[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 72 (Thursday, June 8, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H3518-H3546]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 851 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 5522.

                              {time}  1322


                     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 consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 5522) making appropriations for foreign operations, export 
financing, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 2007, and for other purposes, with Mr. Thornberry in the Chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) and the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Lowey) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased today to present to the House 
of Representatives H.R. 5522, the fiscal year 2007 appropriation bills 
for foreign operations, export financing and related programs. And I 
might say, Mr. Chairman, that I am pleased to have you back in the 
Chair for I am not sure how many of the consecutive years since I have 
been doing this bill that you have been there, but it feels very good 
to have you back with us.
  Before I turn to the bill, let me just mention that this is the last 
appropriations bill that I will be bringing to the floor, at least the 
last regular foreign operations appropriations bill.
  As with nearly every other foreign operations bill over the last 6 
years, this bill is a product of bipartisan cooperation, something I 
could not have done without the support and cooperation of my esteemed 
ranking member, Mrs. Lowey, or my vice chairman, Mr. Sherwood and every 
member of the subcommittee.
  I am proud of this bill. I can honestly say it has probably been one 
of the more difficult ones that we have put together. The bill before 
you totals $21.3 billion. While this level is $597 million above the 
amount provided in fiscal year 2006, not counting supplementals, it is 
fully $2.4 billion below the amount requested by the President. In 
other words, by reducing the allocation by $2.4 billion, we have freed 
up that amount for pressing domestic needs.
  The bill includes increases for three priorities, the war on terror, 
the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and international health 
spending, priorities which lie at the core of the United States 
interests abroad. For the war on terror, this bill includes $962.3 
million for Afghanistan. This amount is $137 million below the 
President's request, but $85 million over fiscal year 2006.
  As with last year's bill, this bill continues a provision that 
withholds $385 million until the Afghan government, both at national 
and local levels, fully cooperates with our efforts against narcotics 
production and trafficking. I want to be clear that I appreciate the 
support of the government of Afghanistan in the war on terror. However, 
that government must take difficult but necessary measures to fight 
narcotics production and trafficking, measures that it has so far been 
unwilling or unable to take.
  The bill also includes $521.9 million for Iraq. While below the 
President's request, it represents a very large increase of $461 
million over what we provided in fiscal year 2006. That is because last 
year we required the administration to fund Iraq programs from 
unexpended relief and reconstruction funds that were in the very 
original supplemental appropriation. Now, however, these funds are 
nearly all expended.
  This bill would normalize Iraq and Afghanistan assistance programs, 
moving them away from emergency supplementals that exceed budget 
limits.
  The bill contains no funding in the economic support fund for West 
Bank and Gaza programs. Although the President's requested $150 million 
for this purpose, the request was made before Hamas was elected to lead 
the Palestinian Authority. The subcommittee believes that humanitarian 
assistance must continue to the Palestinian people, a view, I might 
add, that is shared by the Israeli government and by the 
administration.
  Such funding is not affected by this bill. It does contain 
humanitarian pro democracy funding with restrictions and safeguards 
that have been included in the past.
  For international health, the bill contains the President's requested 
amount of $3.4 billion for the emergency plan for AIDS relief, and 
increase of $751.6 million. Within this sum, we more than double the 
President's request for a contribution to the global fund to fight 
AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, to attain last year's level of $444.5 
million.
  At the same time, I am pleased that the bill maintains last year's 
funding levels for other health programs, including an increase for 
malaria programs of $243 million. For several years now the President's 
budget request has included deep cuts to international health programs. 
We have worked hard to restore them to at least the level of the 
previous year.
  In order to bring these accounts back up, we have had to cut some 
other programs that are also priority programs. We provide $2 billion 
for the Millennium Challenge Corporation, but that is $1 billion below 
the request of the President. It is $248 million above the amount that 
we provided in 2006.
  This is a difficult decision for me, but I saw no way to move forward 
with a bill that gave the full amount that the President asked for the 
Millennium Challenge Corporation. My goal was very simple, I wanted to 
send a clear message that Congress supports the MCCs innovative, 
accountable approach to help countries move away from reliance on donor 
funding. I think a $248 million increase does send that very clear 
message, while it frees up funds above that level that enables us to 
bring before you today a bipartisan bill.
  The bill contains two important innovations. First, it includes a 
Trade Capacity Enhancement Fund which consolidates trade capacity 
funding from a variety of accounts. This new account includes $522 
million, virtually all of what is spent for trade capacity by agencies 
and accounts that are under the jurisdiction of this subcommittee. And 
it is about half of the $1.3 billion that is spent on a government-wide 
basis.
  Since we will now require a coherent strategy for the use of these 
funds, it is my hope and my belief that this new account will provide a 
strong incentive for countries to liberalize their trade regimes.
  This bill would also restructure assistance to Colombia, formerly 
provided only through the Andean Counterdrug Initiative, or ACI. I want 
to be very clear about one point. This

[[Page H3519]]

bill does not cut funding from the President's request for Colombia.

                              {time}  1330

  It simply reallocates the funds requested and appropriated to regular 
assistance accounts. It begins to treat Colombia as we treat other 
strategic partners.
  I think it should be clear to all of us by this time that Colombia 
has made significant progress in the war on drugs. They are now 
bringing guerilla forces in from the jungle, they are prosecuting those 
who are implicated in serious crimes, and they are reintegrating others 
back into society. Coca interdiction, although not eradication, but 
interdiction, continues to improve. I spoke with Speaker Hastert, who 
years ago fathered the legislation creating the ACI, about this 
reformulation of assistance. It has his support. The Colombian 
government also supports this move. It is time to recognize both 
successes of Colombia and its strategic importance to the region.
  Finally, this bill includes the President's full request for Israel 
and for Egypt, our two partners of longstanding in the Middle East. 
Report language from previous years is continued directing $50 million 
of Egypt Economic Support Fund assistance to be used for democracy and 
another $50 million for education. Other language, again the same as 
last year, would withhold expenditures until Egypt implements financial 
sector reforms. Importantly, this bill would also rescind $200 million 
from unexpended balances made available for Egypt in previous years.
  In closing, let me say, again, it has been a great pleasure to work 
with my distinguished colleague, ranking member on the minority side, 
Mrs. Lowey, who I have the greatest respect and affection for. It has 
been a pleasure to work with her and with her staff, with Beth Tritter 
and Nisha Desai. And I don't want to neglect mentioning the fine work 
of the majority staff, Betsy Phillips, Rob Blair, Craig Higgins, Delia 
Scott, and Lori Maes, and also Todd Calongne, a USAID fellow working on 
my personal staff. They are all competent, professional, and a joy to 
work with. The work that we have accomplished together, and I want to 
underscore the word ``together,'' has helped make America more secure. 
It has improved the lives of millions throughout the world.
  We have accomplished much over these last 6 years. My colleagues have 
often heard me say that foreign assistance is a vital component of 
United States economic and security interests, to say nothing of the 
humanitarian imperative. And while two significant initiatives were 
begun under my watch, the Emergency Plan For Aids Relief and the 
Millennium Challenge Corporation, the changes we have implemented in 6 
years of appropriations run even deeper. We have worked to direct our 
nonsecurity foreign assistance around three primary issues, which I 
believe are at the heart of global development: Health, trade, and 
governance. This bill continues that direction.
  In 2001, international HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis spending from these 
accounts was $535 million. Today, just 5 years later, we are at $3.4 
billion. With these steady increases, we have provided life-saving 
medicines to hundreds of thousands of people in the developing world, 
people who are still alive to take care of their children and be 
productive members of their economies, thanks to the antiretroviral 
drugs that we are now providing to them and other important therapies. 
As importantly, these are people who now live with hope, and I believe 
that people with hope are less likely to be attracted to crime and 
violence.
  The New Trade Capacity Enhancement fund will place trade where it 
belongs, at the center of our international development agenda. Without 
trade, sustained global development is simply not possible. This new 
account will provide further incentives for countries to enter 
constructive trade agreements with the United States and others. It 
will also help to ensure that the right programs and policies are in 
place to make sure the poor are not left behind as economies improve.
  Finally, the bill provides further support, as I mentioned, to the 
Millennium Challenge Corporation, which I see as our best hope for 
weaning countries from foreign assistance. The MCC provides another set 
of incentives to countries to make the correct policy decisions, 
policies which improve rule of law and economic policies, investments 
in the health and education of people.
  I am proud to have served in this institution, and I am especially 
proud of the work of this committee and this subcommittee. The package 
of foreign assistance before you is built on a solid basis of 
experience, funds programs that are more accountable and transparent, 
and, most importantly, helps to protect U.S. security at home and 
abroad. It is an example of the good that can be accomplished with a 
bipartisan effort, and I can think of no arena more important for a 
unified American voice than in foreign affairs.
  Mr. Chairman, fellow members, I am pleased to submit this bill and 
urge your favorable consideration.
  Mr. Chairman, I include the following for the Record.

[[Page H3520]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH08JN06.001



[[Page H3521]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH08JN06.002



[[Page H3522]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH08JN06.003



[[Page H3523]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH08JN06.004



[[Page H3524]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH08JN06.005



[[Page H3525]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH08JN06.006



[[Page H3526]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill, and I urge my 
colleagues to support it as well. Our 302(b) allocation, which was 
nearly $2.4 billion below the President's requested level, presented us 
with several challenges. Within this sharply reduced allocation, we 
were compelled to fit dramatic increases in presidential priorities 
such as the Millennium Challenge Account and the President's Emergency 
Plan For AIDS Relief, as well as increased funding for Afghanistan and 
Iraq.
  I generally agree with Chairman Kolbe on the spending levels 
recommended within the reduced allocation. We worked closely together 
as always to ensure that, in the face of devastating cuts, we at least 
level funded child survival and health and development assistance 
priorities. The bill provides the President's request of $3.4 billion 
for HIV/AIDS, increasing the overall amount for HIV/AIDS and TB by $751 
million over the fiscal year 2006 enacted levels, and more than 
doubling the President's request for the global fund to fight AIDS, TB, 
and malaria to the fiscal year 2006 enacted level of $444.5 million. 
Although I know we both wish we could have done more for the global 
fund, I believe we are doing the best we can with the resources we 
have.
  The bill maintains level funding for basic education in the 
development assistance account at last year's level of $365 million. 
And I am pleased that we have been able to increase non-DA funds for 
basic education in the bill for a total of $550 million. We also 
continue the U.S. reconstruction program in Afghanistan, fully fund the 
requested levels for Liberia, Haiti, and Sudan, and fully fund our 
strategic commitments in the Middle East. I am pleased that we have 
also restored deep cuts the President requested in family planning and 
reproductive health programs. The bill substantially increases family 
planning funding and the child survival and health account from the 
President's request, fully restores bill-wide bilateral funding to $432 
million, the fiscal year 2006 House-passed level, and earmarks $34 
million for the United Nations population fund.
  I am also pleased that the bill restores funding for several key U.N. 
agencies, including UNICEF; UNDP, UNIFEM, and the UNIFEM Trust Fund.
  I want to commend the chairman for his willingness to take a critical 
look at the Andean Counternarcotics Initiative, and specifically how 
the continuation of a special program aimed primarily at eradication of 
coca is consistent with the myriad U.S. foreign policy goals in the 
Andean region. I do believe that our overemphasis on the drug war has 
caused us to neglect many of the critical objectives throughout Latin 
America, and it is my hope that the changes made by the chairman in the 
allocation of funds in this bill are the first steps toward a wholesale 
reevaluation of our foreign aid program in the region.
  I want to point out a few specific concerns I have with the bill. Our 
shamefully low allocation required us to make cuts from the requests in 
several key areas, including Migration and Refugee Assistance, 
peacekeeping, programs for Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, 
key Economic Support Fund programs, and Congo debt relief. It is my 
hope we will be able to restore these cuts and even provide increases 
where warranted, in conference, in addition to providing funding for 
many of these priorities in the supplemental conference report expected 
on the House floor tomorrow.
  I also hope that we can restore full funding for the United States 
commitment to the Global Environmental Facility. The President's 
requested level granted in this bill is more than $20 million less than 
what we had pledged. In light of the GEF's adoption just this week of a 
number of U.S. initiated matters and reforms, I believe we have a 
particular responsibility to fully fund our commitment to this 
organization.
  I am disappointed that this bill places no conditionality whatsoever 
on U.S. military assistance to Indonesia and Guatemala. Despite 
constructive language on Indonesia included in the FY 06 bill, this 
bill fails to send the message that the United States does expect 
Indonesia to continue on the path of achieving true civilian control 
over the military and accountability for human rights abuses. Again, I 
hope this is something we can remedy in conference.
  Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Chairman 
Kolbe for his hard work this year and every year throughout his tenure 
in creating a bipartisan environment for examining our foreign aid 
policy priorities and addressing the funding needs of our foreign 
assistance program. The chairman has shown tremendous leadership in 
steering our subcommittee, setting an example of bipartisan cooperation 
and collaboration that, unfortunately, is too rare in Congress today, 
and, Chairman Kolbe leaves behind an impressive legacy as he prepares 
to retire.
  Chairman Kolbe has overseen the largest increases in the foreign aid 
budget post-Cold War, understanding implicitly the key role foreign aid 
plays in maintaining United States national security. Under his 
stewardship, funding in the bill to combat HIV-AIDS has increased from 
$485 million in FY 02 to $3.43 billion in the mark before us today. 
Basic education has increased more than five-fold. I know he is 
particularly proud of his work on trade capacity building, as well as 
on shaping and promoting the Millennium Challenge Account.
  Today, the last time Chairman Kolbe will manage the Foreign 
Operations bill during floor consideration, I do hope we can all take a 
moment to express our appreciation for the chairman's leadership and 
his friendship. This Congress and the American people are richer for 
his service to this body, and his departure will leave a void of 
intelligence, expertise, professionalism and decency that will not 
easily be filled.
  Chairman Kolbe, you are really a great Member and a great friend. I 
think I speak for many of my colleagues when I say that it has been an 
honor and a pleasure to work with you.
  I look forward to continuing to work with the chairman and with our 
Senate counterparts as the bill moves into conference. However, I think 
the bill before us today is a good product. I appreciate the chairman's 
leadership, the involvement of all of our subcommittee members and 
associate staff, of course, the hard work of our staff, as exemplified 
by Nisha Desai and Betsy Phillips celebrating their birthday here in 
this Capitol at about 1 or 2 in the morning. So we all say happy 
birthday. Happy birthday, Betsy.
  We thank Beth Tritter, Craig Higgens, Rob Blair, Delia Scott, Lori 
Maes, Kevin Hernandez and Todd Calongne for their hard work in crafting 
this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), the distinguished chairman of 
the Appropriations Committee.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased today to 
rise in support of H.R. 5522, the Foreign Operations appropriations 
bill for fiscal year 2007. This is the seventh of 11 bills the 
committee plans to bring to the House floor before the 4th of July 
break.
  I, too, want to take a moment to express my appreciation for the work 
of Mr. Kolbe, as well as Ms. Lowey. These two people working together 
are a demonstration of the way Congress ought to work. The two of them 
working together does demonstrate for all of us that the best way to 
get this done is to set aside partisan differences where it is 
possible, but, most importantly, to promote the thought that the place 
works a lot better by working together.
  I want to take a moment to give very special tribute to Jim Kolbe, as 
Ms. Lowey did. Jim is presenting his last bill. It is a very, very 
impressive product, most impressive because it demonstrates truly one 
of our fabulous Members working on behalf of all of us and the country. 
Jim Kolbe is as fine a member as the Appropriations Committee has ever 
had.
  The bill addresses critical issues, including the AIDS pandemic, 
global trade and commerce, anti-narcotics programs, and the Global War 
on Terrorism.

