuary policy that exists in the state of Mexico?

                              {time}  1945

  That is the leverage that is out there now, and we are paying for 
these countries in foreign operations money to alter the crime and 
punishment policy in the United States. That must stop. It can stop 
with the Deal amendment.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I would inquire as to how much 
time remains for me.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Georgia has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, and 
yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we just dealt with another amendment that, in a similar 
way, tried to criticize at the country of Mexico for the problems that 
we have with extradition, and during that debate, I think I outlined 
what I think has been the rather substantial improvement in the 
cooperation that we have had with Mexico on this issue.
  During the first 14 years of the extradition treaty with Mexico, from 
1980 to 1994, Mexico extradited, a total of eight fugitives to the 
United States. In the next 4 years, they extradited an average each 
year of 13. But in the last 4 years, in 2001 they indicted 17; in 2002, 
25; in 2003, 31; and in 2004, they extradited a record of 34 fugitives 
to the United States. So I think there is little doubt that we have 
great cooperation.
  The problem I have with the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Georgia is it is not at all clear to whom this applies. I asked the 
gentleman, and he is not sure. We have asked the Department of State, 
and they are not sure. I know what his intention is and the country he 
is trying to effect, but we do not know it does not apply to other 
countries. There may well be other countries that it applies to.
  I cannot say, for example, with certainty that this would not require 
us to cut off all of our counternarcotics efforts in Colombia. I am not 
sure it would not have some impact on a country like that. It could 
have an impact in Afghanistan. I do not know. Nobody seems to know for 
sure what the impact of this might be.
  So for that reason, Mr. Chairman, I would suggest, and until we have 
a much clearer idea of how this would impact, I would urge that we not 
adopt this amendment and that it be defeated.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  The amendment specifically excludes international narcotics control, 
and law enforcement money would not be subject to being withheld. That 
answers one of the concerns of the chairman. I do not know all the 
countries, but I can tell you some. Mexico, no sentence of life 
imprisonment or greater; Costa Rica, no sentence of more than 50 years; 
Spain, no life sentence; Venezuela, any sentence over 30 years; and 
Portugal, any sentence over 20 years.
  Now, I gave the hypothetical of a 4-year-old girl raped and murdered 
and suspects fleeing over the border. In my county, this past weekend, 
a 4-year-old girl, about 3 feet tall, weighing less than 40 pounds, was 
brutally raped and murdered. The only suspect, the chief suspect, is 
now thought to have fled back across to Mexico. This is an individual 
who was deported from the United States less than 2 years ago and now 
is being sought again.
  There is no way that our district attorney will be able to prosecute 
that case unless we agree that we are going to reduce it to 
substantially less than an American citizen would be charged with under 
the same circumstances.
  I withdrew an amendment very similar to this last year in deference 
to the

[[Page H5340]]

chairman and upon the assurances that the State Department would work 
to change the situation as it relates to Mexico. There has been no 
change.
  Mr. Chairman, they may say that they are proud of extraditing 30 
individuals last year to the United States, but in any district 
attorney's office in Southern California alone, they can tell you of 
hundreds of murder cases where extradition has not been achieved. And 
so I urge the adoption of the amendment.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close the debate.
  Let me just note that we have just been advised by the State 
Department that this would affect Colombia. Of course, as the gentleman 
said, it does not affect the international narcotics control and law 
enforcement account, which is one of the big sums of money that goes to 
Colombia, but this would affect foreign military financing, FMF, for 
Colombia. It would cut off the money for IMET, the International 
Military Education Training programs. And it would affect the anti-
terrorism programs that come under the NADR category. So it would have 
an enormous impact on our efforts in Colombia.
  I think for that reason, I would certainly hope that this body would 
not accept this amendment, and I urge its defeat.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal).
  The question was taken; and the chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. 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 Georgia (Mr. Deal) will 
be postponed.


                      Amendment Offered by Ms. Lee

  Ms. LEE. 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. Lee:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


    prohibition on certain international narcotics control and law 
           enforcement assistance to the government of haiti

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act under 
     the heading ``international narcotics control and law 
     enforcement'' may be used to transfer excess property of an 
     agency of the United States Government to the Government of 
     Haiti.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) and a Member opposed each will 
control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The goal of the Lee-Conyers-Kilpatrick-Waters amendment is to limit 
the transfer of free guns and other defense articles to the Government 
of Haiti which have been used to wreak havoc on the Haitian people. 
Many in the general public and here in Congress have been under the 
misconception that there is an arms embargo to Haiti. However, since 
2004, close to 3,000 weapons have been transferred to Haiti from the 
United States and, in all probability, have gone to arm the Haitian 
National Police force.
  This amendment requires a limitation on all transfers of excess 
property to the Government of Haiti because they are using excess arms 
and ammunition from the United States to arm criminals in the Haitian 
National Police force. This amendment specifically would prohibit all 
arms transfers by the State Department in accordance with all relevant 
sections of current law.
  This limitation is critical, Mr. Chairman, because the people of 
Haiti are not safe, and they remain targets of political violence, 
torture, and, in many cases, murder. Unfortunately, too often the 
perpetrators of this violence are the Haitian National Police. There 
have been numerous reports in the news and firsthand accounts of human 
rights' and faith-based groups who have traveled to Haiti and seen the 
hostile environment Haitians face.
  The Haitian National Police are intimidating, murdering, and 
executing the poor and political opposition with weapons transferred 
from the United States to the Government of Haiti. This is simply 
unacceptable. The Government of Haiti has access to weapons for police 
training and security and have paid for defense articles out of their 
own budget without our government and this Congress' free transfer of 
arms and ammunition.
  This amendment is basically about accountability and saving Haitians' 
lives. The United States must not be complicit in helping to arm 
criminals, and that is why I urge my colleagues to support the Lee-
Conyers-Waters-Kilpatrick Haiti arms limitation amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, but 
I will not oppose the amendment. In fact, Mr. Chairman, I want to say 
that I would be prepared to accept this amendment, however, I think it 
is extremely important that we make it clear that we want to express 
that our congressional intent with this amendment is that this 
prohibition not extend to medical equipment or excess property that is 
used for humanitarian purposes.
  I do not believe that is what the gentlewoman is intending to do. I 
know what she is trying to get at, but I think it is very important we 
make it very clear in our intent here that we are not trying to prevent 
the transfer of medical equipment and other kinds of property that 
would be used for humanitarian purposes.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the co-chair of the Haiti task force.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman yielding me 
this time, and first of all, I want to assure the chairman that we are 
absolutely in agreement that medical equipment and supplies would not 
be affected by the reach of this amendment. I am glad the gentleman has 
put that in the Record, and I am sure we are all in total agreement.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment, the Lee-Lantos-Conyers-Waters-
Kilpatrick amendment is something that we regret that we have to do. 
Haiti is in such a difficult situation, politically, economically, and 
socially, and it is so important that we try to stem the level of 
violence. That is the sole purpose of all of us coming together to work 
on this. I am so proud of the chairman for agreeing to accept this 
amendment, because it means that he sees and understands the underlying 
circumstances that have caused us to come together in the first place.
  We need less violence. The election is coming up. How we are going to 
have an election there under these circumstances I am not even sure of. 
We have tried, some of us have tried to get it delayed, but we have not 
been successful. We need the United Nations to implement an effective 
disarmament program, because as long as there is as much a level of 
violence as we find there, we cannot even go down there.
  So, please, let us support this amendment. I thank the Members on 
both sides that see the importance of it.
  Mr. Chairman, Today I rise to support the Lee-Lantos-Conyers-Waters-
Kilpatrick amendment which would preclude the State Department from 
transferring any ``excess arms'' that the State Department may have in 
its possession to the Government of Haiti and the Haitian National 
Police. Even though the United States has an arms embargo against 
Haiti, U.S. law grants authority to the President of the United States 
to provide weapons to Haiti, without any Congressional input, as long 
as these arms are identified as ``excess.'' Recently, it has come to 
the attention of Congress that last August, the President transferred 
over 4,000 arms and ammunition to the Government of Haiti. These arms 
included hundreds of .38 caliber, .45 caliber, and 9 mm guns as well as 
M-14 rifles and sub-machine guns.
  Presently, the Country of Haiti is in the midst of a political, 
economic and humanitarian crisis. As a result, many resources, 
financial and otherwise are sorely needed. However, the sending of arms 
to further the perpetration the violence is not the prudent course of 
action.
  Specifically, the Haitian National Police, on numerous occasions, 
have not been described not as ``law enforcement'' but instead as ``law 
breakers.'' Many incidents have been reported where the Haitian 
National police are accused