                             {time}   1345

  Specifically, this bill provides a total of $3.4 billion in global 
assistance funds

[[Page H3527]]

to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, $752 million above last 
year's level, and the same as the President's request.
  The bill provides $445 million for the U.S. contribution to the 
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. These accounts are 
more than double the amount that was requested by the President.
  The legislation also provides a record level of funding for the 
President's signature foreign assistance initiative, the Millennium 
Challenge Corporation. Total funding is $2 billion, $248 million above 
last year. That represents a budget increase in a very tight budget 
circumstance.
  Mr. Chairman, I think it is really important for us to recognize the 
role that this bill has played on the global war on terror. We would 
not have been as successful as we have been in that effort if it had 
not been for the work of this subcommittee.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the very 
distinguished member of the committee, Ms. Kilpatrick.
  Ms. KILPATRICK of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, to Chairman Kolbe and to my 
ranking member, Nita Lowey, who has shepherded this bill through the 
many years that I have been on the committee, through several chairmen 
and ranking members, I just want to say thank you very much for your 
leadership and for your cooperation, because it makes it easier for all 
of the subcommittee members when our Chair and ranking member work 
together. I want to thank you for that.
  To Chairman Kolbe, as you enter your next life, sir, I just want to 
say thank you for your leadership, your compassion and your working 
togetherness that you have demonstrated as I have worked with you over 
these last many years. We are going to miss you in this body. I am sure 
your next opportunities will also enhance this body. So congratulations 
and good luck to you.
  I stand in support of this bill. It is a bipartisan effort that we 
have worked together on for several months now. If we had more money, 
we could have done better. But we did the best with what we had.
  Mr. Chairman, I am happy that the HIV account is probably funded 
higher than it has been ever under Chairman Kolbe and Ranking Member 
Lowey's leadership and direction. HIV/AIDS is a pandemic in the world, 
and the U.S. is certainly doing our part. And I want to thank the 
administration as well as the Members of this Congress, both House and 
Senate, for standing by and making available treatment options so that 
people can have fuller, better lives.
  Our Child Survival Account, which is not at the level that I would 
like to see it, but continues to help with malaria and TB and other 
kinds of illnesses across this world. We thank you for that. The 
assistance that this bill gives Liberia, as well as the Sudan, we had 
the President from Liberia here not long ago, President Sirleaf, who 
has demonstrated a new wave in Liberia. I am happy that this bill will 
continue to assist them.
  The Darfur debacle that is currently under way in the Sudan, we have 
got to do more there. We have got to rise up as a Nation and offer the 
leadership of the United States to bring this decimation of millions of 
peoples and their lives and children to a rest.
  I do not want to really get into it here, but there will be much 
debate about Egypt. I want to talk about it just a moment. I was able 
to go to Egypt a couple of weeks ago with our Chair and ranking member; 
I have been in that region before.
  I come from the State of Michigan. Michigan has the largest amount of 
Arab Americans and Arabs in America in our part of the world through 
four of the Members of this Congress. Congressman Dingell, Conyers, 
Knollenberg and myself share that population of Arab Americans in our 
districts, have been living with them for decades, and they are a part 
of our family and our population in southeastern Michigan, where two-
thirds of the population of our State lives.
  Egypt, the leading country in that part of the Middle East, is a 
friend of America. President Mubarak is the best friend we have in the 
region. There will be much debate about Egypt as we go forward. I do 
not want to get into the specifics right now, but I do want to say 
thank you to the chairman, there is a rescission of $200 million in the 
budget that was not spent.
  So there is some attention paid to what is happening in Egypt. Egypt 
needs to be our partner, and they need to know that we support them. 
The rescission that the Chairman offered has now been ratified by the 
subcommittee and the full committee. It is a step to say that we are 
watching you, we are working with you.
  Democracy in our region of the world is not the same as it is all 
over the world. I believe President Mubarak and his administration are 
doing what they can to maintain the stability in the region. So I 
believe this is a good bill.
  And as we go throughout the day to debate the 20-plus amendments, pay 
particular interest to what is happening in the world. We are a leader. 
We deserve it. And we look forward to your support.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg).
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5522, 
the fiscal year 2007 Foreign Operations Appropriations Act.
  First, I want to extend my best wishes to Chairman Kolbe for all of 
the work that he has done. He has done some tremendous work, 
extraordinary work. I think he has been an invaluable resource for the 
foreign operations end of things. So I just want to say, in addition he 
has always been receptive, been very responsive to Members' input on a 
very, very difficult bill.
  Mr. Kolbe, I really appreciate having you around. I also want to wish 
you the very best in the future in whatever you decide to move into.
  I also want to commend the ranking member, Mrs. Lowey. Mr. Kolbe and 
Mrs. Lowey, I think, have been a great team for this particular 
committee. I convey my best. You are not leaving obviously, Mrs. Lowey, 
so can you stick around. But I convey the very best to her and the work 
that she has done.
  We found common ground on a variety of issues, and together I think 
we achieved some pretty important results. I look forward to continuing 
that in the future.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the subcommittee staff for the hard 
work that they have performed in addressing the many issues in this 
bill. It is a testament to them that the bill runs through the process 
so smoothly every year despite the number of demands and challenges 
that they face.
  Once again, Chairman Kolbe, his staff, Ranking Member Lowey have 
crafted an excellent bill that balances all of the many priorities the 
United States has around the world. Our foreign assistance fosters 
democratic and transparent governments, promotes human rights and helps 
millions of people in need.
  While less than 1 percent of our entire annual budget, foreign 
assistance serves as a main pillar of our foreign policy and is an 
integral part of our national security.
  As always, assistance to the Middle East is the central part of this 
bill. It provides the full amount that the President requested for 
Israel, including both economic and security assistance.
  It also provides $40 million for refugee resettlement in Israel. Just 
as importantly, it lays down the groundwork for this program in the 
future. It also provides no direct funding for the Hamas-infected 
Palestinian Authority.
  However, it does provide limited humanitarian assistance under strict 
guidelines and checks to ensure absolutely no funding reaches Hamas.
  Additional funding for Lebanon, Egypt and other Middle East countries 
is important to support reform efforts. It is particularly important to 
note the continued funding for the Middle East Partnership Initiative 
which further reforms the region.
  Mr. Chairman, I am also particularly pleased that the bill provides 
$62 million in economic assistance to Armenia. I look forward to 
working with Chairman Kolbe to ensure that the final bill includes 
adequate funding for Armenia. This funding is especially important 
since Turkey and Azerbaijan continue to obstruct transportation and 
infrastructure routes into and out of Armenia with the intention of 
forcing Armenia into economic isolation.

[[Page H3528]]

  The bill maintains parity in U.S. military assistance to Armenia and 
Azerbaijan, which is critical to the overall policy toward the South 
Caucasus.
  There is also no chance in section 907 language with respect to 
Azerbaijan. The bill includes other important funding, such as $2 
billion for the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which provides 
foreign assistance to specific countries if and only if they meet 
specific criteria. It also includes substantial funding to fight the 
scourge of HIV/AIDS.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a responsible bill. It is the result of 
significant oversight. It is fiscally sound and it focuses funding on 
the priorities that will advance our interests. For all of those 
reasons, I strongly support the bill. I urge all of my colleagues to 
join in supporting this bill on the floor today.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. McCarthy) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I want to talk for a moment about a 
radio station in Iraq called Radio Al Mahaba, which is giving Iraqi 
women a taste of freedom of speech. It is the first and only station 
for women in the entire Middle East and the only politically and 
religious independent radio station in Iraq.
  This station started in April 2005 using a $350,000 grant from the 
United Nations Development Fund for Women. As we know, under Saddam 
Hussein, women lost not only vast employment opportunities, but also 
educational opportunities. The illiteracy rate of Iraqi women rose to a 
high of 75 percent, according to UNICEF estimates.
  The recent changes in the social and political structure of Iraq have 
also been difficult on Iraqi women. The radio station was created in 
order to empower and educate women. When they started, they were 
broadcasting throughout Iraq, including in isolated areas discussing 
issues important to women, and also discussing the goals of freedom and 
democracy.
  Unfortunately, insurgent attacks knocked out their main transmitter. 
In spite of that and a shoestring budget, the people who worked at the 
station continued on broadcasting in Baghdad. Last week their remaining 
transmitter, which was rented, failed.
  However, with the help of the Iraqi Civil Society Program implemented 
by America's Development Foundation and funded by the U.S. Agency For 
International Development, it looks as though they may be able to rent 
another transmitter and get back on the air soon.
  Of course, a more permanent solution is needed. They need a 
transmitter so they can again broadcast throughout Iraq and have a goal 
of reaching places like Iran. Iraqi women are fortunate to have this 
radio station, and it plays an important role toward achieving a free 
and democratic Iraq.
  Mrs. LOWEY. I thank the gentlewoman for her interest in the issue, 
and I understand that Radio Al Mahaba has given Iraqi women the 
opportunity to exercise freedom of expression during a very confusing 
and dangerous time in their country.
  I will look forward to working with my colleague from New York to 
support the continued operation of this vital resource. And I thank the 
gentlewoman for bringing it to our attention.
  Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for her 
willingness to engage us in a colloquy.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire about the remaining time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona has 11 minutes remaining. 
The gentlewoman from New York has 16\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend for 
yielding me time and thank him for the job he has done on this very 
important legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, this morning I had the privilege of joining First Lady 
Laura Bush, Ambassador Tobias, Dr. Kent Hill at an event announcing 
Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, and Senegal as the newest countries to be 
added to the President's Malaria Initiative, $1.2 billion over its 5-
year program. Mrs. Bush also announced Admiral R. Timothy Ziemer as the 
new U.S. Malaria Coordinator.
  I think Members should be aware if they are not already that every 30 
seconds an African child dies of malaria moreover about 1.2 million 
people die each year, mostly in Africa, from this preventable disease.
  The President's Malaria Initiatives (PMI) goal is to cut malaria 
deaths by 50 percent in 15 African countries and hopefully to also 
mitigate morbidity. The plan includes disseminating insecticide-treated 
bed nets, indoor residual spraying, life-saving drugs called ACTs, and 
treatment for pregnant women known as intermittent preventive treatment 
or IPT.
  The money in this bill will advance this initiative and will now 
include four new countries. Let me also thank the chairman and the 
committee for modestly upping the amount of money to try to effectuate 
cures for those women suffering obstetric fistula.
  The amount has now risen to $7.5 million. My hope is, and perhaps in 
conference, we can bump that up even further to $10 million. Two 
million women suffer from this debilitating condition, the result of 
which is incontinence. I have visited hospitals in Africa, and seen 
that for a mere $150 a woman's life can be given back to her through a 
surgical repair.
  Obviously, there is also prevention, but there are these 2 million 
women who have a fistula today, and it seems to me we need to do even 
more to try to end their misery.

                              {time}  1400

  Having met with many of these women, to see the smiles on their 
faces, having gotten their lives back, going back to their villages 
knowing that they will no longer be ostracized because incontinence 
obviously is not just a health hazard and leads to sickness, it results 
in very serious odor as well.
  Let me remind my colleagues that anywhere from 50,000 to 100,000 new 
cases occur every year, and certainly if we were to increase our effort 
on obstetrical services, especially midwives in Africa, such an effort 
would go a long way to preventing this condition when an obstructed 
delivery or some kind of sexual trauma causes obstetric fistula.
  I would hope the chairman would try to increase that number even 
further, and I thank him for what he has done.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. KOLBE. The gentleman has identified a problem that we think is 
absolutely of critical importance. We have moved from, I believe, no 
money just in 2003 to 1 million to 5 million to $7 million in this 
year, so I think we are moving very substantially in this area.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I just want to respond to the gentleman from New Jersey. I appreciate 
your advocacy on this very critical issue. Many of us in the Congress 
on both sides of the aisle understand the urgency, and I do hope we can 
work together on the next step because these young women come there 
with this terrible, terrible problem and then they are repaired. And 
without contraceptive coverage, without family planning, they come back 
again and again and again. So I look forward to continuing the dialogue 
and I thank you for your advocacy.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Ackerman).
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to engage 
in a colloquy with Ranking Member Lowey and Chairman Kolbe.
  The report accompanying H.R. 5522, the Foreign Options Appropriations 
Act, includes language encouraging the consideration of a proposal from 
the Gift of Life International for Project Iraqi Hearts, a program that 
will provide life-saving open heart surgery to Iraqi children that they 
cannot get at home.
  I have been an advocate of the Gift of Life Program since 1983 when I 
worked with then-First Lady Nancy Reagan, to arrange for a young boy 
and girl from South Korea to come to the United States by way of Air 
Force One for a life saving open heart surgery.
  Supported by 50 Rotary Districts every year, the Gift of Life 
International transports to the United States and surgically operates 
on over

[[Page H3529]]

a thousand children from all over the developing world. Through the 
efforts of our military personnel serving in Iraq, the Gift of Life has 
now identified at least 1,500 children that have been diagnosed as 
suffering from congenital heart defects that will be fatal if left 
untreated.
  The Gift of Life has a terrific track record on our Nation's 
reputation in Iraq. It could certainly use a little boost from a 
program like this. While specific funds have not been set aside in the 
text of the bill, I would like the chairman and ranking member of the 
subcommittee to confirm their interest in the program and to reiterate 
their support through consideration of this initiative by the 
Department of State and USAID.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ACKERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. KOLBE. The report accompanying H.R. 5522 does indicate the 
committee's awareness of the Gift of Life International's Project Iraqi 
Hearts. It is an initiative that should be thoroughly explored. The 
ranking minority member and I are both committed to working with the 
gentleman from New York to ensure that this proposal gets careful 
consideration from the Department of State and USAID. Specific funds 
have not been set aside, but if review by State and AID show the 
program can deliver results that save lives, it would have the 
committees's strong support.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ACKERMAN. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I certainly agree that this program should 
be thoroughly considered by the Department of State and USAID. It can 
save lives that would otherwise be lost, and advance our national 
interest by demonstrating the compassion of the American people. It 
deserves a chance to go forward. I look forward to working with the 
Chair and the gentleman from New York to ensure that Project Iraqi 
Hearts gets the attention and consideration it deserves.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the Chair and ranking member for 
their commitment to this initiative and I look forward to working with 
them to see if we can save some Iraqi children's lives through the Gift 
of Life Program.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Sherwood), the distinguished vice chairman of the 
subcommittee, a very important Member who has contributed much to the 
work of this subcommittee.
  Mr. SHERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the 
foreign operations bill for 2007. The legislation before us is a fair 
and fiscally responsible bill that sensibly promotes U.S. foreign 
policy.
  I would like to commend Chairman Kolbe on a job well done. He is an 
effective leader with a strong work ethic, a balanced approach and a 
remarkable knowledge and command of the subject matter. I have learned 
a great deal from you, Mr. Chairman, as a member of your subcommittee. 
As you leave Congress, I wish you the kind of success and respect that 
you have earned here in the House of Representatives.
  This foreign operations bill is a solid bipartisan piece of 
legislation that helps our government meet our objectives abroad and in 
turn make America more secure. The bill is $2.4 billion below the 
President's request, but in light of the many domestic needs here in 
the U.S., I agree with the chairman that the allocation is fair. Tough 
choices had to be made to fund our international priorities, and I 
believe he has made the right choices in setting these priorities.
  The bill provides reasonable increases in assistance to our allies in 
the war on terror, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and 
international health objectives that fight the spread of diseases such 
as AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis. It provides funds for Afghanistan, 
including nearly $300 million for illegal drug interdiction and law 
enforcement. The increase in poppy production in Afghanistan is of 
particular concern to the subcommittee, and these funds are crucial in 
curbing this very real drug problem.
  The bill also includes assistance for Iraq. I know it is a priority 
of the chairman to fund Iraq and Afghanistan assistance programs in 
regular appropriations bills and less in supplementals. We are one step 
closer to doing that in this bill. This bill before us is an important 
measure that successfully fulfills our commitments abroad and as a 
result makes America stronger and more secure. I ask for its full 
support.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Rothman).
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank my ranking member and my friend 
from the State of New York for yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, 
I want to thank our distinguished chairman, Mr. Kolbe from Arizona. It 
has been a great honor and privilege to work with you, sir, all of 
these years. We are going to miss you, your wisdom and your kindness 
and your sense of fairness. Thank you, sir, for all you have done for 
us and for our work. And to Ms. Lowey, our ranking member, thank you 
for your leadership as the ranking member for bringing our priorities 
to the floor and our values. You are a tireless and effective advocate.
  Mr. Chairman, despite an allocation from the Budget Committee that 
was lower than what we had hoped, we I believe on our subcommittee have 
accomplished a great deal and in a bipartisan way, such as providing 
funds for critical programs such as global AIDS and HIV programs, basic 
education worldwide, and economic and military assistance for many of 
our allies.
  This assistance to our allies is important for three reasons: One, it 
improves strategic relations with important countries around the world 
who help guarantee America's security and the perpetuation of democracy 
and western values, countries such as the State of Israel, Armenia and 
Cyprus. It also provides humanitarian assistance for nations in need 
such as in the Sudan, Liberia and Haiti. It keeps our trade relations 
strong, promoting cooperation between nations that help us solve global 
problems and feed the world.
  With regards to the environment, Mr. Chairman, I am concerned that 
the United States may not be doing enough under this bill to contribute 
to the international programs that protect the environment. The Global 
Environment Facility, or the GEF, is the single largest source of 
funding for programs that conserve and protect biodiversity and 
preserve habitats in countries around the world, from Bangladesh to 
Brazil.
  In the roughly 15 years since its creation, the U.S.'s funding to the 
GEF has leveraged at least $14 for every $1 we have contributed, $14 
for every $1 we have contributed. International conservation issues, 
Mr. Chairman, know no national boundaries; and I think the funding 
model of the GEF where our funding is matched many times over by other 
donors to solve problems that impact us all, is a smart, fair, and 
effective approach. Given the importance of the GEF to the global 
environment, I am concerned about the level of funding for the GEF in 
this fiscal year 2007 bill.
  The administration requested $56.25 for the GEF in this year's 
budget, which the committee funded at the request level. But this is a 
48 percent cut compared with the administration's own request last 
year. In the meantime, as our distinguished chairman knows, just this 
past Tuesday, the GEF adopted all of the reforms proposed by the 
Treasury Department associated with the fourth replacement of the GEF.
  The U.S. negotiators have now committed our country to providing $80 
million to the GEF in fiscal year 2007. An increase of $23.75 million 
over the President's budget. I certainly hope that in the conference, 
our distinguished chairman, our ranking member and the other people 
participating in the conference, will work to have this full $80 
million committed by the Treasury in the conference report. This is 
vitally important to our Nation's and our world's environment.
  I look forward to working with the chairman and the ranking member on 
this issue as we move forward towards the conference.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt), a member of the committee.

[[Page H3530]]

  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Arizona 
yielding to me for the purpose of a colloquy. I would also like to 
thank him for his service to the country. In his 22 years in the 
Congress, he has been a great subcommittee chairman and we appreciate 
his leadership.
  Mr. Chairman, I also want to thank him for his foresight and 
inclusion for the Tiahrt amendment violation report language. I also 
appreciate his hard work as chairman of the subcommittee on this bill, 
which I support. As the author of this important amendment, which has 
been in law since 1998, I have grave concerns about the violations that 
took place in Guatemala, the confirmed fact that the violations went on 
for 3 years, and the amount of time it took USAID to notify Congress of 
the violations.
  The purpose of this report language is to send a strong message to 
USAID that the law has been ignored and that Congress will not stand by 
and watch. We must be able to provide proper oversight. In order to do 
that the agencies that receive taxpayer dollars under the child 
survival and health programs fund, must adhere to the specifications of 
the law.
  USAID has confirmed that bonus payments were paid to 12 referral 
agents at APROFAM, the Family Welfare Association of Guatemala, which 
is an international Planned Parenthood federation affiliate. Each agent 
had a target of bringing in 25 women for sterilization. The bonus 
payments were paid to the agents when certain quotas were met, and for 
some their salaries were almost doubled as a result. This violates two 
parts of the language of the law.
  USAID found out about the violations and the bonus was stopped. 
However, the length of time concerns me. It took them 9 months to get 
the information from Guatemala to USAID to Washington, then another 60 
days to get it to Congress.
  We ought to be horrified that no less than 900 women that were 
sterilized by APROFAM over the span of 3 years, the bonus payment 
system was in place.
  Mr. Chairman, I have heard of other possible amendment violations to 
the Tiahrt amendment in other countries, and I implore USAID to act 
quickly to investigate these in a proper and timely manner and to 
report to Congress.
  I want to thank again the chairman for engaging in this colloquy and 
for his service to the committee and to the country.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague from Kansas for 
his discussion on this very important subject, and certainly as the 
subcommittee was crafting this bill, we acknowledge how important these 
issues are.

                              {time}  1415

  I want to assure the gentleman that the committee will continue to 
pay close attention to the reports from USAID of possible and confirmed 
violations of this amendment. We also will work with the USAID to 
ensure the timely reporting of violations if, and when, they occur.
  I thank the gentleman.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank our ranking member, Mrs. 
Lowey. I want to commend her and Chairman Kolbe for their hard work and 
leadership on this bill, and I am particularly pleased that the 
subcommittee called for a higher allocation to Armenia than requested 
by the administration and would like to personally thank him for 
maintaining and providing the needed assistance to Nagorno-Karabahk.
  The President's budget request called for 20 percent more military 
aid to Azerbaijan than to Armenia. That request was a clear breach of 
an agreement struck between the White House and Congress in 2001 to 
maintain parity in U.S. military aid to Armenia and Azerbaijan. Given 
the fact that relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan continue to be 
tenuous, it is imperative that the U.S. maintain a balanced approach. I 
am happy to see that the committee maintained that parity agreement 
despite the administration's request.
  Unfortunately, the administration's budget also called for drastic 
cuts in economic assistance to Armenia, a nearly 33 percent decrease in 
humanitarian aid. Again, I was pleased to see the committee provided 
$62 million in U.S. aid for Armenia, representing a $12 million 
increase over the President's budget. The subcommittee also allocated 
$5 million for Nagorno-Karabahk.
  I am also very pleased that the subcommittee rejected efforts by 
Azerbaijani's advocates to weaken section 907 restrictions on U.S. 
assistance to Azerbaijan. Section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act 
remains a fundamental element of U.S. policy toward the South Caucasus. 
Because Azerbaijan continues its blockade of Armenia, section 907 is 
essential.
  As the co-chair of the Armenian Caucus, I strongly believe that 
technical and developmental assistance and investment is essential to 
Armenia. This funding is imperative to democratic stability and 
economic reform. The dual blockades of Armenia by Azerbaijan and Turkey 
continue to impede Armenia's economic well-being.
  Despite these blockades, Armenia continues to successfully implement 
economic and democratic reforms. However, as long as Armenia suffers 
from blockades on its east and west borders, continued and robust U.S. 
assistance to Armenia will be needed to help minimize their impact.
  Thank you again to the committee and the subcommittee.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), a member of the House 
International Relations Committee for the purposes of a colloquy.
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to engage the chairman of the 
subcommittee, Mr. Kolbe, in a colloquy.
  Mr. Chairman, as you know, on Tuesday the administration successfully 
concluded negotiations for the fourth replenishment of the Global 
Environment Facility, the GEF. These have been long and detailed 
negotiations that had been scheduled to be concluded last year. The GEF 
is an important international institution for protection of the global 
environment, and we should be pleased that negotiations have come, 
frankly, to a very successful resolution.
  The Treasury Department, which conducted the negotiations on behalf 
of the United States, got, in essence, all of the reforms it demanded. 
These include the items mentioned on the report language accompanying 
the bill, including the two major changes proposed by the U.S.: first, 
plans to apply a resource allocation framework to the entire GEF 
portfolio of new projects by 2010; second, enhanced fiduciary standards 
for agents that the GEF works with, including a prohibition of new 
funding to agencies that do not meet the standards.
  The agreement also resolved the other outstanding issues to our 
satisfaction: removal of language regarding arrears that were 
objectionable to the United States; a provision regarding expanding the 
number of agencies the GEF works with; a provision on institutional 
effectiveness; and a firm target for satisfactory outcome ratings for 
GEF projects.
  Based on this outcome, the United States negotiators pledged a total 
of $320 million in U.S. contributions to the GEF over the next 4 years, 
$80 million a year, starting in fiscal year 2007.
  I support the administration's new commitment to the GEF, and I urge 
the chairman to help the administration live up to this promise that 
has been made to the other donors to provide $80 million for the GEF in 
the bill that is ultimately sent to the President. The bill before us 
underfunds this commitment by $23.75 million and, as it stands, 
represents a 26 percent decrease in U.S. commitment to the GEF.
  Mr. Chairman, we engaged, you and I, in a colloquy last year on the 
GEF, and you committed to work to secure funding at conference for the 
GEF if it completed reforms associated with the previous replenishment. 
The GEF did complete those reforms, and I want to thank you right now 
for your support last year.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROYCE. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona for a response.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from California for 
the statement you have just made and

[[Page H3531]]

your commitment to the international environment.
  As you pointed out, I have in the past supported the mission of the 
GEF. I had the opportunity to sit down with the CEO of the GEF, Mr. 
Good, to engage in some very good discussions about their reforms and 
also on their programs in the past.
  I have in the past been concerned about the pace of reform at the 
GEF. Last year, the House withheld funding for the GEF because it had 
not completed reforms associated with the third replenishment when our 
bill came to the floor. There were subsequent agreements that allowed 
us, in the end, to fund the GEF fully last year.
  It is my understanding the GEF has now adopted the reforms sought by 
the committee and the administration for the fourth replenishment. We 
will certainly take this into consideration when we meet with the 
Senate in conference on this bill. In order to facilitate this, I urge 
the administration to consider a budget amendment requesting additional 
funds should they decide that is appropriate.
  I thank the gentleman again for his commitment to GEF and the 
environment and will work with him as the bill moves through the 
process.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, since the time has expired, I will just say 
that I will be happy to work with him, too.
  Mr. Chairman, I am very happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Crowley), my good friend.
  Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman, and my friend and 
mentor, from New York for yielding me this time; and I want to thank 
her and Chairman Kolbe, another good friend, on another good bill 
coming out of this committee and proving once again, when it comes to 
the issue of foreign aid, we can work in a very bipartisan way.
  This bill is of particular importance because it is the last for 
Chairman Kolbe, and I would like to commend Chairman Kolbe for his 
steadfast support of foreign aid and for what I believe will become 
your greatest legacy, the creation of a Trade Capacity Enhancement 
Fund. Time does not allow me to go into it in further detail, but I 
want to thank you for that.
  This bill also includes $34 million to the United Nations Population 
Fund, but it has become a norm under this administration that 
restrictions on providing this important funding will not be released 
by the administration. The administration seems determined to hinder 
the health of women and children around the world.
  While remaining troubled that this detrimental policy continues, 
there is much good in this bill, particularly when it comes to the 
issue of the Middle East.
  I strongly support the funding included in this bill for Israel's 
foreign military financing and economic aid. We need to continue to 
ensure that our close allies are able to protect themselves and remain 
a strong and viable state.
  While I support our ally Egypt, there are issues that we in Congress 
must address. I understand that the Egyptians are concerned about how 
we disburse the aid to them, but it is important for them to understand 
what we expect of our partner.
  The government of President Mubarak has shown that it is quite quick 
to throw dissidents into jail, discriminate against the Coptic 
minority, tolerate anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism in the official 
press, throw gay Egyptians into jail.
  The United States must do more to help end this dangerous mix, and 
before the problem becomes more unstable.
  There is more I would like to say about the issue of Egypt that time 
does not permit, but also the country of Pakistan, another country I 
have been concerned about for quite some time; and I am glad the 
Appropriations Committee recognized the internal problems within 
Pakistan. The reductions in ESF and FMF should send a strong message to 
Pakistan that it cannot use the war on terror as an excuse to repress 
their people.
  With that, I urge my colleagues to support this worthy legislation.
  Many of us in Congress have strong concerns about our partners in the 
developing world's capacity to handle free trade agreements with the 
United States and this new fund will help to solve many of those 
issues.
  This new fund will provide the much needed assistance to our FTA 
partners who need increased assistance with labor and environmental 
standards.
  My hope is that this new fund will create the environment where we 
will not have to repeat the divisive CAFTA battle.
  We should all be doing what we can to support free trade to benefit 
these emerging democracies.
  We must recognize that building stable societies must start at the 
grassroots level and that is why I was pleased to see that this new 
section of the program will receive $6 million.
  We need to redouble our efforts to make sure while we move peace 
along at the top levels we don't forget to focus on the people who will 
truly make a lasting peace.
  Egypt has been a strong friend and ally and has done much to help 
bring about a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but 
we cannot allow that to cloud our judgment.
  Egypt should expect more from themselves, if they want to compete in 
today's world and move forward with the reforms they have outlined.
  Pakistan is another country I have been concerned about for quite 
some time and I am glad the appropriations committee recognized the 
internal problems with Pakistan.
  The reductions in ESF and FMF should send a strong message to 
Pakistan that they cannot use the war on terror as an excuse to repress 
their people.
  This is a strong bill that will help our friends and allies and I 
urge all of my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) who has been one of the 
strongest advocates for clean water in the world, and we thank you for 
your important work.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy 
in permitting me to speak and for her kind words and for the work that 
she and Mr. Kolbe have done in this important bill, fashioning, I 
think, something that is very, very good, given the minimum amount of 
money they have been given.
  Across the world, this bill will enable the United States to 
cooperate with other donors, to partner with people in extreme poverty 
to improve their lives and well-being; but, Mr. Chairman, I am hopeful 
that we can do a little modification to make this difficult bill a 
little better.
  During consideration here, I will be offering an amendment with the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach) to increase the Development Assistance 
Account by $250 million in order to support these smart investments to 
reduce poverty of the 1 billion people around the world who live on 
less than $1 a day, the children who will die every 15 seconds because 
they do not have access to clean water and sanitation.
  The proposed increase would be offset by a reduction in equal amount 
from unearmarked funds in the Foreign Military Financing Account. This 
will not affect the almost $4 billion that is set aside for Israel, for 
Egypt, Jordan, or Colombia.
  Mr. Chairman, the American people overwhelmingly support these 
investments to fight against global poverty. Recently, the Program on 
International Assistance Policy Attitudes found that 65 percent of the 
American public would support significant increases in U.S. assistance 
to fight poverty and disease.
  This amendment will represent an all-too-rare occasion in this 
Chamber for bipartisan cooperation to shift money away from what are 
largely repressive regimes for unnecessary military assistance and put 
it where it will make a difference, saving the lives of poor families 
and especially their children around the world.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding, and 
today I rise in strong support of the 2007 foreign operations 
appropriations bill.
  I want to acknowledge the fine work done by the chairman, Mr. Kolbe, 
who I had the honor to travel to Indonesia with as part of the House 
Democracy Assistance Commission and also the superb work done each and 
every day by our ranking member, Nita Lowey. We are very grateful for 
your fine work.
  There is a lot to applaud in this bill, and I want to recognize a 
couple of

[[Page H3532]]

areas worthy of specific mention, funding in Darfur and funding for the 
state of Israel among others; but before I do, I want to express my 
regret and concern about the fact that this bill is still $2.38 billion 
below the President's request. That significant cut in foreign 
assistance, given all the problems around the world, should be concern 
to all of us. Some of the areas of particular significance that have 
been cut: refugee assistance is being reduced; debt relief is being 
cut; peacekeeping is being reduced. The Peace Corps funding is being 
reduced. Funding for democratization efforts in Eastern Europe and the 
former Soviet Union countries is being reduced. Global environmental 
facility funding and economic support funds, all those are being 
reduced from the President's proposed budget at a cumulative cost in 
cuts in those areas and others of $2.3 billion; and that is, I think, a 
considerable concern.
  In other areas, I want to acknowledge and applaud the work that we 
are doing in Darfur and the Sudan. More needs to be done. At least 
300,000 people are estimated to have died in Darfur in what has 
remained a largely neglected tragedy and genocide. Currently, more than 
3.5 million Darfurians depend on international aid for survival. 
Another 2 million have been driven from their homes. The $450 million 
in humanitarian relief efforts to the Sudan provided in this bill will 
help meet this rapidly growing need and lend credibility to American 
calls for other countries to follow our example.
  I also applaud the legislation for the groundwork it does for vital 
improvements in global health and AIDS funding which also are very 
significant.
  Again, I congratulate our Chair and our ranking member for their 
superb efforts.