[[Page H5341]]

of harassing, beating and killing Haitian citizens, including innocent 
children.
  Due to the many problems plaguing the Haitian National Police, the 
policy of transferring ``excess'' weapons to them is particularly 
unsettling. I believe it is important we stop the flow of weapons to 
Haiti and work with the U.N. to implement an effective disarmament 
program. As long as violence is the way, the people will suffer. The 
passage of this amendment is one of life and death and is critical to 
the well-being of region, of a country and of a people.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and 
I also want to thank the chairman for supporting this amendment, and I 
want to assure him that if we need to, in conference, make it explicit 
that no humanitarian assistance or excess property would be prohibited 
by this, we will definitely do that.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleagues from California, the 
cochairs of the Haiti task force, for their important work on this 
issue. So many of us continue to look at the horrors that are occurring 
every day, and instead of being minimized, they seem to increase in 
intensity. In talking to friends who have been there recently, each day 
the violence gets more grim, and it affects the average person who just 
wants to go about their business living normally. That is impossible.
  So I am very pleased that the chairman is accepting this amendment, 
and I hope that we can work closely with the Haiti task force to see if 
we can come up with some kind of positive recommendations that can have 
an impact on the lives of people.
  So I thank my colleagues for introducing this amendment and I look 
forward to working closely with them so that perhaps the average family 
can look forward to a decent life one day soon.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time, and I 
thank the gentlewoman from New York and the gentleman from Michigan for 
their support and their very clear statements.
  Also, if there are no other requests for time, I want to, once again, 
thank our chairman for his support and clarify again that the point he 
raised is certainly a concern all of us have, and we will make sure 
that humanitarian types of excess property that we all care about in 
getting to Haiti is excluded from this provision.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time and, 
again with the understanding that we are all in agreement that the 
intent of this prohibition is not to extend to medical equipment or 
other excess property used for humanitarian purposes, I accept this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.


           Amendment Offered by Mr. Bradley of New Hampshire

  Mr. BRADLEY of New Hampshire. 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. Bradley of New Hampshire:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


limitation on assistance to Romania under the Support for East European 
                      Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989

       Sec. __. None of the funds appropriated in this Act under 
     the heading ``assistance for eastern europe and the baltic 
     states'' may be obligated or expended for assistance to 
     Romania under the Support for East European Democracy (SEED) 
     Act of 1989.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley).
  Mr. BRADLEY of New Hampshire. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  First, let me begin by thanking the chairman of the committee as well 
as the ranking member, and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
McGovern) for cosponsoring this amendment with me.
  It is not my intention to permanently withhold dollars that are 
appropriated under this bill from the country of Romania. It is my hope 
that by the time there is a committee of conference the issue that I 
will describe in just a moment will have been resolved.

                              {time}  2000

  That issue involves preapproved adoptions from the country of 
Romania.
  A couple of years ago, I met a family in my home State of New 
Hampshire. The woman's name is Allyson Schaaf, and she had already 
adopted a Romanian baby and had a second child that had been approved 
by the Romanian authorities. She was one of about 200 Americans 
families that had their adoption cases already approved before a change 
in the law by Romania.
  Under pressure by the European Union in order to gain acceptance to 
the European Union, Romania changed its adoption policy without 
releasing the 200-or-so adopted children that already had families 
assigned to them here in this country.
  I have met with numerous Romanian officials, including the president 
of Romania, the prime minister and the ambassador on several occasions, 
and pressed the case not only for my constituent, Ms. Schaaf, but also 
for the other 200-or-so American families in this circumstance.
  These are families that have invested love, time, energy, and all of 
the commitment to try to unite their families in this country. It is my 
hope that with this amendment that would withhold some of the money for 
Romania, that that will be the signal that will be necessary for the 
Romanians to deal with this situation, to release the 200-or-so cases 
that have been previously approved; and then by the time the conference 
committee has been formed, hopefully these adoptions will have gone 
forward, and this amendment will no longer be necessary.
  Once again, I thank the minority ranking member and the chairman for 
working with me so hard to ensure that this amendment is the 
appropriate amendment in terms of the parliamentary procedure.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I will not be in opposition to the amendment for the purpose of this 
discussion, and I thank the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley) 
for bringing this amendment to the floor, and I thank him for his 
remarks. As the gentleman suggested, this is a very emotional issue 
which cuts deeply with a number of American families that have 
adoptions pending in Romania.
  The development assistance accounts in our bill accounts for roughly 
$20 million for Romania. I want to make it very clear it is not my 
intent to limit assistance to Romania for the entire year. The 
assistance we provide is very important for local police forces, for 
HIV/AIDS prevention, and for fighting human trafficking, very much the 
kind of thing that the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley) would 
want us to fight against. It helps fight corruption and money 
laundering and builds an independent media.
  I have been working with the Romanian Government to address this 
issue, but I know not a great deal has been accomplished in this 
regard. I think by adopting this amendment this evening, we are 
impressing both on the State Department and I hope the Romania 
government, which I hope will get this message, how important it is to 
continue to work toward a solution. This does send a very strong signal 
to the Romanian Government. I am pleased to accept the amendment, but I 
do expect to work with the ranking member and the gentleman to work and 
revisit this issue in conference with the Senate and to find a solution 
that will not involve cutting off aid to Romania.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to associate myself with the 
comments of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), and I thank the 
gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley) for clarifying the 
amendment. We understand the important purposes of our

[[Page H5342]]

aid to Romania, and I hope we can really make a change in the adoption 
policy. I look forward to working with the chairman.
  Mr. BRADLEY of New Hampshire. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the 
balance of my time.
  I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) for her gracious 
support and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for his gracious 
support, and it is my hope that the 200-or-so families that have gone 
through the process, that they will be able, by us taking this action 
tonight, I hope we can help them expedite the process to unite their 
families into loving, caring homes in the United States.
  I have met a couple of children adopted by American families, and it 
is a wonderful story. Anything that we can do to expedite that will be 
a significant step for those families. I thank both the ranking member 
and the chairman of the subcommittee.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I urge an ``aye'' vote on the amendment, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Ms. Waters

  Ms. WATERS. 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. Waters:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


        sense of Congress regarding national elections in Haiti

       Sec. __. It is the sense of Congress that national 
     elections should not be held in the Republic of Haiti until 
     conditions have been established to ensure that the elections 
     will be free and fair. Such conditions should include the 
     following:
       (1) The disarmament of all gangs and illegally armed 
     groups.
       (2) An end to kidnappings of civilians.
       (3) Security for all United States citizens working in 
     Haiti.
       (4) The establishment of security throughout Haiti in order 
     to enable all candidates to campaign for office safely.
       (5) Plans to provide security at all polling places.
       (6) Plans to ensure security for United States and 
     international election monitors.
       (7) Fair trials or release for all persons in Haiti who are 
     being detained without trial.
       (8) Respect for internationally recognized human rights.

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House today, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  One week ago today, the Canadian Government issued a travel advisory 
for Haiti, warning its citizens not to travel to the island nation 
unless they have critical or compelling business or family reasons. The 
advisory was issued after a Montreal woman said she was kidnapped in 
Haiti and beaten and burned with candles until her family paid a 
ransom.
  The U.S. State Department issued a similar travel warning on May 26, 
urging all U.S. citizens to leave Haiti. The travel warning was issued 
the day after unknown gunmen fired five rounds of bullets at a U.S. 
embassy van traveling in downtown Port-au-Prince.
  On May 31, unknown gunmen shot a French official and stole his car 
while he was driving from Cap-Haitien to Port-au-Prince. The official 
died at a hospital in Port-au-Prince several hours later. At least 
seven people were killed the same day when armed men opened fire and 
started a fire that spread throughout an entire market in Port-au-
Prince.
  By mid-June, the Peace Corps had suspended its operations in Haiti 
and evacuated 16 Peace Corps volunteers. The same week, gunmen wounded 
two U.N. peacekeepers during a shootout in Cite Soleil.
  Mr. Chairman, the violence in Haiti has been escalating over the past 
year. Kidnappings are now commonplace, and security is nonexistent. The 
interim government of Haiti has been unwilling, unable, incompetent, 
has not disarmed the gangs that roam, enforced the rule of law, or 
provide security to citizens and foreigners.
  But the government is creating as many problems as those gangs that 
are roaming the streets. The Haitian National Police contribute to the 
violence through their use of force and summary executions. On February 
28, 2005, during a large nonviolent march for democracy, police 
officers opened fire on unarmed demonstrators in broad daylight in the 
presence of international observers and media.
  Many Haitians do not trust the U.N. peacekeepers who stood by and 
watched while the police fired on the demonstrators. Police officers 
are widely considered to be corrupt; and Amnesty International has 
expressed concerns about arbitrary arrests, ill-treatment in detention 
centers, and other human rights violations. There are an estimated 700 
political prisoners in Haiti, and most of them have been detained 
illegally for months without formal charges.
  This is not an atmosphere that is conducive to the organization of 
free and fair elections. Nevertheless, the interim government of Haiti 
is persisting in its plans to hold elections in October and November of 
this year. If elections are held under the current conditions, 
candidates will be afraid to campaign for office, and individual 
Haitians will be afraid to leave their homes to vote.
  My amendment expresses a sense of Congress that national elections 
should not be held in the Republic of Haiti until conditions have been 
established to ensure that the elections will be free and fair.
  The amendment specifies that conditions should include the following: 
the disarmament of all gangs and illegally armed groups; an end to 
kidnapping of civilians, security for all United States citizens 
working in Haiti; the establishment of security throughout Haiti in 
order to enable all candidates to campaign for office safely; plans to 
provide security at all polling places; plans to ensure security for 
United States and international election monitors; fair trials or 
release for all persons in Haiti who are being detained without trial; 
and respect for internationally recognized human rights.
  Mr. Chairman, until all candidates for office can travel safely 
throughout Haiti, they cannot be expected to campaign for office. Until 
American citizens can travel to Haiti without risking their lives, they 
cannot be expected to monitor the Haitian elections. And until the 
people of Haiti can walk outside of their homes in peace, they cannot 
expect to vote.
  Mr. Chairman, we are fiddling while Rome is burning. Haiti is in an 
absolute mess. The police officers, many of them are corrupt who were 
rebels, who were part of the coup d'etat, who were in exile before this 
interim government took over, are now executing members of the Lavalos 
Party, are basically killing folks who belong to the party that will 
likely prevail if there are elections. This violence must stop.
  This Congress must send a message to CARICOM and everybody else that 
we will not support elections in this atmosphere. We should stop this 
madness and help to stabilize Haiti.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes 
legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of 
rule XXI.
  The rule states in pertinent part:
  ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order 
if changing existing law.''
  The amendment proposes to state a legislative position.
  Mr. Chairman, for that reason I would insist on the point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of 
order?
  Ms. WATERS. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
  I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for his interpretation 
of what I am attempting to do here. I do not know what law the 
gentleman is referring to. There is no law that would have us dictate 
when elections are to take place in Haiti. There is no law that we 
would be in violation of by not using our influence to make those 
elections happen.
  As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, this is 
being driven by Mr. Noriega at the State Department because they have 
helped to create this chaos in Haiti with the removal of the 
democratically elected

[[Page H5343]]

president, and this democratically elected president will probably not 
be able to return to Haiti. That is not a problem. That is not 
something that anybody should worry about.
  What we should be concerned about is why they are insisting on 
holding these elections in this atmosphere of violence, corruption, and 
complete chaos in Haiti. So I do not think the gentleman is referring 
to any law that he can reasonably point to that we are in violation of.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule on the point of order.
  The amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) 
proposes to express a legislative sentiment of the Congress.
  As such, the amendment constitutes legislation in violation of clause 
2 of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is 
not in order.


             Amendment Offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey

  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. 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. Garrett of New Jersey:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


  limitation on funds relating to attendance of Federal employees at 
            conferences occurring outside the United States

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to send or otherwise pay for the attendance of more 
     than 50 employees of a Federal department or agency at any 
     single conference occurring outside the United States.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Members from either side of the aisle may disagree exactly how we got 
to the point we are, in general, and that is that our deficit is too 
high and that we spend too much money. But I think we can both agree on 
one thing, that we should work together to try to solve that problem.
  I am offering, therefore, today what I consider is a commonsense 
approach to deal with a spending abuse. It is an approach that this 
House agreed to in similar legislation in the past.
  In essence, it is a limitation on the number of Federal employees 
that may go overseas to international conferences. This has grown out 
of a growing tendency in the past by various administrations for 
sending various numbers to international conferences, spending upwards 
of millions of dollars. Back in 2004, for example, over 130 Federal 
employees attended an AIDS conference in Thailand.

                              {time}  2015

  Instead of spending all this money on sending personnel over there, 
instead we could have used it, in fact, to provide AIDS prevention and 
AIDS medicine; 216,000 newborns in Africa alone.
  So this legislation grows out of a common problem in the past. Just 
sending too many people overseas, using taxpayers' dollars to do so.
  Earlier in this session we had similar language which was approved by 
this House in the Interior bill, and I would encourage my colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle to approve it now in this legislation as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I do not intend to oppose the amendment, but simply to say that I am 
willing to accept this amendment at this time and will revisit this and 
consider this, of course, in the conference.
  But I appreciate the gentleman's bringing this issue to our 
attention, and I am prepared to accept the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  I just want to take this time to thank the chairman for his work this 
time, as well as in the past, to visit this issue through the 
conference process. So I thank the gentleman for accepting this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Capuano

  Mr. CAPUANO. 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. Capuano:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


 authorization to use all necessary means to stop genocide in Darfur, 
                                 Sudan

       Sec. __. Consistent with the Convention on the Prevention 
     and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the President is 
     authorized to use all necessary means to stop genocide in 
     Darfur, Sudan.

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano).
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  What this amendment does is it authorizes the President to use all 
necessary means to stop the genocide in Darfur, Sudan.
  Before I start, I would like to comment very clearly that I know that 
the gentleman from Arizona has been very active on this issue and has 
been very supportive, understanding the rules and the difficulties they 
present. I respect the position he has to take tonight, but I also want 
to make it clear that I consider him a friend on this issue.
  For those who do not know, the genocide in Darfur has been clearly 
documented. This Congress declared it a genocide in July of 2004. In 
September of 2004, Secretary of State Colin Powell stated: ``genocide 
has been committed in Darfur and that the government of Sudan and the 
Janjaweed bear responsibility.''
  This Congress has passed enough money, I think it totals about over 
$400 million already, for the African Union Mission and the 
humanitarian relief in Sudan. We have done our job. The United States 
has supported financially and morally. The African Union has also 
stepped up. The African Union, in April of 2004, created a Cease-Fire 
Commission. They do not have the mandate to protect civilians, however, 
and that is the major problem. They do have 2,600 troops on the ground 
right now, but the job is not being done. In May they announced that 
they are going to send 7,700 troops to Darfur between July and 
September. NATO, the EU, and the United States are all supporting that 
effort.
  Finally, the United Nations itself has taken action. Six resolutions 
have passed the Security Council to bring an end to the violence. 
Unfortunately, all of these efforts have failed to date. The violence 
has already claimed the lives of 400,000 people, and it is getting 
worse. For those who do not understand the concept of 400,000, that is 
the entire population of Oakland, California or Mesa, Arizona or Tulsa, 
Oklahoma or Omaha, Nebraska or Minneapolis, Minnesota. The violence has 
created 200,000 refugees and it has displaced 2 million people. That is 
the entire population of New Mexico.
  What is going on in Sudan is a tragedy. The United States, I believe, 
has a moral obligation to step up and do whatever we can to stop this 
genocide. We have done it in other places for other reasons. We have 
failed to do it in other places for other reasons. We should not fail 
to do it here.
  The government of Khartoum is a genocidal regime. They have 
demonstrated this policy again and again in every segment of their 
country. Reports of the fighting and the killing are getting worse, and 
this regime remains in power this whole time. We need to stand up and 
take some action.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H5344]]

                             Point of Order

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment, but before I do so, let me say to the gentleman that I fully 
concur with what he is attempting to do here. I have been to Darfur. I 
went with the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson), and we have seen 
some of the terrible things going on there. There is no question about 
it. We need to do everything we can to stop this. And I believe that 
our legislation does do a lot of that. For one thing, we have $69 
million in the legislation for the assistance to Darfur for 
humanitarian assistance as well as other moneys to implement the peace 
accords in the south.
  But, Mr. Chairman, this is a very broad amendment, and for that 
reason I must make a point of order against the amendment because it 
does propose to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an 
appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI.
  That rule states in pertinent part that:
  ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order 
if changing existing law, modifies existing powers and duties.'' This 
does that, and for that reason it would not be in order.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) wish to 
be heard on the point of order?
  Mrs. LOWEY. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank my colleague from 
Massachusetts for spending some time to discuss the genocide that is 
currently occurring in Darfur. He and I understand that the 
administration does currently have the authorization to take steps, and 
with his help and with the help of the Chair, I hope we can continue to 
keep this issue on the tops of our agenda so that the world does not 
actually watch what is going on without taking all appropriate action, 
and I want to thank the gentleman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair finds that this amendment includes language 
conferring authority. The amendment therefore constitutes legislation 
in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.
  The point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Bonilla