                              {time}  1430

  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield to the 
distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) 1 minute.
  Mr. KIND. Will the chairman be kind enough to yield me his 30 
seconds?
  Mr. KOLBE. If I am correct, I think I have 30 seconds remaining, and 
I will yield the balance of my time to the gentleman.
  Mr. KIND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I rise to enter into a 
colloquy with the chairman.
  I rise to express appreciation for the very clear direction provided 
in the committee's report to the Agency for International Development 
with regard to the continuation of the East Central European 
Scholarship program in Albania and Macedonia. Over the last several 
years, I have become very familiar with this highly effective program 
because for more than a decade, the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, 
through this program, has been able to provide training to some 300 
financial managers from all the participating program countries.
  The program has provided the managers training with bank risk 
management, financial management, and supervision of financial 
institutions, all of which are critically important to stable market 
economies. This training has helped create financial sectors with 
improved protections against corrupt and fraudulent activities and has 
facilitated integration by these economies with the broader European 
economy.
  As the chairman may be aware, however, USAID has not been responsive 
to the committee's views with regard to the program, as laid out in 
recent earlier reports. With that in mind, I would appreciate getting 
the chairman's assurance that the subcommittee will follow up on this 
excellent report language to impress upon the agency the seriousness of 
our congressional intent here.
  Mr. KOLBE. I appreciate the gentleman from Wisconsin's comments and 
strong support for ECESP. We will have those discussions with USAID to 
emphasize the importance of continuing ECESP activities in Albania and 
Macedonia this fiscal year to shape future utilization of ECESP's 
expertise.
  Mr. KIND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that; and I, too, 
want to echo the sentiments and the appreciation for the gentleman's 
many years of fine service to this body, this institution.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord 
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment that he has 
printed in the designated place in the Congressional Record. Those 
amendments will be considered read.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I have made this point several times before during the 
appropriations cycle, and I want to put Members on notice one more 
time. I think the record is pretty clear that the minority has 
cooperated at every step of the way on every appropriation bill before 
this House so far this year. We have facilitated time agreements, we 
have persuaded our own Members to stifle themselves and reduce the 
amount of time they take on amendments, we have asked numerous people 
not to introduce duplicative amendments, and we have, in general, 
worked as a willing partner with the majority to see to it that this 
House proceeds in an orderly fashion.
  I have had only one requirement. I do not believe that major issues 
affecting the expenditure of taxpayers' dollars should be decided in 
the dead of night, and I do not believe that this House has any 
business voting on these major issues at 11, 12, or 1 o'clock in the 
morning. It is clear to me that that is what is going to happen on this 
bill.
  I intend to support this bill, unless two amendments that are pending 
do not pass. But if that happens, I intend to support this bill. But I 
do not believe that it serves the interests of this country to be 
passing this legislation or dealing with major amendments thereto in 
the midnight hours.
  So I want to put every Member on notice. I am perfectly willing to 
agree to a unanimous consent agreement that enables us to get a 
substantial way through the consideration of this bill. I would love to 
see it finished tonight. If it can, by a reasonable hour, no one will 
be happier than I. But I do not intend to cooperate in a process which 
pushes all of these votes into 11, 12 or 1 o'clock votes.
  We saw that on prescription drugs, we saw that on major tax bills, we 
have seen that on several appropriation bills last year, and I do not 
intend to allow that to continue without doing everything I can to 
prevent it. We can either proceed in an orderly fashion, in a way which 
is reflective positively on what is supposed to be the world's greatest 
deliberative body, or we can run a death march where we hide most of 
our major actions after midnight.
  I don't intend to participate in the latter. I will be happier to 
cooperate in the former.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 5522

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes, namely:

               TITLE I--EXPORT AND INVESTMENT ASSISTANCE

                EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES

                           Inspector General

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, $988,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2008.

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I won't take that much time, but let me just respond to 
the gentleman from Wisconsin and let me just say that he has been very 
cooperative, and I appreciate very much his cooperation in trying to 
work out some time limitations so that we could work our way through 
this bill in an orderly fashion, and hopefully in a timely fashion, and 
get everybody home at a reasonable hour.
  With the number of amendments that we have, it does not appear that 
we can get any kind of a unanimous consent agreement that would allow 
us to finish the bill by the time that the gentleman has said that he 
would prefer us to be out and not considering major issues of 
appropriations of taxpayers' dollars after the hour of 10 o'clock at 
night.
  So it is beyond my pay grade at this point to decide how we proceed, 
whether or not we do agree to a unanimous

[[Page H3533]]

consent agreement to have some limitation on the time of amendments and 
stop at a reasonable time tonight, or whether we simply plunge on 
through without any kind of agreement and get as far as we can tonight, 
which will certainly be much shorter, but we will not get nearly as far 
or nearly as fast.
  So I am hoping the leadership, that is not on this floor at this 
time, will shortly be able to come back to us with some understanding 
of how we are going to proceed, and I hope we can just move on and do 
the reading, and we will get to amendments as we can here.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            Program Account

       The Export-Import Bank of the United States is authorized 
     to make such expenditures within the limits of funds and 
     borrowing authority available to such corporation, and in 
     accordance with law, and to make such contracts and 
     commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations, as 
     provided by section 104 of the Government Corporation Control 
     Act, as may be necessary in carrying out the program for the 
     current fiscal year for such corporation: Provided, That none 
     of the funds available during the current fiscal year may be 
     used to make expenditures, contracts, or commitments for the 
     export of nuclear equipment, fuel, or technology to any 
     country, other than a nuclear-weapon state as defined in 
     Article IX of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear 
     Weapons eligible to receive economic or military assistance 
     under this Act, that has detonated a nuclear explosive after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding section 1(c) of Public Law 103-428, as 
     amended, sections 1(a) and (b) of Public Law 103-428 shall 
     remain in effect through October 1, 2007.

                         Subsidy Appropriation

       For the cost of direct loans, loan guarantees, insurance, 
     and tied-aid grants as authorized by section 10 of the 
     Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, as amended, $26,382,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2010: Provided, That 
     such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall 
     be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act 
     of 1974: Provided further, That such sums shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2025, for the disbursement of 
     direct loans, loan guarantees, insurance and tied-aid grants 
     obligated in fiscal years 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated by this 
     Act or any prior Act appropriating funds for foreign 
     operations, export financing, and related programs for tied-
     aid credits or grants may be used for any other purpose 
     except through the regular notification procedures of the 
     Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That funds 
     appropriated by this paragraph are made available 
     notwithstanding section 2(b)(2) of the Export-Import Bank Act 
     of 1945, in connection with the purchase or lease of any 
     product by any Eastern European country, any Baltic State or 
     any agency or national thereof.

                        Administrative Expenses

       For administrative expenses to carry out the direct and 
     guaranteed loan and insurance programs, including hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles and services as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109, and not to exceed $30,000 for official reception 
     and representation expenses for members of the Board of 
     Directors, $75,234,000: Provided, That the Export-Import Bank 
     may accept, and use, payment or services provided by 
     transaction participants for legal, financial, or technical 
     services in connection with any transaction for which an 
     application for a loan, guarantee or insurance commitment has 
     been made: Provided further, That, notwithstanding subsection 
     (b) of section 117 of the Export Enhancement Act of 1992, 
     subsection (a) thereof shall remain in effect until October 
     1, 2007.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Lynch

  Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Lynch:
  Page 4, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert the following: 
``(reduced by $5,000,000)''.
  Page 38, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert the following: 
``(increased by $5,000,000)''.

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to accept the amendment being 
offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts, if the gentleman would be 
prepared to proceed in that way.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 5 
minutes on his amendment.
  Mr. LYNCH. First of all, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Kolbe for 
his great work on this bill, and also Ranking Member Lowey. I will not 
take the 5 minutes that I am allowed under the amendment process, but I 
do want to take a few minutes just to talk about what is going on here.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment that I have offered proposes to confront 
the related threats posed by improvised explosive devices, also known 
as IEDs, as well as land mines, which are being used against our men 
and women in uniform and against innocent civilians in both Afghanistan 
and Iraq.
  My amendment seeks to accomplish this by dedicating $5 million for 
the State Department account for nonproliferation, anti-terrorism, 
demining, and related programs. This $5 million will be offset by 
shifting the same amount from the Export-Import Bank's administrative 
expense account, which is currently funded at $72 million.
  Mr. Chairman, like a lot of Members on both sides of the aisle, I 
have recently returned from my fifth visit to our troops in Iraq and I 
have also spent some time in Afghanistan. On all of my visits to the 
region, I have been accompanied by strong representation from both 
parties, and one issue that has emerged and has grown more lethal is 
the threat to our men and women in the military, to nongovernmental 
agencies, to coalition contractors, to the press, and to innocent 
Afghani and Iraqi citizens is the threat posed by these so-called 
improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.
  While some IEDs are triggered remotely with basic electronics, such 
as portable phone stations or garage door openers, in many other cases, 
we are finding that these IEDs are being triggered by a simple contact 
strip concealed within a narrow section of split holes that is 
concealed in cracks in the roadway or have been covered by a thin layer 
of dirt just below the surface of local roads. They can be detonated by 
pressure of a passing vehicle or with as little pressure as a child's 
footstep. These latter types of devices are much more similar in their 
nature and use to land mines.
  Moreover, as time goes on and as the casualties grow, we are finding 
that many of the land mines previously planted by Saddam Hussein and 
the Taliban in Afghanistan have been recovered by the insurgents and 
are now being retrofitted to serve as components in these more lethal 
IEDs.
  Like most of my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, I have made 
more than a few visits to Walter Reed Army Medical Hospital. We have 
all seen the devastation and the damage and suffering that these IEDs 
have brought to the very best Americans and their families. In my last 
visit with General Casey in Baghdad, he estimated that approximately 50 
percent of our monthly casualties in Iraq are the result of these IEDs. 
So the importance of what we are doing here, reducing these threats, 
should be obvious to everyone.
  In closing, with today's news that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been 
eliminated and the last of the new Iraqi ministers has been selected, 
it is my greatest hope that we have now reached a point at which we can 
begin to transfer governing authority and responsibility to the new 
Iraqi government and to bring our troops home. But regardless of the 
rate of progress, these armaments will still remain a lethal threat to 
our troops and to innocent civilians. By transferring this money, this 
$5 million, we can expedite the process of recovering and disposing of 
these lethal land mines and potential IEDs before additional life and 
limb is lost.
  I do appreciate the courtesy that Chairman Kolbe and Ranking Member 
Lowey have afforded me, and I am thankful that they have accepted this 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).
  The amendment was agreed to.


              Amendment Offered by Ms. Millender-McDonald

  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Ms. Millender-McDonald:
       Page 4, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 5, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 19, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I would just rise to say that I am prepared, 
if the gentlewoman will keep her remarks very short, to accept this 
amendment.

[[Page H3534]]

  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California 
for 5 minutes.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. I do recognize that. Thank you so much, Mr. 
Chairman. We will miss you sorely on this committee and the work that 
you have done, along with our distinguished ranking member.
  Today I do offer this amendment that addresses one of the greatest 
atrocities of the 21st century, and that is the trafficking of men, 
women, and children for forced labor and sexual exploitation.
  The Economic Support Fund operates to provide financial assistance 
for various developmental programs worldwide, including 266 programs to 
eradicate human trafficking. These programs are designed to present a 
multifaceted defense against the various and varied crimes that 
comprise human trafficking.
  We know that this year the committee has provided $8 million for the 
use of this program. That is a start, but it is less than what the 
President has suggested in the program. Of course, I am proposing a 
modest increase of $2 million. This amendment offsets the increase by 
those things that have been outlined in the amendment.
  It is not enough that we pay lip service to this problem, we actually 
have to lead the 21st Century Abolitionist Movement against modern day 
slavery. I am very happy to present this amendment. We know that human 
trafficking affects an estimated 800,000 persons each year, and 80 
percent of those victims are women and children.
  I am happy that the ranking member joined me on the trip to the 
United Nations to address these atrocities, and so I am so happy that 
the chairman and the ranking member have accepted this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION

                           Non-Credit Account

       The Overseas Private Investment Corporation is authorized 
     to make, without regard to fiscal year limitations, as 
     provided by 31 U.S.C. 9104, such expenditures and commitments 
     within the limits of funds available to it and in accordance 
     with law as may be necessary: Provided, That the amount 
     available for administrative expenses to carry out the credit 
     and insurance programs (including an amount for official 
     reception and representation expenses which shall not exceed 
     $35,000) shall not exceed $45,453,000: Provided further, That 
     project-specific transaction costs, including direct and 
     indirect costs incurred in claims settlements, and other 
     direct costs associated with services provided to specific 
     investors or potential investors pursuant to section 234 of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, shall not be considered 
     administrative expenses for the purposes of this heading.

                            Program Account

       For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, $20,035,000, 
     as authorized by section 234 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961, to be derived by transfer from the Overseas Private 
     Investment Corporation Non-Credit Account: Provided, That 
     such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall 
     be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act 
     of 1974: Provided further, That such sums shall be available 
     for direct loan obligations and loan guaranty commitments 
     incurred or made during fiscal years 2007, 2008, and 2009: 
     Provided further, That funds so obligated in fiscal year 2007 
     remain available for disbursement through 2014; funds 
     obligated in fiscal year 2008 remain available for 
     disbursement through 2015; funds obligated in fiscal year 
     2009 remain available for disbursement through 2016: Provided 
     further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Overseas Private Investment Corporation is authorized to 
     undertake any program authorized by title IV of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 in Iraq: Provided further, That funds 
     made available pursuant to the authority of the previous 
     proviso shall be subject to the regular notification 
     procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.
       In addition, such sums as may be necessary for 
     administrative expenses to carry out the credit program may 
     be derived from amounts available for administrative expenses 
     to carry out the credit and insurance programs in the 
     Overseas Private Investment Corporation Non-Credit Account 
     and merged with said account.

                      TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT AGENCY

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     section 661 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     $50,300,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008.