  Mr. BONILLA. 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. Bonilla:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:

                TITLE VI--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS


  Limitation on use of funds by the Export-Import Bank of the United 
                                 States

       Sec. 601. Of the amounts provided in title I, under the 
     heading ``Export-Import Bank of the United States--
     administrative expenses'', not more than $66,200,000 may be 
     expended while there is a vacancy in position of the head of 
     the Office of Inspector General in the Export-Import Bank of 
     the United States.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bonilla) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bonilla).
  Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  My amendment would do something very simple, and that is it would 
withhold 10 percent of administrative costs at the Ex-Im Bank until 
there is an Inspector General in place.
  As we all know, Ex-Im Bank's mission is to assist in financing the 
export of U.S. goods and services to international markets. A by-
product of this, of course, is the creation of U.S. jobs and the 
support of U.S. manufacturers. But all too often, it seems that the Ex-
Im Bank is content to conduct operations in the shadows in a 
questionable manner. There appears to be a lack of official guidance in 
how credit worthiness is determined. There appears to be a lack of 
official guidance addressing the small business requirements that 
Congress has mandated. And more disturbing also is that we ask 
questions and we get no answers.
  People empower us to keep an eye on these expenditures, and they are 
not being open with Members of Congress. All too simple questions 
sometimes that are set on basic policy either go unanswered or answered 
without any substantive information.
  For example, in March of this year, I sent a letter to the Ex-Im Bank 
that, among other things, asked: ``Under what circumstances does EX-IM 
permit its employees to share information about an ongoing 
investigation with third parties? The bank has acknowledged that they 
received my letter. The Director of Legislative Affairs replied that my 
concerns have been forwarded to the Office of General Counsel, and the 
General Counsel's office has acknowledged receipt of the letter, but 
yet the questions remain unanswered. Obviously, their inability to 
answer basic questions on policy raises a concern that the bank may be 
operating subjectively and without internal policies or controls to 
prevent waste, fraud, or abuse.
  This agency has existed far too long and with far too great an 
expense to the taxpayer to not have an Inspector General keeping an eye 
on it. It is time that this agency provide taxpayers with the assurance 
that their hard-earned tax dollars are being spent wisely. It is time 
the Ex-Im respects the role that this body plays in keeping an eye on 
them and an oversight on this agency, which is very important.
  I ask the chairman for his support of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, but 
I will not oppose it.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me just say that I think the gentleman's amendment is one that we 
can accept. The administration has requested $1 million to pay for an 
Office of Inspector General at the U.S. Export-Import Bank in addition 
to the $73 million that they have for regular administrative expenses.
  For the past few years, the committee has not recommended separate 
funding for an Inspector General because we felt the bank was small. It 
only had 400 employees. The bank uses a private accounting firm to 
audit its books so a main function of the proposed IG is already being 
met.
  Nonetheless, I understand the frustration that the gentleman from 
Texas has shown here this evening and has expressed. The bank should be 
responsive to the needs of U.S. exporters; so I do not intend to oppose 
the amendment.
  I do want to say, however, Mr. Chairman, to the gentleman from Texas 
that I am concerned about what might be the unintended side 
consequences of this amendment. The U.S. Export-Import Bank is not able 
to control the nomination and confirmation process of the Inspector 
General, as we know. That comes from the White House, the President; so 
they cannot have any control over that. And without doubt it would 
penalize U.S. exporters and the bank itself if there were a delay 
through no fault at the bank in nominating and confirming the Inspector 
General.
  So I intend to work in conference to ensure that the bank is not 
unintentionally harmed with respect to the support that it gives to 
U.S. exporters, and I am sure that that would be the intention of the 
gentleman from Texas as well.
  I urge support of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I appreciate the chairman's support of my amendment and acknowledge 
his very thoughtful remarks. I would, however, point out that private 
accounting is not independent because they answer to the Ex-Im chairman 
and not the public. So, again, we are looking for answers. The public 
empowers us to keep an eye on how these funds are allocated, and they 
need to have the sun shine on them a little more, and the Inspector 
General would do that because obviously they are not being responsive 
at this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. 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. Bonilla).

[[Page H5345]]

  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Inslee

  Mr. INSLEE. 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. Inslee:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:

                TITLE VI--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS


          Limitation on use of funds by the Export-Import Bank

       Sec. 601. Of the total amount made available in this Act to 
     the Export-Import Bank of the United States for the extension 
     of credit for transactions related to energy projects, the 
     Bank shall use--
       (1) not more than 95 percent for transactions related to 
     fossil fuel projects; and
       (2) not less than 5 percent for transactions related to 
     renewable energy and energy efficiency projects.

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).
  Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Our amendment seeks to improve our investment internationally in 
renewable energy sources and energy efficiency technologies. There is a 
certain irony that while this amendment comes to the floor of the House 
now, the President is addressing the Nation about the Iraq War right 
now, a war in the middle of an oil-producing region that the world is 
largely dependent upon to sustain its economy. The instability of that 
region in and of itself ought to point out the need to use the Export-
Import Bank to encourage the development not of the fossil fuel energy 
sources but renewable energy sources and energy efficiency standards. 
So our amendment would simply say that we have to use at least 5 
percent of our energy products in renewable energy projects so we do 
not have to remain dependent on fossil fuel.
  A couple of things that have happened to indicate the wisdom of this: 
In the last couple of weeks, oil has topped $60 a barrel. And since 
dinosaurs went to die in the Mid East, that is where the oil is. We 
have to break our dependence on oil internationally from any source.
  Secondly, we have seen the effort by the Chinese government-owned oil 
company to buy a domestic United States producer as a precursor, a 
predecessor, of future disputes over this resource that we are now 
largely dependent on. We need to break our addiction to oil. We need to 
get serious about renewable energy.
  And the third fact that has happened in the last several weeks is 
that we have learned that the debate about global warming is over. 
Debating whether or not global warming is occurring in large part or 
significant part during human activity is like now debating gravity. 
And just two facts that I hope that some Members who may be listening 
tonight may consider: A picture here of a glacier in Antarctica over a 
several-month period, showing a block of ice breaking off the 
Antarctic, 26 miles by 11 miles in width, breaking off, a phenomenon 
that is now occurring with, if not regularity, more frequency now as an 
indication of global warming.
  I noticed seeing in the newspaper yesterday tourism is booming in 
Alaska because tourists say they want to see Alaska before it melts. We 
are now seeing with our own eyes the symptoms of global warming across 
our hemisphere. We need to do something about it.

                              {time}  2030

  The science behind that, this is not just anecdotal. I would ask 
anyone when they think about energy sources to consider the fact that 
carbon dioxide now is at levels that we have never seen before in the 
history of the planet.
  I refer you to a chart which shows the changes in CO2 levels and 
temperature levels that have occurred on the globe over the last 
several thousand years. This chart basically shows that while there 
have been changes in the last several hundred thousand years, we have 
never seen spikes of carbon dioxide, the major global warming gas, like 
we have now.
  Here is the present. We show that our carbon dioxide levels, over 
376,000 parts per million, are the highest ever in global history since 
we have been able to ascertain, even looking at the trapped air bubbles 
at historical levels thousands of feet down in the glaciers.
  What we see is the prediction, Mr. Chairman, that if this Nation and 
the world does not become serious about renewable and clean energy, 
those levels will spike to unprecedented levels, up to 980,000 parts 
per million by 2100. In the next century, we will have carbon dioxide 
levels, by 2100, three times higher than they have ever been in the 
history of the world, at least for several hundred thousand years.
  We have to get serious about this issue. Our amendment would be one 
small step. I would like to pass it tonight. We will not, because a 
point of order has been raised against it. But I hope this is one small 
moment when Members can think that the next time we have an opportunity 
to get serious about global warming or respond to the needs of our 
grandkids, do not let this happen to this great Earth.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Washington?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, let me just advise Members that might be listening that 
we are coming to the close of the end of the discussion here this 
evening and to the amendments, and I believe that we will be having 
votes in a very short period of time. I think the discussion that we 
have had here today, this evening, has been one that has been 
productive and I think has highlighted a number of the issues in 
foreign policy.
  The foreign operations legislation appropriation bill is one which 
uniquely allows us to cover a broad range of foreign policy issues and 
allows the Congress of the United States to have its input on issues 
and give direction to the administration, as well as to other agencies, 
about how foreign policy should be conducted.
  I think that some of the amendments which have been accepted here 
tonight have helped to strengthen the legislation that we have, and I 
think that the others that have not been accepted and will be voted on 
are ones that I hope will be defeated on the floor when it comes time 
to cast votes on these amendments.
  So I would urge my colleagues to restrain themselves here at this 
late hour, and I believe that we can very quickly come to a conclusion 
on the bill and be able to conclude deliberations of this bill very 
quickly.


             Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:

    Limitation on Use of Funds to Reduce Outlays for the Return of 
                           Darfurian Refugees

       Sec.  . None of the funds made available in this Act may be 
     used to return displaced persons from Chad to Sudan.

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that 
the text of my amendment be read.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read the amendment.
  The Clerk read the amendment.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona reserves a point of order 
against the amendment.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.

[[Page H5346]]

  Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member and the chairman. I want to 
acknowledge the work that the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) has 
done and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) has done on the 
Darfur crisis as relates to the refugees; and I hope that maybe as we 
discuss this matter, I can work with the distinguished gentleman and 
the distinguished gentlewoman on conference language that responds to 
my concern.
  We originally had this amendment include the words ``not against 
their will.'' The reason, Mr. Chairman, is that in the time that I 
spent in Chad with the refugees that have been resettled in Chad, I saw 
that the crisis in Darfur and the surrounding border areas between 
Sudan and Chad still exist.
  We have made great strides in providing resources to the region; but 
as I traveled to Chad and met with the leadership of Chad, they talked 
about the enormous challenges that they are presently having with their 
refugees and the refugees from Sudan and the need for resources. At the 
same time as I talked one on one to the refugees that were there, they 
expressed to me that the brutality was still going on.
  Of course, in Chad we find that there is a lack of sufficient water, 
adequate medical supplies, and, of course, the possibility that the 
Janjaweed will come across the border and raid them at will. But at the 
same time, these refugees were frightened about the possibility of 
being returned to Sudan because the Government of Chad may be 
overwhelmed with the resources needed to protect them.
  I believe, of course, that we can help provide the resources to Chad 
needed to protect those refugees, and the United Nations refugee 
resettlement effort was very much in force and very much an effective 
tool.
  But as we know, the genocidal regime in Sudan has left 2.5 million 
people displaced and at least 380,000 people dead in Darfur. We also 
know that there is a continuing number of refugees that have come 
across the border.
  Due to increasing violence, 15,000 innocent civilians continue to die 
each month. Genocide cannot continue on our watch. The United States 
must move forward towards an effective action against this terrible 
crime.
  We are gratified that this Congress voted on a genocide initiative 
and declared that genocide was occurring. The United Nations, of 
course, has had a more difficult time dealing with that question. But 
we know that genocide has occurred. We know that these refugees are 
fleeing for a very important reason. The United Nations Secretary 
General has described the situation in Darfur as ``a little short of 
hell on Earth,'' and expert John Prendergast calls it ``Rwanda in slow 
motion.''
  Under cover of a decade-long civil war that has claimed 2 million 
Sudanese lives, the government-backed Janjaweed continues their 
campaign to wipe out communities of African tribal farmers who live in 
the region.
  I understand that there have been changes in the Sudanese Government. 
In Chad, I met with the Sudanese ambassador. I have met with the 
Sudanese ambassador, to the dismay of many here in the United States, 
trying to find common ground.
  I want to applaud the work of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Payne) and the Committee on International Relations and the Committee 
on Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing, 
and Related Programs, that has looked at this question and has fought 
it with great, great perseverance. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Jackson) provided additional dollars.
  But I want to make sure that any Darfurian refugee that is in Chad is 
not forced to leave for any economic reason. Of course, we need more 
dollars to help Chad, more support of the United Nations Commissioner 
on Human Rights and Refugees. But we also need to ensure that resources 
here by this appropriation do not force anyone to go back to a place 
where they do not want to go.
  Some refugees may want to go back. When I met with them one on one, 
they talked about their cattle being destroyed, they talked about there 
being no place for them, their villages had been destroyed. We looked 
and spoke with the African Union at the aerial footage that would show 
how large villages had been destroyed, so there is not much for them to 
return to.
  I want to be able to say that we are working at all ends, the 
declaration of genocide, the negotiations with Sudan to stop the 
violence and stop the devastating destruction of these individuals in 
Sudan and stop the fleeing from Sudan.
  But now that we are in the predicament that we are in, which is 
380,000, up to 400,000 and growing, refugees in Chad, we want to make 
sure that there is no fear, no, if you will, requirement, no demand, no 
shuttling. Refugees who do not want to go back, they should not have to 
go.
  Let me say this as well: if you speak to the women and the children 
that I had a chance to speak to, I can only say that tears would come 
to your eyes, the raping, the brutalization, the fear, the 
apprehension. I would ask my colleagues to consider an amendment that 
simply wants to give to those who are in fear of their lives the 
opportunity not to return if they desire not to return.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes to preclude the use of funds 
made available in this act to force repatriation of Darfurian refugees 
from the Republic of Chad back to Darfur, Sudan against their will. 
This act could be deemed authorized under Section 12 of the Sudan Peace 
Act as an effort to assist the African Union in its peacekeeping 
efforts; however, it could prove detrimental or deadly for many 
Darfurians.
  I traveled to the Republic of Chad last April and saw the devastation 
and suffering first-hand by the Sudanese refugees. They lack sufficient 
water, adequate medical supplies, and protection from Janjaweed militia 
who raid them at will.
  As many of you know, the genocidal regime in Sudan has left 2.5 
million people displaced and at least 380,000 people dead in the 
Darfur. Due to increasing violence, 15,000 innocent civilians continue 
to die each month. Genocide cannot continue on our watch; the United 
States must move toward effective action against this most terrible 
crime. The United Nations Secretary General has described the situation 
in Darfur as ``little short of hell on earth.'' Expert John Prendergast 
calls it ``Rwanda in slow motion.'' Under cover of a decade-long civil 
war that has claimed 2 million Sudanese lives, government backed 
Janjaweed continue their campaign to wipe out communities of African 
tribal farmers who live in the region. The government-backed Janjaweed 
are razing villages, systematically raping women and young girls, 
abducting children, poisoning water supplies, and destroying sources of 
food. Unlike the recent tsunamis in Southeast Asia, the situation in 
Darfur is manmade and therefore can be addressed.
  In my visit to the region, I had the opportunity to meet with Lt. 
General Ansu of the African Union, which is the single peacekeeping 
force supported by the United Nations. During the meeting, the general 
noted that there is nothing they can do pursuant to the current 
mandate. As a result, I recently co-signed a letter, along with other 
Congressional Black Caucus members, to the President of Nigeria, Mr. 
Obasanjo, asking him to use his influence as chairman of the African 
Union to change the mandate of the AU in Sudan. Additionally, I am also 
a co-sponsor of H.R. 1424, ``The Darfur Genocide Accountability Act of 
2005.'' H.R. 1424, among other things, also calls for changing the 
mandate of the AU. While these are positive steps towards ending the 
genocide, they are clearly not enough.
  In addition to my visit with Lt. General Ansu, I also had the 
opportunity to visit refugee camps and spoke with many of the refugees 
regarding what they have seen. According to them, many of the women and 
young girls have been raped, and many of the men have been violently 
murdered. Furthermore, water and food supplies have been completely 
destroyed making it impossible for many to survive.
  The time has come for the United States to take a substantive role in 
curtailing this situation. I ask that my colleagues support the 
Jackson-Lee amendment.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I understand the Parliamentarian has made a 
decision that this would be in order, and, therefore, I would withdraw 
my reservation.
  Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I am not at all sure what the gentlewoman is 
attempting to accomplish here, what the purpose of offering this 
amendment is. The only funds that would be affected by this, the only 
funds that we have in the bill that affect refugees is that we provide 
for the UNHCR, that is, the United Nations High Commissioner on 
Refugees.