                TITLE II--BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

                  FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

       For expenses necessary to enable the President to carry out 
     the provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and for 
     other purposes, to remain available until September 30, 2007, 
     unless otherwise specified herein, as follows:

           UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

                Child Survival and Health Programs Fund


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     chapters 1 and 10 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961, for child survival, health, and family planning/
     reproductive health activities, in addition to funds 
     otherwise available for such purposes, $1,565,613,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2008: Provided, That 
     this amount shall be made available for such activities as: 
     (1) immunization programs; (2) oral rehydration programs; (3) 
     health, nutrition, water and sanitation programs which 
     directly address the needs of mothers and children, and 
     related education programs; (4) assistance for children 
     displaced or orphaned by causes other than AIDS; (5) programs 
     for the prevention, treatment, control of, and research on 
     HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, polio, malaria, and other infectious 
     diseases, and for assistance to communities severely affected 
     by HIV/AIDS, including children displaced or orphaned by 
     AIDS; and (6) family planning/reproductive health: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds appropriated under this 
     heading may be made available for nonproject assistance, 
     except that funds may be made available for such assistance 
     for ongoing health activities: Provided further, That of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading, not to exceed 
     $350,000, in addition to funds otherwise available for such 
     purposes, may be used to monitor and provide oversight of 
     child survival, maternal and family planning/reproductive 
     health, and infectious disease programs: Provided further, 
     That the following amounts should be allocated as follows: 
     $356,400,000 for child survival and maternal health; 
     $25,000,000 for vulnerable children; $346,621,000 for HIV/
     AIDS; $287,592,000 for other infectious diseases; and 
     $350,000,000 for family planning/reproductive health, 
     including in areas where population growth threatens 
     biodiversity or endangered species: Provided further, That of 
     the funds appropriated under this heading, and in addition to 
     funds allocated under the previous proviso, not less than 
     $200,000,000 shall be made available, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, except for the United States 
     Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 
     2003 (Public Law 108-25), for a United States contribution to 
     the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (the 
     ``Global Fund''), and shall be expended at the minimum rate 
     necessary to make timely payment for projects and activities: 
     Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading, 
     may be made available for a United States contribution to The 
     GAVI Fund, and up to $6,000,000 may be transferred to and 
     merged with funds appropriated by this Act under the heading 
     ``Operating Expenses of the United States Agency for 
     International Development'' for costs directly related to 
     international health, but funds made available for such costs 
     may not be derived from amounts made available for 
     contributions under this and preceding provisos: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds made available in this Act 
     nor any unobligated balances from prior appropriations may be 
     made available to any organization or program which, as 
     determined by the President of the United States, supports or 
     participates in the management of a program of coercive 
     abortion or involuntary sterilization: Provided further, That 
     none of the funds made available under this Act may be used 
     to pay for the performance of abortion as a method of family 
     planning or to motivate or coerce any person to practice 
     abortions: Provided further, That nothing in this paragraph 
     shall be construed to alter any existing statutory 
     prohibitions against abortion under section 104 of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961: Provided further, That none 
     of the funds made available under this Act may be used to 
     lobby for or against abortion: Provided further, That in 
     order to reduce reliance on abortion in developing nations, 
     funds shall be available only to voluntary family planning 
     projects which offer, either directly or through referral to, 
     or information about access to, a broad range of family 
     planning methods and services, and that any such voluntary 
     family planning project shall meet the following 
     requirements: (1) service providers or referral agents in the 
     project shall not implement or be subject to quotas, or other 
     numerical targets, of total number of births, number of 
     family planning acceptors, or acceptors of a particular 
     method of family planning (this provision shall not be 
     construed to include the use of quantitative estimates or 
     indicators for budgeting and planning purposes); (2) the 
     project shall not include payment of incentives, bribes, 
     gratuities, or financial reward to: (A) an individual in 
     exchange for becoming a family planning acceptor; or (B) 
     program personnel for achieving a numerical target or quota 
     of total number of births, number of family planning 
     acceptors, or acceptors of a particular method of family 
     planning; (3) the project shall not deny any right or 
     benefit, including the right of access to participate in any 
     program of general welfare or the right of access to health 
     care, as a consequence of any individual's decision not to 
     accept family planning services; (4)

[[Page H3535]]

     the project shall provide family planning acceptors 
     comprehensible information on the health benefits and risks 
     of the method chosen, including those conditions that might 
     render the use of the method inadvisable and those adverse 
     side effects known to be consequent to the use of the method; 
     and (5) the project shall ensure that experimental 
     contraceptive drugs and devices and medical procedures are 
     provided only in the context of a scientific study in which 
     participants are advised of potential risks and benefits; 
     and, not less than 60 days after the date on which the 
     Administrator of the United States Agency for International 
     Development determines that there has been a violation of the 
     requirements contained in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (5) of 
     this proviso, or a pattern or practice of violations of the 
     requirements contained in paragraph (4) of this proviso, the 
     Administrator shall submit to the Committees on 
     Appropriations a report containing a description of such 
     violation and the corrective action taken by the Agency: 
     Provided further, That in awarding grants for natural family 
     planning under section 104 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 
     1961 no applicant shall be discriminated against because of 
     such applicant's religious or conscientious commitment to 
     offer only natural family planning; and, additionally, all 
     such applicants shall comply with the requirements of the 
     previous proviso: Provided further, That for purposes of this 
     or any other Act authorizing or appropriating funds for 
     foreign operations, export financing, and related programs, 
     the term ``motivate'', as it relates to family planning 
     assistance, shall not be construed to prohibit the provision, 
     consistent with local law, of information or counseling about 
     all pregnancy options: Provided further, That to the maximum 
     extent feasible, taking into consideration cost, timely 
     availability, and best health practices, funds appropriated 
     in this Act or prior appropriations Acts that are made 
     available for condom procurement shall be made available only 
     for the procurement of condoms manufactured in the United 
     States: Provided further, That information provided about the 
     use of condoms as part of projects or activities that are 
     funded from amounts appropriated by this Act shall be 
     medically accurate and shall include the public health 
     benefits and failure rates of such use.

                         Development Assistance

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     sections 103, 105, 106, and sections 251 through 255, and 
     chapter 10 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 
     $1,294,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2008: 
     Provided, 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 $42,500, 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 of the funds appropriated 
     under this heading, $10,000,000 may be made available for 
     cooperative development programs within the Office of Private 
     and Voluntary Cooperation: Provided further, That not less 
     than $20,000,000 should be made available for rural water and 
     sanitation projects in East Africa.

                              {time}  1445


               Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

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

       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Blumenauer:
       In the item relating to ``Development Assistance'', after 
     the aggregate dollar amount, insert the following: 
     ``(increased by $250,000,000)''.
       In the item relating to ``Foreign Military Financing 
     Program'', after the aggregate dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $250,000,000)''.

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering today, 
along with Mr. Leach from Iowa, the chairman of the International 
Relations Subcommittee on Asia, will increase the development 
assistance account by $250 million in order to fund clean water and 
other anti-poverty programs. This increase will be offset by an equal 
amount of unearmarked funds in the military foreign financing account; 
and as such will not, and I want to emphasize this, will not impact the 
military aid to Israel, Egypt, Jordan, or Colombia.
  Over the last few years, it has become increasingly clear to people 
of every political stripe that we live in an interconnected world. How 
people in other countries live affects how we are secured at home, 
whether we are impacted by diseases like avian flu that thrive in 
poverty, whether our economy grows and creates more and better jobs.
  By investing in poor people around the world, we invest in global 
economic growth, the kind of thing that will have a clear effect on our 
own economic future. It is also helping responsible governments get 
stronger, offering their own people a better future, and a smart 
investment in our own security from terrorism to bird flu. The capacity 
of responsible governments to partner with the United States in 
tackling these shared challenges is critical to our security at home.
  Across the world, people living in extreme poverty are working, are 
struggling to improve their lives; but a billion of them live on $1 a 
day or less. It is critical that we expand our programs to help them in 
this work.
  There is no doubt that the record of previous development efforts, 
including foreign aid, has been uneven; but the fact is we are getting 
better at it. We know what works. There is a global partnership that 
has emerged that does have a measurable, positive impact on growth in 
poor countries.
  Thankfully, we now have the very best ideas of what kinds of steps 
are effective in providing the best returns in fighting poverty. The 
best tools, luckily, are simple: targeted programs to provide clean 
water, health care, improve agricultural productivity, and support good 
governance. This is not rocket science, as they say; but these are 
things that work.
  Time and time again we have made commitments to fight against 
poverty, and we must now put those commitments into action.
  In 2000, we joined with over 190 countries in committing to a series 
of ambitious targets called the Millennium Development Goals, including 
cutting in half the people living in extreme poverty by 2015. There are 
a series of other initiatives that have taken place to try and make 
sure that the rich countries of this world invest 0.7 percent of their 
gross national product in anti-poverty programs.
  Currently, there is only one country in the world of the rich, 
developed countries that does less than we do in this regard. We spend 
less than 0.2 percent. It is time for us to live up to the commitments 
we have made. This amendment is a simple way to do it.
  In fact, this is supported by people across this country. The Program 
on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland found 
that two-thirds of the American public supports significant increases 
for our foreign assistance. It shows majorities of both Republicans and 
Democrats supporting increasing our investments.
  Now, there are consequences for our lack of leadership. Mr. Chairman, 
every 15 seconds a child dies needlessly from waterborne disease. Half 
the people who are sick today around the world are sick needlessly 
because of a lack of fresh pure water and sanitation.
  This is within our capacity to make a difference, and there is no 
great philosophical fault line. Indeed, Girl Scout troops, churches, 
synagogues, your local Rotary Club may well have been involved with 
these efforts; and they support these approaches and can do something 
about it.
  This amendment would allow the House to decide if $250 million is 
better served by investing in people through good governments, health 
and economic development, or selling more weapons around the world, 
often to countries with questionable human rights records.
  The most recent year that I surveyed showed that half the money that 
we gave for military assistance went to countries that the State 
Department ruled were not democratic. I strongly urge the adoption of 
this amendment to be able to realize this bipartisan objective.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an example of the kind of amendment that we are 
going to hear a great deal about this afternoon and this evening. It is 
the kind of amendment that if the world were different, if we lived in 
a world

[[Page H3536]]

with unlimited resources, it would be wonderful to say ``yes'' to an 
amendment like this.
  But, of course, we do not live in a world of unlimited resources. As 
described in general debate, the allocation for our bill is $2.4 
billion below the amount requested by the President, and certainly 
lower even than what all Members would like to see in the bill.
  We have $1.29 billion for development assistance. That is $12 million 
above what the President requested. So in this particular area, despite 
the fact that we are $2 billion below the President's request, we have 
actually exceeded the amount in this area. It is equal to the amount we 
provided in fiscal year 2006 once you adjust for the trade capacity 
funds that have been moved to the new account.
  We have some very tough choices that we have to make in this bill, 
and yet we have provided at least steady funding levels for the 
Development Assistance Account.
  Now, the difficult part of this amendment is where the money comes 
out of. The gentleman says it is more important to provide safe 
drinking water than it is to make military sales to other countries. I 
would agree with that statement certainly when it is phrased that way. 
But I think it is important, and the gentleman understand, that of the 
$4 billion that we have in our bill for military assistance, foreign 
military financing, all but $900 million is designated for countries. 
It is designated to Egypt, Israel, Jordan and some for Colombia, and a 
couple of other countries. But there is only $900 million that is not 
designated.
  The gentleman's amendment takes this money out of it, but does not 
touch the earmarks, of course; and so it comes out of that $900 million 
that is left. What he is doing is taking the money away from a handful 
of countries which would absolutely decimate the handful of countries 
left. You would be talking about taking away the small amounts of money 
that we give to such countries as Armenia, the substantial amounts that 
we give to Pakistan, Turkey, the small amounts that we give to 
countries like Liberia and Ethiopia. All of it would come out of the 
funds that go to those countries, which money is important, very 
important in terms of their security, very important in terms of their 
international obligations. In many cases, it goes for things so those 
countries can meet their international obligations towards peacekeeping 
forces.
  So the amendment is going to reduce funding out of 68 small country 
programs which would have to be cut by 50 percent or more in each of 
those cases in order to accommodate the gentleman's amendment. I think 
to do this would be absolutely irresponsible on the part of the House 
of Representatives, and we should not allow this to happen.
  Let me conclude by saying what we have done on water programs in this 
legislation. We have directed the U.S. Agency for International 
Development to provide not less than $50 million from the development 
assistance accounts to build wells in rural areas and to secure water 
systems in urban areas of Africa and communities that lack access to 
fresh water.
  In addition, we have language, bill language within the Development 
Assistance Account, that mandates $20 million specifically for water 
programs in East Africa, and that of course is where we know the need 
is the very greatest.
  These directives, these mandates, will double the fiscal year 2006 
allocation for Africa in the Development Assistance Account. No one, 
certainly not the least of whom is me, doubts the need to provide 
clean, safe water for drinking around the world. I believe this bill as 
presented to the House helps us deliver on that promise.
  Does it do everything we would like it to do? No. But in so many 
other areas, this bill so necessarily falls shorts, as do other 
appropriations bills.
  This amendment is not the right way to proceed and the consequences 
for the small countries that rely importantly on our foreign military 
financing programs and are affected by this reduction would be 
absolutely drastic. I would urge my colleagues to defeat this well-
meaning amendment, but with consequences that are quite dire to the 
effect of this bill.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to this amendment, and I 
associate myself with the remarks of Chairman Kolbe. I understand and 
support what the gentleman from Oregon seeks to accomplish; but I 
believe passage of this amendment would upset the delicate balance of 
funding we have achieved in this bill on a bipartisan basis.
  It would also severely disrupt foreign military financing programs 
that are a key part of our overall national security strategy.
  I was pleased that the fiscal year 2006 foreign operations bill 
included a $200 million earmark for drinking water supply projects in 
the developing world, and I understand that USAID will indeed meet that 
earmark in this current fiscal year. As we have not reduced development 
assistance funding below the 2006 enacted level, and have not reduced 
disaster assistance significantly from the enacted level, I am 
confident this bill has room to at least meet the 2006 earmark for 
water supply projects.
  As I said, the potential effect of the gentleman's amendment, and the 
chairman referred to that, would be to cut nearly in half the 68 
unearmarked recipients of foreign military financing. So I am very 
concerned, but I hope to work with the chairman and the gentleman from 
Oregon in conference to ensure a high level of funding is earmarked for 
water supply projects.
  In the meantime, I reluctantly urge my colleagues to oppose this 
amendment.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I recognize that there are some problems associated 
with this amendment. And if it were adopted, I think there would have 
to be substantial rejiggering of the allocation to the subcommittee. 
But I just want to make an observation, nonetheless.
  With the passage of the defense appropriations bill, we will have 
spent $450 billion on the dumbest war since the War of 1812, that war 
being our involvement in Iraq.
  The conferees on the supplemental two nights ago, despite the fact 
that there were two Senate votes and one House vote which put into that 
bill a declaration that the Congress was in opposition to creating 
permanent bases in Iraq, despite that fact, the conferees dropped all 
three of those.

                              {time}  1500

  So we are now in the position where the Congress of the United States 
will not even take a position that we don't want permanent bases in 
Iraq. Now, I know there are some people in this Chamber who don't want 
us to pull out immediately. There are a lot of people who don't want us 
to do that. But, certainly, the only other option isn't to stay there 
forever, but that is what is being implied if we accept these permanent 
bases in Iraq.
  Imagine how our influence in the world would be transformed. Right 
now, since our invasion of Iraq, we are at an all time low in terms of 
American popularity in every region of the world. Imagine how our 
popularity would be transformed if we said that, instead of spending 
$450 billion on a stupid war, imagine how the world would look at us if 
instead we said we were going to take 1/10 that amount and use it to 
make certain that every single one of God's creatures who we could 
reach in the next 10 years would finally have access to water that 
doesn't make them sick and doesn't make a lot of their kids die. 
America would be transformed, at least our image would be transformed, 
into actually living up to our Judeo-Christian principles. Wouldn't 
that be a shocker?
  So I recognize that there are technical problems associated with the 
gentleman's amendment. But just because my heart moves me on that 
subject, I am going to vote for it. And if it means that somebody 
somewhere is not going to get all the weapons they have been planning 
on, isn't that too bad.
  Mr. LEACH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment which Mr. Blumenauer and I are offering 
is a transfer amendment. $250 million would be taken from the 
unearmarked section of the Military Assistance Account which exceeds 
the Development Assistance Account by approximately a three to one 
margin. These resources

[[Page H3537]]

would then be applied to clean water and other poverty alleviation 
programs.
  In our interactions with the world, the U.S. basically only has two 
options. We can emphasize our capacities to project military might and 
be a global policeman, or we can emphasize our humanitarian concerns 
and be a global doctor or engineer. There are times that the 
policeman's role may be compelling, but I am hard pressed to think 
anything except that in the long run, American leadership in the 21st 
century will be judged on whether the United States chooses to be a 
superhumanitarian power rather than principally a military 
interventionist.
  One of the myths of our time is that realism is about might. 
Actually, realism is about the human condition. It is the human 
condition that must be improved if national security is to be 
strengthened. Impoverished nations are breeding grounds for radicalism. 
Where there is no hope, there is nothing to lose. There is no restraint 
on violence.
  Thus, the approach contained in this amendment is to address the 
daily concerns of the 3.7 billion people in the world who lack access 
to clean drinking water and adequate sanitation. These people are 
exposed to sicknesses like giardia, guinea worm, shistosomaisis, and 
diarrhea on a regular basis. Hundreds of millions of people, including 
one in every five children in the poorest countries of the world, die 
simply because there is no clean water.
  Mr. Chairman, our priorities must be recalibrated. It may be true 
that the militaries of several poor countries will not be as 
advantaged, but the family of man will clearly benefit.
  Mr. SWEENEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Let me start by saying as a member of the committee I really 
appreciate the work of the chairman and the ranking member. I know the 
very difficult choices that had to be made under an extremely tight 
budget and extremely tough year in making those decisions. And I rise 
in opposition to this amendment somewhat reluctantly because I agree 
with some of the prior speakers and the need to look at the priority of 
water and the needs of water throughout the Nation as a means of 
expanding United States influence in a very positive way. We do it in 
this bill; we do it as best we could in fitting in some of the other 
priorities they have.
  And why I rise in opposition to this amendment is because of its 
effect. As has been pointed out already, it cuts everything, but from 
the designated funds, the earmarked funds. It cuts $250 million that I 
think will critically imbalance United States relationships in some 
places. For example, it cuts from some of the African nations that I 
think desperately need the support that would be given in the MFM fund.
  And as an Armenian American, I want to point specifically to the 
effect it would have on Armenia and the fact that it would cut $68 
million in assistance, economic and border security assistance to 
Armenia, which I view in large part is in this bill in order to balance 
out some of the challenges that fledgling nation has with its neighbors 
in Turkey and Azerbaijan; and in part, in recognition, which we have 
failed in this Congress to do as of yet, and in this Nation, to 
recognize the Armenian genocide of the past century and its impact on 
that nation's history.
  And so I want to salute the chairman and the ranking member for 
trying to find that delicate balance and striking it here in this bill. 
And while I applaud the sponsor of the amendment and his intentions and 
hope that we can work in future years to do even more as it relates to 
providing water, I think the impact of what this bill does in terms of 
offsetting those funds would have too detrimental an impact. Therefore, 
I would urge my colleagues to object.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SWEENEY. I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I just want to clarify in my own mind. I heard Mr. 
Kolbe say that the effect of our amendment, there were about 900 
million, if I heard him correctly, that was unallocated at this point. 
There is some report language in there that talks about where it might 
go.
  According to the information I have, there is only $7 million that 
has been identified in report language for Armenia and Azerbaijan, and 
there is over a quarter billion dollars that is completely undirected. 
So I am wondering where the $70 million figure came from that you are 
citing here that our amendment would impact.
  Mr. SWEENEY. Well, the amount for Armenia, as is being explained to 
me by the chairman, is about 7 percent. So if I said 7 million, then I 
misspoke out of MFM. But the total impact, as I understand it, of the 
taking of the 250, about 50 percent would be to lose the 68 million 
that was intended to be sent to Armenia for the border security.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. 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 Oregon will be 
postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

              International Disaster and Famine Assistance

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of 
     section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for 
     international disaster relief, rehabilitation, and 
     reconstruction assistance, $348,800,000, to remain available 
     until expended, of which $30,000,000 should be for famine 
     prevention and relief.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Obey

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Obey:
       Page 14, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $50,000,000)''.
       Page 19, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $100,000,000)''.
       Page 20, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $100,000,000)''.
       Page 32, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $50,000,000)''.

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I am offering this amendment on behalf of 
myself, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green).
  For some time, Mr. Chairman, I have been troubled by the repression 
of political freedom in Egypt and the lack of democratic reform. But in 
light of the historical role that Egypt has played in the region and 
the continuing stability that Egypt brings to an increasingly troubled 
region, I have appealed for patience and moderation in efforts to alter 
Egypt's aid package.
  I chaired this subcommittee for 10 years, and during that time I was 
responsible for providing over $20 billion in military and economic aid 
to Egypt. In the years since, I have helped to fend off amendments that 
sought to cut or restrict aid to Egypt.
  Last year, during the Full Committee consideration of the bill, I 
offered an amendment that earmarked some of Egypt's economic aid for 
democracy purposes, a move that allowed Congress to fend off yet 
another attempt to restrict the military aid. But in offering that 
amendment, I gave notice to the government of Egypt that my patience, 
and the patience of the American people, was wearing thin, and I hoped 
and expected that the government of Egypt would get the hint and make 
some moves to loosen its grip on political freedom and democratic 
reforms.
  Instead, I am sad to say, we have gotten backsliding on municipal 
elections, an extension of emergency laws, repression of judicial 
freedoms and a crackdown on demonstrations and rallies.
  Most recently, we have seen the appellate court in Egypt reject the 
appeal of Ayman Nour, a political opponent of President Mubarak who was 
conveniently arrested just prior to last year's presidential elections.
  Hundreds of demonstrators have been arrested and jailed in recent 
weeks, many of them young kids in their teens and 20s who have been 
beaten and bullied. Reporters have been roughed up and intimidated.
  Just this week, the government of Egypt suspended the work of the 
International Republican Institute in Egypt after the IRI country 
director criticized in an interview the pace of reform as being too 
slow.

[[Page H3538]]

  Now, I am not a naive peddler of global democracy. I am not preaching 
that we hold elections all across the Middle East and call it a day. I 
understand that the very free and fair elections in the West Bank in 
Gaza have resulted in a disastrous consequence for the peace process 
through the election of Hamas.
  But I do fear that Egypt is heading toward a precipice. What is 
happening in Egypt, Mr. Chairman, is that the government is 
systematically fencing in and squeezing out its moderate opposition. 
And if they continue to do that, they are going to wind up with the 
only viable opposition being the Muslim Brotherhood, the most radical 
of the forces in the country. That will be disastrous for Mr. Mubarak. 
It will be disastrous for his government. It will disastrous for the 
American people, and it will be disastrous for the entire region.
  I consider myself a lifelong friend of Egypt, and I have taken a lot 
of heat on this floor through the years for taking a number of actions 
that supported Egypt and the rest of the Arab world, sometimes even 
when I differed with my friends who were supporting various provisions 
for Israel.
  But it seems to me that if you are a friend of Egypt, you will try to 
make them understand that they are endangering their ability to have a 
peaceful transfer of power when Mr. Mubarak leaves office.
  Now, I have met Mr. Mubarak's son. I understand that Mr. Mubarak 
would like to see his son succeed him. I am very impressed by his son. 
I happen to think he would probably be a good leader. But he is not 
going to get the chance for very long if the moderate opposition in 
that country is systematically jailed, beaten up and wiped out, because 
then you will have only the most radical extreme elements left.
  So what we are doing in this amendment is to cut $100 million out of 
the Economic Support Fund, and we are moving 50 million of that to help 
refugees in the Sudan, and we are moving another 50 million of it to 
provide increased funding for the President's HIV/AIDS initiative. I am 
not doing this out of anger at Egypt. I am doing this out of a deep and 
abiding concern for the future of that country.
  I respect Egypt. I think the people of Egypt are a wonderful people. 
And I think that Mr. Mubarak has done many constructive things that 
have been in the interest of peace in the region and have helped 
promote our own national interests as well.

                              {time}  1515

  But I am speaking as a friend, and I am saying this Congress has an 
obligation to recognize the problem and to act before it is too late to 
salvage the situation.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I do rise in opposition to this amendment, and I say so 
with the greatest respect to my colleague David Obey. Often on this 
floor, we say things about each other and we say things because it is 
the oil that helps make this place move forward, but I do have the 
greatest respect for him and I believe he has been a great part of this 
institution, it has been a privilege to serve with him. We just differ 
on this amendment. We had a very good debate in the full Appropriations 
Committee on this, and I hope the debate this afternoon will be as 
constructive and as good as the debate that we had in the committee.
  We both agree that Egypt should strive toward greater democracy and 
greater freedoms, and I believe the approach taken by this amendment is 
the wrong approach.
  Mr. Obey suggests that we would take $100 million of funding in 
economic support funds from Egypt. The intent is to take these funds 
from the amounts that are designated as budget support for Egypt. These 
are the funds that are transferred to Egypt when it successfully 
completes certain financial sector reforms. In other words, we have put 
benchmarks in front and said the money can't be released until they 
meet these reforms. As they meet these reforms, the money is then 
released. This would then take the money away from that, reducing that 
incentive to make these kinds of reforms.
  The funds that are targeted by this amendment support one of our 
strongest allies in this region. And I say that very carefully, one of 
our strategic partners, our very strong allies in this region, to help 
them meet the memorandum of understanding that we made in March of 2005 
about these financial sector reforms.
  Last month in the same kind of debate that we had in Committee, the 
Secretary of State said in a letter to the chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, ``Reducing U.S. assistance would seriously 
damage our partnership as well as the broader strategic interests of 
the United States.'' And she also went on to state, ``We firmly believe 
the U.S. assistance to Egypt could continue at the full level requested 
by the administration, and ask your support for that request.''
  In the past, the ranking member Mr. Obey has himself recognized this 
when he has stated on the floor his support for the funding for Egypt. 
Now, I recognize and he could argue quite correctly, times have 
changed, there are different things that have happened, and he could 
say this is a different source of funds perhaps from it. But 
nonetheless, he himself has recognized the importance of Egypt as an 
ally.
  While it is sometimes important to dispense tough love by withholding 
or eliminating funds, we also have to ensure that Egypt remains allied 
with the United States as a leading moderate nation within the Middle 
East. And I believe that, in this case, any attempt to pressure Egypt 
into hastening its transition to democracy could push this country away 
from the United States and allow another foreign power to gain a 
foothold in the region that could be very detrimental not only to our 
interests, but to the interest of peace in the region. This certainly 
would not be good for any of us.
  Mr. Chairman, the bill that is before us today already has a $200 
million rescission in funds for Egypt in the economic support fund. So 
for those who want to make this claim, the bill already has sent a 
signal to the Egyptians, and I think this amendment just simply piles 
on. It is overkill, in my opinion.
  As in the programs that would receive funds with the Obey amendment, 
he would put some of it to the global HIV/AIDS initiative. I don't 
believe that anybody could claim that we have not supported this 
program or provided all the funds that could reasonably and effectively 
be spent. In fact, this bill has a total of $3.4 billion for HIV/AIDS 
programs. The President's request, $750 million increase over the 2006 
level, this is the largest increase in this bill, and that demonstrates 
how much I think all of us on this committee and in this body care 
about fighting the HIV/AIDS. To increase it by another $50 million is 
simply not necessary and doesn't do anything more to meet in any way, 
certainly not as much as it detracts from the strategic interests that 
we have in Egypt.
  The second area is in the international disaster and famine 
assistance, and this is a contingency count for uses when disaster 
strikes. In this bill there is a total of $348 million, again, the 
President's request for this account. The supplemental that 2 days ago 
was considered by the House and Senate conferees includes an additional 
$161 million for IDFA to accommodate emergencies that have recently 
arisen. We have done what I think is the responsible thing in this 
bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote against the Obey-Lantos 
amendment.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, my friend and colleague Chairman Hyde and I are strong 
friends of Egypt and we are proud cosponsors of this amendment. We are 
sponsors of this amendment because we are fed up with an Egyptian 
government that has received well over $50 billion from United States 
taxpayers in the past quarter century, yet it will not treat its 
citizens with dignity and respect. We are fed up with an Egypt that 
suppresses dissent, an Egypt that suffocates the secular liberal 
opposition, throws its leaders in jail on trumped-up charges, an Egypt 
that takes out its wrath on a man called Ayman Nour, who finished a 
distant second in President Mubarak's landslide victory last year. I am 
sickened, Mr. Chairman, that Mr. Nour is likely to spend the next 5 
years of his life behind bars on transparently manufactured charges 
when we know his only

[[Page H3539]]

real crime was having the temerity to wage a political campaign against 
Mr. Mubarak.
  We are fed up with and are not fooled by an Egyptian government that 
stages parliamentary elections, but prevents voters from reaching the 
polls. We are fed up with an Egyptian government that punishes judges 
who merely want to insist on judicial independence and ignores its 
promises to end emergency law and instead extends it. We are fed up 
with and deeply disappointed in an Egyptian government that suspended 
the activities of the International Republican Institute in Egypt 
simply because the local director criticized the pace of reform in 
Egypt.
  We are fed up with an Egypt that is one of the leaders among the so-
called group of 77 who are working hard to derail the critical United 
Nations reforms proposed by Kofi Annan, the Secretary General, which 
have bipartisan and strong support here in this Congress.
  We are fed up with an Egypt that has nearly 500,000 active duty 
troops in its military, yet can do nothing in the international effort 
in Afghanistan.
  We are fed up with an Egypt whose peace with Israel remains frigid, 
far colder than it ought to be, as we approach the 27th anniversary of 
the peace treaty.
  Mr. Chairman, I do not denigrate the importance of our alliance with 
Egypt and I deeply appreciate the importance of the Israeli-Egyptian 
peace. But I do feel that we deserve more, much more for our generosity 
than the laundry list of problems I have only partially described.
  I want the United States to maintain the strongest possible relations 
with Egypt. As you know, Chairman Hyde and I have made efforts in the 
past to communicate this to Egypt in clear and unmistakable legislative 
language.
  The approach in our amendment is not precisely the approach I would 
have championed. Nevertheless, I consider it absolutely critical that 
President Mubarak understand the deep dissatisfaction here with the 
course of events in Egypt, particularly regarding the decline of human 
rights and personal freedoms.
  It is also critical that the Egyptian people understand that we are 
taking this action in support of those moderate political parties, 
human rights advocates and independent judges who are supporting change 
in Egypt.
  I believe this amendment sends a message to President Mubarak and to 
the Egyptian people in a manner that is loud, clear, friendly and 
measured. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this 
amendment, communicating our deep disappointment in our ally Egypt, and 
boosting simultaneously the underfunded and critical causes of the 
tragedy in Darfur and fighting HIV/AIDS globally.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise on behalf of and in support of the amendment 
offered by Mr. Obey, Mr. Hyde, Mr. Lantos and Mr. Green, and I 
associate myself with the remarks of Mr. Obey and Mr. Lantos.
  I believe the alliance between ourselves and Egypt is an important 
one. I believe that Egypt has played an important role, not as 
expansive a role as I would have wanted, but an important role in the 
Middle East.
  Mr. Chairman, in his inaugural address President Bush stated, ``It is 
the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of 
democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with 
the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in the world.''
  Mr. Chairman, I agree with this unambiguous statement in support of 
democracy and freedom, and I believe Members on both sides of the aisle 
agree with it as well. In fact, it is the reiteration of the policy 
that has guided our Nation from Wilson to Roosevelt, to Truman to 
Kennedy, to the present day.
  Yet today, Mr. Chairman, one of our Nation's key allies in the Middle 
East, our friend Egypt, has taken demonstrable steps that raise 
troubling questions about its commitment to democracy.
  Mr. Chairman, I will give examples. Multiparty presidential elections 
in 2005, as has been stated, were marred by allegations of fraud, voter 
suppression and intimidation. The leading opposition candidate, Ayman 
Nour, was arrested and sentenced to 5 years in prison, prompting the 
State Department to comment, ``The Egyptian government's handling of 
this case represents both a miscarriage of justice by international 
standards and a setback for the democratic aspirations of the Egyptian 
people.''
  In Egypt, judges who protested the election have been disciplined. 
More than 600 pro-democracy activists have been arrested, and members 
of the foreign and Egyptian press have been harassed and intimidated.
  Let me add, Mr. Chairman, it troubles me that last year, Egypt voted 
with the United States of America on contested votes of importance only 
8.9 percent of the time. Let me reiterate that. A country to whom we 
have given $67 billion since Camp David, voted with us in important 
votes 8.9 percent of the time.
  Thus, today, Mr. Chairman, I believe this amendment gives us a clear 
choice: We can continue to turn a blind eye to the undemocratic 
behavior of the Egyptian government, which will receive $1.8 billion in 
military and economic assistance through this foreign operations bill; 
or, alternatively, through the adoption of this amendment, we can send 
a message to our friend that the United States of America does not 
approve of its undemocratic activities, and, indeed, believes those are 
inimical to Egypt itself. We expect Egypt to abide by its commitments 
on democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
  The Secretary of State's letter has been referred to by the chairman 
of the subcommittee. I have read that letter, Mr. Chairman. It sets 
forth many things that Egypt has done which have had a positive effect 
on stability in the Middle East.
  Mr. Chairman, in my opinion, those actions were in Egypt's best 
interests.