[[Page H5347]]

  I think it is quite apparent that when it comes to Darfur and the 
Sudan, the UNHCR would not support any kind of program of resettlement 
of refugees that had been, not displaced, but they are refugees that go 
from one place to another. Refugees that fled from Sudan into Chad, 
they would not support any program of resettling them back in Sudan if 
there were not a comprehensive peace settlement that would allow them 
to be resettled.
  The effect of the gentlewoman's amendment would be to stop assistance 
for such an important program if there was to be a peace settlement 
that was to be achieved and everybody in Darfur and Sudan were to agree 
on it. I cannot believe that is what the gentlewoman really intends, 
because what she would be doing is taking a terrible human tragedy and 
simply compounding it and making it a much worse human tragedy.
  Mr. Chairman, I would hope the gentlewoman would reconsider this 
amendment, because I do not believe that its intent is what she intends 
to do. Let me just make it clear, it would limit all money going to 
UNHCR for resettlement if there were a peace agreement in Darfur. If 
there were a peace agreement, we would want nothing more than to be 
able to return those refugees from Chad back to Darfur. I cannot 
believe that is what the gentlewoman intended.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. LOWEY. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished 
gentlewoman very much for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, if I might engage the distinguished gentleman from 
Arizona, I think the amendment can be interpreted in the way the 
gentleman has offered, but I think it can be interpreted in the way I 
have offered it. The problem is as we visited, first of all I want to 
thank Chad for what it has offered to the refugees and, of course, 
refugee resettlement efforts with the United Nations, where Chad is 
hosting the United Nations and welcoming them for the many refugee 
camps that are there.
  But there is a terrible economic burden on Chad as well, and this is 
simply language that suggests that we are monitoring or ensuring that 
our funds are being used to, in fact, provide for those refugees who 
are in fear of their lives.
  Now, I would be happy if the gentleman would work with me to include 
this in report language, so that we would have at least that protection 
from what might happen or what might be thought of or what might cause, 
if you will, some sort of pressure to return those refugees because of 
the economic imbalance. When we were there, though Chad was very 
hospitable, and all of us have gone to Chad and gone through Chad to go 
to Sudan, but if, for example, the financial burden became so 
extensive, then there might be some pressure, Mr. Chairman.

                              {time}  2045

  So I would hope that we find common ground to realize that it is a 
concern. I would not have brought it to the floor if it was not. I 
think it is an important point to make, that we understand the 
brutality that these refugees have experienced, and because they have 
experienced such devastation, we want to cross the T's and dot the I's.
  So that was the explanation I wanted to make. If I can work to get a 
commitment on precise report language, which I think answers the 
concern, then I think that that is a way of addressing a definitive 
concern that I saw, and I think it is real, and I think my 
interpretation clarifies that it is not in any way undermining the 
funding for the U.N. Refugee Resettlement Program, but it is to make 
clear that even if there is an economic burden on the host country; in 
this instance, Chad, and again, I repeat, I thank them for their 
hospitality to these refugees. They should be, as we have supported 
their efforts, but there would not be that intent to resettle these 
refugees beyond the time of them wanting to go back, or for those who 
do not want to go back.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I know the chairman's 
clear concern and commitment to focus on the severe issues in Darfur, 
and I certainly would be delighted to work with the chairman to see if 
we can come up with some report language that would clarify the intent 
of the gentlewoman from Texas' concerns as expressed in this amendment.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. LOWEY. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I understand then what the gentlewoman from 
Texas is suggesting. Certainly, none of us would want to require forced 
repatriation of people from Chad back to Sudan. That is certainly not 
what any of us would want. But this amendment, as it is drafted, would 
be overly broad and would simply not allow us to do any kind of program 
that would help to resettle refugees that have fled from Darfur to 
return them to their homes, and I know that is not what the gentlewoman 
desires.
  So, therefore, I agree with the point she is making, and we are 
certainly willing to work with her when we get to conference and the 
statement of manager's intentions in conference to work on language 
that will make it clear that we would oppose any kind of forcible 
repatriation of refugees from one country to the other.
  If that is acceptable, I would hope the gentlewoman would then 
withdraw this amendment.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. LOWEY. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas for a concluding 
statement.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me try to understand the 
gentleman. I guess we differ whether it is overbroad, but I am 
welcoming of the gentleman's generous offer, in understanding that he 
would work with me on report language that helps us not have forced 
repatriation back to Sudan.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman from New York would 
continue to yield to me, the House report for the House bill is 
completed, but in conference, yes, we could work on language in 
conference.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman from New 
York would continue to yield, that is the clarity that I was trying to 
secure.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) 
has expired.
  The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) has remaining time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I am completed with my remarks and I am 
prepared to yield back the balance of my time, if the gentlewoman is 
prepared to withdraw the amendment.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KOLBE. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, with that kind of offer and 
the understanding that the amendment was drafted to ensure that we did 
not have the forcing of refugees to return, I will look forward to 
working with the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and the 
gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) to have language in conference 
on this matter.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Hefley

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

       Amendment offered by Mr. Hefley:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


                   reduction in total appropriations

       Sec. __. Total appropriations made in this Act (other than 
     appropriations required to be made by a provision of law) are 
     hereby reduced by $202,700,000.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) and the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Kolbe) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page H5348]]

  Mr. Chairman, this is no surprise to anyone. I rise again today to 
offer an amendment to cut the level of funding in this appropriation 
bill by 1 percent, 1 cent on the dollar. This amounts to $202.7 
million.
  I have offered this kind of an amendment on a number of these bills, 
and it is because I feel so strongly about the need for us to come to a 
balanced budget which we once had, and we have gotten very far away 
from.
  The committee has done a good job in the sense that the amount of 
this bill is $2.5 billion less than what the administration called for. 
However, it is still an increase of $750 million over last year's 
Foreign Operations budget.
  My sense is that if you do not have the money, you do not spend more 
than last year. That is the situation we are in right now. I will not 
go into this whole thing; I simply encourage an ``aye'' vote on behalf 
of the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, and I yield 
myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the bill before us today already cuts the President's 
request, and the gentleman from Colorado has mentioned this; it cuts 
the President's request by $2.6 billion. That is 11 percent, and that 
is the largest cut in terms of any of the appropriation bills that we 
have had on the floor or will have on the floor this year.
  We have cut all of the fat I think, and then some, from this bill. I 
am sure everybody can find something that they do not like, but there 
are a lot of programs that I think are very valuable that did not get 
funded in this because of the 11 percent cut over the President's 
request that we had, certainly things that the President thought were 
important and should be done.
  I think if my colleagues were to peruse the bill, they would see that 
there is a $1.4 billion dollar cut from the President's account for the 
Millennium Challenge Corporation. That has been a priority of the 
President and mine in this bill. We have cut all of the new programs 
that the President requested. We zeroed out the Global Environmental 
Facility. We withheld 25 percent of the funds from the World Bank and 
conditioned funds of the Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS until detailed 
reforms are met.
  So this is a fiscally conservative bill of which I am very proud, and 
I ask my colleagues to oppose this amendment that is offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to express my appreciation for every 
one of the cuts that the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) mentioned, 
and they have done a good job where that is concerned, but I still hope 
we will get a positive vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) 
will be postponed.


         Amendment Offered by Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California

  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. 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. Loretta Sanchez of California:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


limitation on International Military Education and Training assistance 
                              for Vietnam

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act under 
     the heading ``international military education and training'' 
     may be used to provide assistance for Vietnam.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order, and I do so 
until we have had a chance to see the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez) and the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta 
Sanchez).
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  I intend to withdraw this amendment, and the gentleman from Arizona 
(Chairman Kolbe) has been kind enough to agree to engage in a colloquy 
with me on the issue of International Military Education and Training, 
or IMET, funding for Vietnam.
  I strongly support the IMET program. Sitting on the Committee on 
Armed Services, I understand that it is a vital tool for furthering 
regional security cooperation and promoting United States interests 
overseas.
  Vietnam held off on agreeing to participate in the IMET program for 
quite a while because they were concerned about scrutiny of their human 
rights record, and those concerns are well-founded. Vietnam is 
responsible for a broad range of human rights abuses, including the 
repression of ethnic minorities, detention and torture of political 
dissidents, and the repression of religious freedom.
  The U.S. designated Vietnam as a ``Country of Particular Concern'' in 
2004 because of its violations of religious freedoms. With this 
designation, Vietnam joins a club including Burma, China, Iran, and 
North Korea.
  So, should the United States provide IMET for these countries? Why 
should Vietnam be any different?
  The Vietnamese military has reportedly been involved in numerous 
cases of human rights violations, including violence and brutal 
suppression of the peaceful Montagnard people in demonstrations in 
April of 2004.
  Providing humanitarian assistance to a country is one thing. 
Establishing trade relations is yet another. But military assistance 
such as IMET requires an even higher standard. Why would we want to 
establish military relations with a repressive regime, one in which our 
potential counterparts are directly involved in that repression? I 
think Vietnam should not be eligible for IMET assistance until it has 
demonstrated a willingness to treat all its citizens with the 
fundamental dignity and respect that they deserve.
  Can the chairman provide me with assurances that Vietnam's human 
rights record and the record of its military in particular will be 
taken into consideration as part of Vietnam's eligibility for IMET 
funding?
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. I yield to the gentleman from 
Arizona.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, first, I withdraw the reservation of the 
point of order.
  Mr. Chairman, let me just say that I appreciate the gentlewoman's 
concern about the human rights situation in Vietnam. I share those 
concerns, and I believe our foreign policy should stress its 
importance.
  I can assure the gentlewoman that improved relations between the 
United States and Vietnam, particularly in the area of military 
relations, will not ignore our objectives for improved human rights 
protection in that country. However, I do not wish to make engagement 
through IMET contingent on a specific action by the Vietnamese. I think 
it could have very well the opposite effect if we were to do that.
  One purpose of IMET funds is to provide English language instruction 
to the Vietnamese military. In a fundamental way, it thus serves as a 
tool to give the Vietnamese military exposure to U.S. instructors, to 
professionalism, to progressive ideas, and to the role of the military 
in civil society. IMET would promote mutual understanding and provide 
an additional context for the Vietnamese to understand how important it 
is for the United States to see improvements in human rights. Besides 
providing this context for understanding, I believe that IMET for 
Vietnam will help us address transnational issues such as 
counterterrorism and counternarcotics and contribute to greater 
security and regional stability in Southeast Asia.