                              {time}  1530

  They did not do that for the United States. They did it to create 
stability in the region in which they live. I congratulate them for 
that. But they did not do it because we gave them aid, assistance.
  The bipartisan amendment that has been offered, quite simply, would 
cut $100 million, as has been said, in economic assistance for Egypt. 
Like Mr. Lantos, that would not be my choice, but that is the choice of 
this amendment. Instead, it increases funding for disaster assistance 
for refugees in Darfur, one of the crisis regions of the world today. 
In addition, it increases the President's Global HIV/AIDS Initiative by 
an additional $50 million
  At a time when this Nation has committed itself to promoting 
democracy throughout the Middle East, we have, it seems to me, a 
responsibility to expect that the most populous country in the region 
meets its democratic commitments.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment.
  Mr. WICKER. I move to strike the requisite number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, my colleagues, I rise in opposition to the amendment 
and urge my colleagues for a strong vote against this ill-advised 
initiative.
  In debate on the House floor some 2 years ago, some of the advocates 
of this amendment today rose and very eloquently spoke basically on the 
other side of the argument, saying that this would be ill advised, it 
would be unilateral action against a friend of ours.
  I thought those remarks were correct at the time. And I am 
disappointed that some of the advocates of this amendment have changed 
their minds over 2 years' time. What has happened in 2 years?
  Well, one thing that has happened is they have had a presidential 
election in Egypt which has represented progress. Now, we were not 
happy with everything that happened with the parliamentary elections, 
and it was not exactly a perfect presidential election in Egypt. But 
they had multiple parties, they had an open process. And I think almost 
every person who watched this on the international stage said it 
represented progress. So what has happened between 2004 and now is 
actual progress in Egypt. I commend them for that. But let's talk about 
why we have this bill at all. I meant to get down here for general 
debate to discuss this. We do foreign assistance for altruistic 
reasons, certainly for humanitarian reasons, of course. But the main 
reason we do foreign assistance is we

[[Page H3540]]

do it in the American national interest. This bill is a very important 
part of our national security package. And let me tell you about the 
national interest. Those of you who have been to the Middle East know 
that we do not have a lot of friends over there. But one friend we have 
in that area is Egypt. Since Nasser kicked the Soviets out, since Sadat 
helped with Camp David, with the beginnings of that Arab-Israeli peace 
process up until today, Egypt has been our strategic friend and our 
strategic partner.
  Talk about national interests: When we went in with Operation Iraqi 
Freedom, some of our allies, Turkey, for example, would not let us 
through. How much trouble did that cause us, because we were not able 
to go into Iraq through Turkey?
  By contrast, Egypt has allowed us to use the Suez for that purpose. 
They have allowed us continuous overflights. And just recently, they 
have been instrumental in helping with the unilateral Israeli 
withdrawal from the Gaza. They have helped us when it counted.
  How many American soldiers are alive today because Egypt was our 
friend in Operation Iraqi Freedom? How many billions of dollars have we 
saved for the American taxpayers because Egypt has been our friend?
  An amendment that was stronger than this was offered in the 
Appropriations Committee, and it was rejected overwhelmingly on a 
bipartisan basis. The authors of this amendment have attempted to 
soften it here on the floor. And one of the things that they have tried 
to do is take the money from Egypt and give it to programs that we all 
like--AIDS in Africa, Darfur, things of that nature. It is hard to 
resist. It sounds good.
  But my friends, these people in Egypt have stood by us in a tough, 
tough neighborhood. And I do not think this amendment is the sort of 
thing we do to our friends. It might make us feel good, but it is 
terrible foreign policy, and I believe the House of Representatives 
will reject this amendment.
  Ms. KILPATRICK of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the 
requisite number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, Members and the world, this is a very important 
amendment, and we must pay particular attention to it. The Middle East 
is in turmoil. We are threatened on every side of the Middle East. 
Sometimes we do not respect the culture. Sometimes we do not respect 
the religion. Sometimes we do not respect the people for what has 
happened to this country and terrorism around the world.
  But I want for a minute for you to just take a moment and think how 
important this amendment would be and the signal it would send to our 
strongest alley in the Middle East. We have had a wonderful 
relationship with Egypt over the last 30 years. Over 75 million 
Egyptians, with some of the other countries, Syria, Jordan, Saudi, some 
of them 7 million, some 10 million, some 12, this is 75 million 
Egyptians who live in our country today and who live in the Middle 
East.
  Mr. Chairman, it is the wrong signal to send at a time when the 
Middle East is in turmoil. Leadership is what they must have. And I 
contend to you that President Mubarak and his administration is the 
best friend that we have in the Middle East. I am recently returned 
from the World Economic Forum in Egypt on the Middle East, where 
countries from that region came together.
  We met with them, a good delegation of us. And we interacted with 
them for the 2, 3 days of that summit. They want to be good neighbors. 
And what I am here to tell you is that Egypt, with the President and 
his administration, is leading the effort to make sure that our 
relationship with them and theirs with the rest of the Middle East is 
one that is important, that is stabilized, and that it is secure.
  Egypt is a critical partner of the U.S. in the Middle East. Egypt is 
an honest broker with the Palestinians on its issues and on our issues. 
Egypt is the main protector of Israel, and we need that communication, 
we need that cooperation. Egypt supports us in the Gaza and the 
Egyptian border.
  Egypt has sent 800 peacekeepers to the Sudan. Egypt also participates 
in joint exercises with our military. They buy our U.S. military 
equipment. This is not the time to punish them. No, they are not a 
democracy like we have. This is the best country in the world. Our 
democracy is second to none.
  But do we penalize our neighbors, sovereign nations, because they are 
not like us? President Mubarak in the last 12 months has issued many 
decrees and is about changing how they believe and what they believe in 
Egypt.
  As a result of that, Egypt has seen three bombings, had not seen any 
in over 10, 15, 20 years. Because it is hard to change from one way of 
governing, and then come to another. You have people in Egypt rising up 
against the president and against us too.
  It is not time now. The timing is not good for the U.S. to back away 
from our relationship with Egypt as we help to stabilize that part of 
the world and remain partners with our country.
  Is it possible that some things might not be right? Yes. I would be 
the first to say that. Are they working to make it better? Yes, they 
are. Israel needs a strong Egypt. The U.S. needs a strong Egypt. So I 
implore my colleagues, and I hate to rise any time against my ranking 
member. I feel so passionately about this that I implore my colleagues 
to look at what is happening in the world, look at us as our Nation, we 
are a great Nation, second to none.
  Let us not forfeit our partnership with our friends that will 
destabilize our own country. There was a great act in the Middle East 
overnight, when one of the terrorists was captured, not only captured 
but further than that. Do we throw all of that for naught, or do we try 
to live in a world community where we can live together as brothers and 
sisters from different nationalities and ethnicities? I contend that 
Egypt is key in that and that we must continue.
  It is not about the money, I must say as I take my seat. The cost of 
military assistance is phenomenal. The amount that this will deduct 
from that, it is not about the money; it is about the good will and the 
partnership.
  Hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent for our own security. 
I contend that Egypt is a partner with us, and we should maintain that 
bipartisanship, for it is they and us and nations of good will like us 
that will determine what kind of world your grandchildren will live in. 
Vote ``no'' on the amendment.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the 
requisite number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Obey amendment, although I 
have great respect for what my colleague is trying to achieve.
  What we are hearing in this debate is two narratives, both of which 
are important. In the first narrative, we hear that Egypt's progress 
toward democratic reform has been far too slow with far too many 
setbacks; and, my colleagues, that is true.
  The Egyptian Government persists in imprisoning political opponents 
like Ayman Noor. I could add Professor Saad Ibrahim to that list. I 
worked for several years with colleagues to urge the Egyptian 
Government to free Mr. Ibrahim, director of an organization in Cairo 
that promoted democracy and was critical of President Mubarak's 
leadership.
  Thankfully, Mr. Ibrahim has now been released, but the pattern of 
imprisoning dissenters continues. These are very real concerns, and I 
hope the Egyptian Government hears the debate in this Chamber today as 
a strong alarm signal regarding Egypt's slow pace of progress.
  However, there is a second narrative that is equally compelling. 
Egypt is one of our most important allies in a troubled region. It has 
contributed greatly to many efforts critical to our national security, 
including supporting efforts to stabilize and rebuild Afghanistan; 
training Iraqi police and troops; helping ensure an orderly withdrawal 
of Israeli forces from Gaza, including the sending of 750 troops to the 
Sinai-Gaza border; and policing the Rafah border crossing between Egypt 
and the Palestinian territories.
  Perhaps most important now, Mr. Chairman, is Egypt's role as a 
mediator in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Egyptian leaders like 
General Suleiman have intervened in discussions and negotiations when 
the U.S. simply cannot do so.
  Just this morning, USA Today reported that Egypt had mediated between 
Fatah and Hamas to secure an agreement under which Hamas will withdraw 
its 3,000-person militia from

[[Page H3541]]

Gaza and allow it to be folded into the Palestinian security forces.
  Egyptian leaders have intervened on several other notable occasions. 
In an effort to prevent Fatah's disorganization from enabling a Hamas 
victory in Palestinian elections, General Suleiman worked with Abu 
Mazen in December 2005 to try to mediate between splinter parties.
  In December 2004, during a period of heavy attacks against Israel, 
General Suleiman initiated a dialogue with Hamas and the Islamic jihad 
and other Palestinian militant groups to seek an end to the attacks.
  Mr. Chairman, we are facing a critical period in the Middle East. The 
political crisis caused by Hamas's victory makes Egyptian mediation 
more, not less, critical. That is decisive for me. It is a time to 
build on this second narrative, not to deliver an irresponsible poke in 
the eye to a critical player at a critical time.
  Let me say a few words about the supposed beneficiaries of this 
amendment. Mr. Obey has cleverly crafted the amendment to distract 
attention from the cuts to Egypt by directing the money to two causes 
that many of us believe are of the highest importance, stopping 
genocide in Darfur and stemming the spread of HIV/AIDS.

                              {time}  1545

  I strongly support both of these priorities and would support added 
funding in this bill for them. However, this amendment does a 
disservice to those priorities by making them pawns in a political game 
that is about our support for Egypt, not for support for AIDS and 
Darfur. I hope we can add funding for efforts to address the AIDS 
pandemic and the genocide in Darfur, but this amendment is not the 
responsible way to do it.
  Let us not lose sight of the millions of people in the Middle East 
who are depending on our leadership and our ability to work with Egypt 
to achieve peace in their troubled region. That is the priority of 
which we must not lose sight. I urge my colleagues to oppose the Obey 
amendment.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, what if a member of your family were heading in a 
direction that was going to cause that person irrevocable harm, a 
member of your family? Would you stand by and say nothing? Someone you 
love. Or would you get their attention however you could as subtly as 
possible but if subtlety does not work then with a little more oomph to 
get their attention, to get them to change direction because they are 
going in a destructive direction?
  That is what the Obey amendment is about. It is about our friend 
Egypt, a member of our family, if you will, going in the wrong 
direction. A friend who we have committed more than $67 billion to, 
delivered it to them. They have done wonderful things for our national 
security as well. We are great and good friends, Egypt and the United 
States, but our friend Egypt is headed in the wrong direction.
  Just this past year, President Mubarak's leading opposition candidate 
for president was put in jail. Emergency laws which suspend democracy 
and the rule of law are still in effect. Independent judges have been 
disciplined for not following in lockstep with what the government says 
is their agenda. Freedom of the press has been weakened. And just this 
week, the International Republican Institute, a democracy building 
program in Egypt that is also funded by our Appropriations Committee, 
was suspended for criticizing the slow pace of reforms in Egypt.
  People around the world, countries around the world, Mr. Chairman, 
have no hesitation telling us in America when we are moving in the 
wrong direction. Even in a time of war, other countries who are our 
friends say, America, you should not do that. You are going in the 
wrong direction. Well, that is what the Obey amendment does. It says to 
our friends in Egypt, please, we have tried every subtle way to get 
your attention, it has not succeeded. We are going to try to get your 
attention now with this $100 million transfer to two very worthy 
purposes, by the way, HIV/AIDS relief in Africa and $50 million for 
Darfur, clearly places where this money will be put to better effect.
  Now, again, I view the Egyptian people as honorable and great people, 
great friends of the United States. I heard somewhere that that 
somebody said Egypt is defending Israel. By the way, Israel is 
America's greatest ally in the Middle East by far and votes with 
American more than any other country. Egypt unfortunately only votes 
with us 8 percent. Israel votes with America over 90 percent of the 
time at the U.N. Israel takes care of itself.
  But, Mr. Chairman, we need to send a message to our friend, Egypt, to 
finally make these changes and show progress this coming year in the 
rule of law, in respect for democracy and human rights. I support the 
Obey amendment.
  Mr. SWEENEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment and would like 
to say, first, that I understand that simply by having this debate here 
today, I think we are sending the appropriate message that needs to be 
sent to Egypt. And I would point out that already in the bill we 
rescind $200 million in aid to Egypt, and I think that this particular 
amendment would be much more punitive than is requisite and needed.
  The United States needs to strive to bring reforms to Egypt. We all 
agree on that. But this is not tough love. This is going over the top 
in my estimation, and would cause damage for many years in the future 
if it were to pass. Reducing U.S. aid to Egypt at this time would also 
be strategically not a good move for the United States. Egypt has 
facilitated expeditious transit of hundreds of U.S. warships and 
thousands of U.S. aircraft through the Suez Canal and Egyptian air 
space since the start of Operation Enduring Freedom and Iraqi freedom.
  Egypt has been a close partner. Many of my colleagues before have 
spoken about that relationship and what it means to the region at such 
a critical team. So I would urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment 
because I think it goes just too far.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SWEENEY. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. KOLBE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to correct some 
statements that were made by previous speakers with regard to the 
International Republican Institute having been denied the ability to 
operate in Egypt. I have the privilege of serving on the board of the 
IRI, and I did speak yesterday to the president of the IRI.
  There has been some disagreement, some misunderstanding, I think, 
really in terms of the registration process for the IRI in Egypt, but 
it is the belief of the President of the IRI that this is going to be 
worked out very shortly. But we do not believe it will, in any way, 
affect the programs of IRI in Egypt.
  So I think he would agree, and certainly I would suggest to you that 
$100 million whack at Egypt over the slowness of registering an 
organization, an NGO that has engaged in democracy building, is a 
little bit of an overkill.
  That leads me to my larger point, and this has been a bipartisan 
debate, and we have seen speakers here on both sides of the aisle 
speaking against this amendment and appreciate my colleagues who have 
come to the floor to make the points about how important Egypt is as a 
strategic partner.
  That is the bottom line here. Egypt is a strategic partner. Egypt is 
a country that is in transition as we speak. Everybody knows that we 
are moving on to a post-Mubarak age. The question is, where do we want 
to be 10 years from now? Where do we want Egypt to be? Where do we want 
to be with regard to our relationship with Egypt. I would suggest to 
you that Egypt which has been since 1979, with the Camp David Accord, 
the key part of our strategic effort to achieve peace in the Middle 
East, that this would not be the time, this would not be the way to 
achieve that, to continue on that path by kicking sand in the face of 
Egypt.
  This is not the right move, Mr. Chairman. This is not the way to go 
about this. We need to continue this strategic partnership. We need to 
continue to say to Egypt, we do expect you to reform. We do expect 
these kinds of political reforms to be made. We will work with you and 
we will stand with you and we will stand with the people of Egypt to 
make these reforms. And