[[Page H5349]]

  I thank the gentlewoman for raising this issue and look forward to 
working with her in the future on this.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, 
I thank the gentleman for his interest in the issue, and I am glad to 
hear that our policy towards Vietnam will not ignore human rights 
objectives. I sincerely appreciate the chairman taking the time with 
this important matter.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman 
from California?
  There was no objection.


             Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
       Page 132, after line 13, insert the following:


    limitation on military assistance in contravention of the child 
     soldiers protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child

       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act under 
     the heading ``international military education and training'' 
     or ``foreign military financing program'' may used in 
     contravention of the child soldiers protocol to the 
     Convention on the Rights of the Child.

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Kolbe) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I have worked on this issue for a long time, and I hope to be able to 
withdraw this amendment and engage the chairman in a colloquy.
  I think all of us are reminded of the terrible wars in Liberia, 
Sierra Leone, and Rwanda. And, in addition to the enormity of the loss 
of life, one of the most troubling and very sad aspects was the use of 
child soldiers. In fact, even now, there are programs on the continent 
of Africa to restore the childhood to these children, children who had 
guns instead of soccer balls or basketballs or baseballs; children who 
had guns instead of sitting in classrooms and learning about science 
and math and the study of the stars.
  So, it is unfortunate that even today, in 2005, we find the fact that 
child soldiers are still utilized. They are utilized in places like 
Burma, in the Republic of the Congo, and other places where wars arise.
  I would think in this day and time of terrorism, we know that child 
soldiers are being used as terrorists around the world.
  On June 18, 2002, the U.S. Senate gave unanimous consent to U.S. 
ratification of the Child Soldiers Protocol which was the optional 
protocol to the convention on the rights of children on the involvement 
of children in armed conflict.

                              {time}  2100

  This decision meant that the United States would not put anyone under 
the age of 18 in combat, nor would we approve or sanction any such 
activity. However, despite that fact, there are many nations throughout 
the world that sign and ratify the protocol. The problem of children 
being put into combat situations is still prevalent in many regions of 
the world. Despite gains in awareness and better understanding of 
practical policies that can help reduce the use of children in war, the 
practice persists; and globally the number of child soldiers, about 
300,000, is believed to remain fairly constant.
  In some continued armed conflicts, child recruitment increased 
alarmingly. And I have cited some of the countries where they are being 
used to fight wars, boys and girls, which is enormously tragic. They 
have even been used as laborers and sexual slaves. We know that the 
governments of Burma, Burundi, the DRC, Liberia, and Sudan and other 
governments have used children to fight wars. Burma's National Army 
alone includes an estimated 70,000 child soldiers, which is nearly one 
quarter of the world's total and routinely sends children as young as 
12 into battle against armed ethnic opposition groups.
  Mr. Chairman, I would hope that this Congress would go on record in 
some manner. Even as this amendment may be subject to a point of order, 
I believe it was worthy of our discussion that we oppose the use of 
children as soldiers. We have certainly opposed violent conflicts 
around the world and we wish to promote peace; but we will do 
everything we can to ensure that our children of the world, the ones 
who can be leaders for peace if given half the chance, if given the 
chance to live in a free and open society where they can be children 
and learn to be the best that they can be, I would hope that these 
children would not be put to the test of fighting in battles.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support my Amendment to this Foreign 
Operations Appropriation bill, which states that none of the funds made 
available in this Act under the heading ``INTERNATIONAL MILITARY 
EDUCATION AND TRAINING'' or ``FOREIGN MILITARY FINANCING PROGRAM'' may 
be used in contravention of the child soldiers protocol to the 
Convention on the Rights of the Child. The nations known to use child 
soldiers do not deserve military assistance from our nation.
  On June 18, 2002 the U.S. Senate gave unanimous consent to U.S. 
ratification of the child soldiers protocol, which was the optional 
protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the 
involvement of children in armed conflict. This decision meant that the 
United States would not put anyone under the age of eighteen in combat. 
However, despite that fact that many nations throughout the world 
signed and ratified the protocol, the problem of children being put 
into combat situations is still prevalent in many regions of the world. 
Despite gains in awareness and better understanding of practical 
policies that can help reduce the use of children in war, the practice 
persists and globally, the number of child soldiers--about 300,000--is 
believed to have remained fairly constant. In some continuing armed 
conflicts, child recruitment increased alarmingly. In Northern Uganda, 
abduction rates reached record levels in late 2002 and 2003 as over 
8,000 boys and girls were forced by the Lord's Resistance Army to 
become soldiers, laborers, and sexual slaves. In the neighboring 
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where all parties to the armed 
conflict recruit and use children, some as young as seven, the forced 
recruitment of children increased so dramatically in late 2002 and 
early 2003 that observers described the fighting forces as ``armies of 
children.''
  However, it is not just non-governmental armed opposition groups who 
continue to use children to fight wars. Governments including those in 
Burma, Burundi, the DRC, Liberia, Sudan, and Ugandan have continued to 
recruit and use children in armed conflict. Burma's national army alone 
includes an estimated 70,000 child soldiers, which is nearly one-
quarter of the world's total and routinely sends children as young as 
twelve into battle against armed ethnic opposition groups. Both Uganda 
and the DRC have ratified the optional protocol, but flout their 
obligations by using child soldiers. The Ugandan People's Defense Force 
has recruited children who escaped or were captured from the rebel 
Lord's Resistance Army, and has trained and deployed children recruited 
into local defense units. The government of DRC maintains children in 
its ranks despite a 2000 presidential decree calling for the 
demobilization of child soldiers.
  While none of these nations are specifically targeted to receive any 
military assistance in this Appropriation, it is important that this 
amendment is passed so that a message against the use of child soldiers 
is sent throughout the world. Regardless of how unlikely it is that 
such funding may ever take place, we as a nation can not allow even the 
slightest possibility that taxpayer money may go to pay for military 
assistance to other nations who continue to use child soldiers. It is 
also important to note that these military assistance funds do not 
cover any humanitarian assistance, only funds under the International 
Military Education and Training and Foreign Military Financing 
Programs. It's a travesty that here in America we talk of holding our 
children above all else, but around the world children are being used 
as tools for war. I urge support for the Jackson-Lee Amendment to 
prohibit military assistance to nations that continue to use child 
soldiers.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve my point of order. I hope this 
will not be necessary. I think the gentlewoman's concern is certainly a 
very real one. None of us want to see child

[[Page H5350]]

soldiers. None of us want to see this kind of child labor and abuses of 
children. And I would hope that this is a priority as far as I think 
the United States policy is concerned. I think the United Nations 
agencies, I think all of them have this as a policy. But I just would 
hope that the gentlewoman, we will continue to work with her on the 
right language here. But I hope the gentlewoman would withdraw this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, if I might, to the gentleman, 
I would simply say I would like to work with the Chair and the ranking 
member. Again, I would like to call on your good graces to look at 
language during conference and work with you and have the language that 
is appropriate and of course acceptable to all of us and acceptable to 
the Chair and the ranking member.
  I do think that silence on child soldiers is not helpful because 
there is continued recruitment, and so I would like to withdraw the 
amendment. I would like to yield to the gentleman, just to say can we 
work together on it.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman will yield, she has the 
assurance of the chairman that we will work with her on language in 
conference that would address this issue. I obviously cannot commit 
with the Senate exactly how that language would be worded, but 
certainly we will take this issue to the Congress, and we will work on 
language in the report language for the conference.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the chairman and 
let me ask and thank the chairman for his reservation of point of 
order. But let me thank him for entering into a discussion on this 
matter and allowing me to discuss it and bringing it to the attention 
of my colleagues.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.


          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: amendment No. 6 by the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), amendment by the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. Beauprez), amendment by the gentleman New York (Mr. Weiner), 
amendment by the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), amendment by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal), amendment by the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. McGovern

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
McGovern) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 189, 
noes 234, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 329]

                               AYES--189

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Chandler
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Filner
     Flake
     Ford
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Otter
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pitts
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rohrabacher
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--234

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Bean
     Beauprez
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cardoza
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeLay
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Drake
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Green, Gene
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Kanjorski
     Keller
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris
     Melancon
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Oxley
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schwarz (MI)
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Sodrel
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Cox
     Doolittle
     Hayes
     Hinojosa
     Kingston
     Lynch
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     Ortiz
     Ross

                              {time}  2127

  Mrs. NORTHUP and Messrs. BACA, KENNEDY of Rhode Island and HOSTETTLER 
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. TANCREDO and Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi changed their vote from 
``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 329, had I been present, 
I would have voted ``aye.''

[[Page H5351]]

                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Beauprez

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Beauprez) 
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 327, 
noes 98, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 330]

                               AYES--327

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Bean
     Beauprez
     Berkley
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Chocola
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     Delahunt
     DeLay
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Drake
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hinojosa
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kline
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCarthy
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Melancon
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Obey
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Salazar
     Saxton
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Schwarz (MI)
     Scott (GA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Sodrel
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--98

     Ackerman
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Berman
     Blumenauer
     Boucher
     Brown, Corrine
     Capps
     Conyers
     Cummings
     Davis (FL)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dingell
     Dreier
     Ehlers
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Gillmor
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hinchey
     Hobson
     Holt
     Honda
     Hyde
     Jackson (IL)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lowey
     Maloney
     Matsui
     McCollum (MN)
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     Meeks (NY)
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Oxley
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Rogers (KY)
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Schakowsky
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Solis
     Stark
     Sweeney
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Woolsey

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Doolittle
     Hayes
     Kingston
     Lynch
     McIntyre
     Ortiz
     Ross


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised that 2 minutes 
remain in this vote.

                              {time}  2136

  Mr. CUMMINGS changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. SCHWARZ of Michigan, Ms. PRYCE of Ohio, Mr. ENGEL, Mrs. NORTHUP 
and Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois 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 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 293, 
noes 132, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 331]

                               AYES--293

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Akin
     Alexander
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bass
     Bean
     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boehlert
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Case
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Chocola
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Cox
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Drake
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Flake
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McNulty
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)

[[Page H5352]]


     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Norwood
     Olver
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Rogers (AL)
     Rohrabacher
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryun (KS)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Sodrel
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--132

     Aderholt
     Allen
     Baldwin
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Burgess
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Cole (OK)
     Conyers
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Cunningham
     Delahunt
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dingell
     Dreier
     Ehlers
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Foley
     Gilchrest
     Gingrey
     Granger
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hensarling
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Istook
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Kanjorski
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Latham
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McMorris
     Mica
     Mollohan
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Ney
     Northup
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Oxley
     Pastor
     Pearce
     Peterson (PA)
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reynolds
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (WI)
     Sabo
     Saxton
     Schwarz (MI)
     Sessions
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Stark
     Sweeney
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Turner
     Upton
     Walsh
     Weller
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Doolittle
     Hayes
     Kingston
     McIntyre
     Meehan
     Ortiz
     Ross
     Shays


                      Announcement by the Chairman

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

                              {time}  2144

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


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Sanders

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) 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 313, 
noes 114, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 332]

                               AYES--313

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bass
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Cox
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Drake
     Duncan
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Gordon
     Green (WI)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Harman
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     King (IA)
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mack
     Maloney
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Melancon
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Musgrave
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Obey
     Olver
     Osborne
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Porter
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Sodrel
     Solis
     Souder
     Stark
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (PA)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (NM)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--114

     Alexander
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Beauprez
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bonilla
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chocola
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Tom
     DeLay
     Dicks
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Etheridge
     Feeney
     Frelinghuysen
     Gilchrest
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall
     Hart
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Keller
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Manzullo
     McCrery
     McMorris
     Meeks (NY)
     Mica
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Oberstar
     Otter
     Oxley
     Pearce
     Peterson (PA)
     Pomeroy
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Schwarz (MI)
     Sessions
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Upton
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (SC)

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Doolittle
     Hayes
     Kingston
     McIntyre
     Ortiz
     Ross


                      Announcement by the Chairman

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

                              {time}  2151

  Mr. LEACH changed his 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. Deal of Georgia

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote

[[Page H5353]]

on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) 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 294, 
noes 132, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 333]

                               AYES--294

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Bean
     Beauprez
     Berkley
     Berry
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Case
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Chocola
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Costa
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     Dent
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Drake
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Everett
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harman
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Honda
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Langevin
     Lantos
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCarthy
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris
     McNulty
     Melancon
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Pallone
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rothman
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Salazar
     Sanders
     Saxton
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Scott (GA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (TX)
     Sodrel
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--132

     Ackerman
     Allen
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Berman
     Biggert
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Bonilla
     Boucher
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Cantor
     Capuano
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Crenshaw
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, Tom
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dingell
     Dreier
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gilchrest
     Granger
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (FL)
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holt
     Hooley
     Jackson (IL)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Lee
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lowey
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Miller, George
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Oxley
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Schakowsky
     Schwarz (MI)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Stark
     Sweeney
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thornberry
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Woolsey

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Doolittle
     Hayes
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Kingston
     McIntyre
     Ortiz
     Ross


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are reminded 2 minutes remain 
in this vote.

                              {time}  2158

  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 333, I 
inadvertently voted ``aye'' when I intended to vote ``no.'' Please have 
the Record reflect that I would have voted ``no.''


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Hefley

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) on 
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 117, 
noes 309, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 334]

                               AYES--117

     Akin
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Bean
     Beauprez
     Berry
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Cannon
     Cardoza
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Costa
     Costello
     Cox
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Duncan
     Everett
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gibbons
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Green, Gene
     Gutknecht
     Harris
     Hart
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Jindal
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McMorris
     McNulty
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Norwood
     Otter
     Paul
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pombo
     Price (GA)
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Stearns
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Terry
     Tiberi
     Upton
     Walden (OR)
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)

                               NOES--309

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chandler
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Tom
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Edwards

[[Page H5354]]


     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Foley
     Ford
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Israel
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Ney
     Northup
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Osborne
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Schwarz (MI)
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Sodrel
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tauscher
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Doolittle
     Hayes
     Kingston
     McIntyre
     Ortiz
     Ross
     Waters


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised 2 minutes remain 
in this vote.

                              {time}  2204

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  Mr. Chairman, I am not rising because it happens to be my 19th 
wedding anniversary.
  Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege to express my great appreciation for 
the fantastic work done by the chairman and the ranking member on this 
bill, and for all of us to come together to recognize the birthday of 
the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe).
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. KOLBE. It is a few more than 19, too.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Let us all join in extending happy birthday 
wishes to the gentleman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read the last three lines of the bill.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       This Act may be cited as the ``Foreign Operations, Export 
     Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2006''.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise and 
report the bill back to the House with sundry amendments, with the 
recommendation that the amendments be agreed to and that the bill, as 
amended, do pass.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
LaTourette) having assumed the chair, Mr. Thornberry, Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3057) 
making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, and 
related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for 
other purposes, had directed him to report the bill back to the House 
with sundry amendments, with the recommendation that the amendments be 
agreed to and that the bill, as amended, do pass.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 341, the 
previous question is ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment? If not, the Chair will 
put them en gros.
  The amendments were agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  Pursuant to clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 393, 
nays 32, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 335]

                               YEAS--393

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Bean
     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Chocola
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick (PA)
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fortenberry
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harman
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McMorris
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Osborne
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)

[[Page H5355]]


     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sabo
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz (PA)
     Schwarz (MI)
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Sodrel
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tauscher
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--32

     Bartlett (MD)
     Berry
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Duncan
     Flake
     Franks (AZ)
     Gibbons
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Hefley
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Jenkins
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Lucas
     Miller (FL)
     Norwood
     Otter
     Paul
     Petri
     Pombo
     Rahall
     Rohrabacher
     Ryun (KS)
     Sensenbrenner
     Stark
     Stearns
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Doolittle
     Hayes
     Kingston
     Lewis (CA)
     McIntyre
     Mollohan
     Ortiz
     Ross

                              {time}  2226

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________