[[Page H3542]]

we are glad that you have moved towards the multi-party presidential 
election. We are glad some of these things are happening. We expect 
more to be done, but we are not going to achieve that if we do not 
continue the partnership. If we jerk the rug out from under them, if we 
take away that partnership, we can hardly expect that to continue.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SWEENEY. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. OBEY. Last year, I said virtually everything that my good friend 
is now saying today. The problem is that in the last year they have 
jailed their main opponents, they have beaten up people who are 
defending an independent judiciary, they have imposed another round of 
martial law, and they have continued the very things that are totally 
opposed to our values.
  Now, to me the issue is not whether Egypt is a good friend and a good 
ally. They obviously are. The question is; Are they going to be around 
to continue to be that. If they do not change the way they are 
behaving, they are not going to be succeeded by a moderate government. 
They are systematically alienating every moderate group in that 
society, and you are going to wind up with the Muslim Brotherhood 
running that country unless they wake up before it is too late.
  Mr. SWEENEY. Reclaiming my time, let me conclude by saying that I 
agree the purposes of this amendment are quite noble and that we as a 
body and as an institution should be promoting the ideas of reform and 
we should be intolerant and frustrated, but this amendment goes too 
far. And we have already taken steps and the mere fact we are having 
this debate I believe reinforces that message. I urge my colleagues to 
oppose this amendment.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words. I rise in support of the Obey-Hyde-Lantos amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, in years past on this floor and in committee I have 
noted Egypt's central role in the Middle East peace efforts and that 
without those efforts we would have been even further away from peace 
than we are. That is, I believe, still true today. And clearly Egypt 
played an important part of Israel's successful disengagement from Gaza 
last year, but as central as the Egyptian role in the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict is and as helpful as Egypt has been with ship 
transits through the Suez and flights over the Suez Canal in support of 
our efforts in Iraq, in regional peace and security, is not the only 
agenda that we have with Egypt.
  President Bush has called for democratic transformation as a response 
to the rise of Islamic extremists in the Arab world. In Egypt, the 
response to that call has been decidedly mixed. Clearly, last year's 
presidential elections which for the first time featured more than one 
candidate on the ballot were a departure from the past practice of an 
up or down vote on President Mubarak and were a positive step forward. 
However, the Egyptian parliamentarian elections in December were marred 
with violence, voter intimidation and allegations of fraud as the 
ruling party sought to hold not just its majority in the assembly but 
its overwhelming majority.
  While some will point out that a large number of opposition 
candidates who want seats, the real concern is that so many of them are 
affiliated with the Muslim brotherhood. No doubt the Egyptian 
government will look at these results and say again that political 
reform must proceed slowly.
  I would argue that these results are of the government's own making. 
It is not democratic reform that produced these results, but the lack 
of political space for legitimate secular parties to function within 
Egyptian society. By denying that space, by arresting judges and 
journalists, by prosecuting legitimate opposition political leaders, by 
beating demonstrators, by extending the emergency law, the government 
of Egypt makes more likely the political result that they most fear, a 
future government of Egypt dominated by radical Islamists.
  The choice we have today is to do nothing and hope that with more 
dialogue and a little more cajoling, that we can get President Mubarak 
to continue on the path to reform or we can send a clear message that 
even appreciating how helpful Egypt is on the regional peace and 
security issues, the Congress will not stand silently by as government 
thugs beat peaceful demonstrators in the streets of Cairo and with 
their fists extinguish the hope of a truly moderate, secular democratic 
future for Egypt.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ACKERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman. We were just told this amendment 
goes too far. The fact is the State Department made phone calls to a 
number of people here yesterday indicating they would be willing to 
support this amendment. The only difference was that they wanted $50 
million going to added democratization programs rather than going to 
AIDS. That was the only difference, because the State Department is 
getting fed up with the conduct that Egypt is demonstrating, and the 
State Department recognizes that this is a very dangerous slippery 
slope the Egyptian government is on.
  So some may think this amendment goes far, but based on these 
conversation yesterday, the State Department is not one of them.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I do not think we should regard this as 
punitive. We should regard this as a signal coming from a friend. Mr. 
Obey, I think as a lifelong friend of Egypt as am I, would probably as 
ranking member, or perhaps as chairman, would be the first person to 
rush to the floor to restore those funds and then some, should Egypt 
understand this message and rectify its ways and move in a direction 
that is within its own interests.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly rise in support of the Obey amendment and 
I want my colleagues to know that the decision to support this 
amendment has not been an easy one for me. I support it out of a deep 
sense of disappointment and unease with recent actions taken by the 
Egyptian government.
  I returned from Egypt with many of the members of the committee just 
a couple of weeks ago. Our brief visit there was filled with candid 
meetings with key Egyptian officials. We heard about Egypt's support 
for the Darfur peace process, its pledges of support for a U.N. 
peacekeeping force.

                              {time}  1600

  We heard the fears of Egyptian officials about the prominence of the 
Muslim Brotherhood, the threats to Egyptian society and industry from 
terrorism, and that what happened in the Palestinian elections with 
Hamas could happen to them.
  We also heard about the great strides Egypt has made on economic 
reforms and the difficult reforms still ahead, and we heard about 
Egypt's cooperation on the Middle East peace process and Israel's 
withdrawal from Gaza and on ensuring speedy passage for U.S. military 
vessels through the Suez Canal.
  However, in recent weeks and months, we heard other stories as well, 
of thousands of riot police being deployed to crush peaceful 
demonstrations by supporters of judicial independence, of judges being 
punished for publicly saying that past elections have been rife with 
fraud, of efforts to quash moderate opposition parties, including 
through the prosecution, brutal physical abuse and lengthy 
incarceration of an opposition candidate, of the extension of the 
sweeping emergency law despite explicit statements that it would not be 
removed and, most recently, of the termination of democracy-building 
projects under the auspices of the International Republican Institute 
simply because IRI's Cairo director criticized the slow pace of 
Egyptian reform.
  I have such great respect for the chairman and am delighted that he 
had conversations with the IRI as a board member, and I do hope that 
there has been a misinterpretation of the public information with that 
issue, and I do hope it can be straightened out.
  I am concerned about these developments, and I just finally came to 
the conclusion that the U.S. has an obligation to speak out; and to 
those who say that Egypt is a close ally of the United States and we 
should deal with these

[[Page H3543]]

issues in private, I believe that we are a close ally, we will remain a 
close ally. We understand how important the United States-Egyptian 
relationship is, but I would say that we have dealt with them in 
private, countless times; but the Mubarak government refuses to 
acknowledge our messages.
  We, as members of the committee, delivered those messages in person. 
We understand that Egypt is a close, essential, strategic ally which is 
precisely why we tried to deliver those messages quietly, in private. 
It did not work. The reports kept appearing. The pictures on CNN when 
we were even in Egypt kept appearing.
  Since 1979, Egypt has received more than $60 billion in military and 
economic aid from the United States, and I have supported it every time 
I had the opportunity to vote for that, understanding the importance of 
Egypt in that very difficult region of the world. This is proof enough 
of the importance of Egypt's continued strength, stability, and 
friendship to the United States.
  The Obey amendment is not about devaluing that relationship or 
causing instability. It is, rather, a strong, unequivocal message that 
only a friend can deliver, that the way in which the government of 
Egypt currently approaches its moderate political opposition is simply 
inexcusable; and for this reason, I do urge my colleagues to support 
the Obey amendment.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. LOWEY. I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, I accompanied the gentlewoman on the 
delegation to Egypt. Will she acknowledge that we met with Mr. Mubarak, 
Jr., and that he outlined a roadmap for further constitutional 
democratization in Egypt that is a positive step and that the 
gentlewoman was impressed with that? Would she acknowledge that?
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, may I respond to my 
colleague, I feel strongly that I am not going to tell Mr. Mubarak or 
his son, with whom we were very impressed, I am not going to tell them 
whether they should democratize in 1 year, 2 years or 3 years.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) 
has expired.
  (By unanimous consent, Mrs. Lowey was allowed to proceed for 2 
additional minutes.)
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, in response to my good friend Mr. Wicker, 
as you well know, we had some very, very solid, powerful dialogue with 
both President Mubarak and his very impressive son, and we both felt 
that his words were very strong, very optimistic about the future of 
the continuance of our relationship and the importance of their role in 
that region.
  I am not even suggesting to my good friend Mr. Wicker that we should 
tell them they should democratize in 2 years or 3 years. They are 
living in a tough neighborhood, and they are taking actions that they 
may think are appropriate in their move towards democratization.
  However, I happen to believe, from the bottom of my heart, that those 
pictures on the camera of 10,000 riot police beating people over the 
head or the jailing of political opposition for 5 years on forgery 
charges, and I know we heard that he was not a very good, upstanding 
citizen, I believe that, however, I am taking this action because of 
the behavior which I think is inexcusable and because I have confidence 
that they will continue to move towards the path of democracy.
  So I am taking this action not because I am commenting on their slow 
move towards democracy, but because of the actions that they have taken 
that I think are inexcusable and, in my judgment, would be problematic 
if you are moving towards democratic reform.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. LOWEY. I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman agree that if this 
Obey amendment passes today, the headline tomorrow in Egypt would be 
that the United States House has taken a slap at our allies in Egypt 
and that it might make it harder for moderates in Egypt to continue 
down that path?
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) 
has again expired.
  (By unanimous consent, Mrs. Lowey was allowed to proceed for 1 
additional minute.)
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would hope the headline would emphasize 
the over $1 billion that we are providing in assistance to Egypt 
because we acknowledge the very critical role in that region: the 
critical role they are playing in Darfur; the critical role they are 
playing in the peace process. And I have confidence that that 
relationship is so strong that we will continue to work together to 
make sure that someday, in our lifetime, we will see peace in that 
region of the world and hopefully it will be based on democratic 
principles.
  I thank my good colleague for your very thoughtful question.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the 
requisite number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, one could not help but appreciate the debate that has 
been carried on this afternoon and particularly the remarks of concern 
about Egypt's democratization; and, certainly, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin and the gentlemen from California and Illinois are 
individuals that I respect, but I rise this afternoon to again 
emphasize key elements that we cannot change.
  In a letter from Secretary Rice dated the 24th to the chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, she said let me first state that our 
strategic partnership with Egypt is a cornerstone, a cornerstone, of 
U.S. policy in the Middle East, and the partnership that would continue 
would be in the U.S. interests.
  So although I recognize that this is to, if you will, to say to Egypt 
that all is not well, I would simply say to my colleagues that this is 
too important a relationship to create the kind of atmosphere or tone 
that would say that the alliance between Egypt and the United States 
has been broken and forever broken.
  A few weeks ago, some of us took our passion and our belief to the 
Sudanese embassy and were arrested, and so of course I have a sense of 
passion and concern for the dollars that would go to Sudan. But do we 
realize that Egypt is the first Arab country to support the peace 
agreement with Darfur that was reached between the government of Sudan 
and the rebels; that Egypt committed itself to participate in the 
international forces and post-war reconstruction of Darfur; that just 
recently Egypt has convinced the government of Khartoum to accept the 
international peace forces; and that Egypt has increased its 
participation in the African Union peacekeeping; and that they will 
welcome the sick and injured from Darfur, including the rebels? They 
have worked on behalf of this peace agreement.
  And then I might say to you that based on mutual agreement between 
Egypt and the U.S., the ES fund that was allocated is already $40 
million less than fiscal year 2006. We have already cut them more than 
half of the level, cut half of the level of 1998, and particularly this 
ES fund is targeted for democracy and education. The very complaint 
that we have will be undermined by the Obey amendment.
  I would also say to you that in Secretary Rice's letter she said 
again reducing the U.S. assistance would seriously damage our 
partnership, as well as the broader strategic interests of the United 
States. Accordingly, we firmly believe, the State Department, that the 
U.S. assistance to Egypt should continue at the full level requested by 
the administration.
  We frankly have an opportunity to reinforce our friendship. I do not 
like the incarceration of opposition and the 10,000 police that were, 
if you will, both misguided and without temperament. They should be 
chastised, and the Mubarak government has the responsibility to do 
that. What the world sees, the world believes.
  But Egypt is currently undergoing a process of reform. They are 
undergoing an effort of broadening political participation ensuring 
freedom of expression. In addition, they recognize that this is a 
problem with the incarceration of the opposition. I might remind my 
colleagues that it was a court decision that caused Mr. Noor to be 
incarcerated.
  But nonetheless, any letter to the effect that suggests that this is 
not the

[[Page H3544]]

right way I will join, but this is not the way to engage in this 
position. It is true that Egypt is not engaged in active or interactive 
military conflict as we speak, but there is no doubt that Egypt is a 
target of terror and terrorism. There is no doubt that they are a 
strategic body of safety within the region of the Middle East. They are 
subject to forces of terrorism, militant Islam, and rogue countries 
that threaten America and Egypt.
  I would only ask my colleagues that, yes, it is appropriate to 
admonish Egypt and to make them realize that we want an encompassing of 
the ideals of democracy, but having just received the Prime Minister of 
Israel, they have a relationship with a strong partner of the United 
States. Let us recognize that Egypt has been a friend; that Egypt's 
culture is a culture of great diversity; that Egyptians here in the 
United States have spent their blood on behalf of freedom of this 
country; and that the relationship that we have between Egypt and the 
United States is one to nurture and one to give credence to and one to 
be able to protect.
  Egypt is listening to this debate, and I believe, Mr. Chairman, as 
they listen to this debate they will correct their ways, but we should 
not support this amendment. Let us support and nurture the relationship 
between the United States and Egypt. They are a strategic partner.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number 
of words.
  In a moment, I would turn to my colleague Mr. Obey in case he has 
other thoughts to round out his, I think, important case on an 
important amendment, which I strongly support. The only adjustment that 
I could possibly suggest would be that some of the money that was of 
the $100 million be invested in water resources around the world, but I 
am pleased to step forward.
  I am a supporter of the historic agreement that Egypt entered into. I 
think the $60 billion American taxpayers have invested is justifiable, 
but I think it is time for us to take a step back and get real. I have 
listened to the argument that we have heard from a variety of people, 
including those who have been the most steadfast supporters of Egypt on 
the floor of this Chamber year after year in terms of patience running 
thin, in terms of the oppression of people in Egypt, suppression of the 
democratic process.

                              {time}  1615

  I find it a little farfetched to suggest that somehow everything is 
going to be fine with our relationship with Egypt if we give them $1.75 
billion, but if somehow that is scaled down to $1.65 billion that 
somehow things are going to be upset; that it is a slap in the face; 
that Egypt is somehow undermined. Who else is going to give them this 
type of money and provide this type of steadfast support?
  It is the wrong use of this money. I think Mr. Obey has suggested 
higher and better uses. Again, I only wish it was water resources. I 
think it is an important wake-up call for Egypt, but more important, I 
think it is an affirmation of our responsibility of how we use these 
resources to extend our interests in foreign policy. We shouldn't be 
trapped in time.
  I think Mr. Obey's amendment is an important step in our exercising 
our responsibility.
  I yield to Mr. Obey if he wanted to elaborate on his defense.
  Mr. OBEY. I thank the gentleman. Someone on the other side just said 
``What will the headline be tomorrow?''; that it will be that there is 
a slap in the face of the government. That is the point. That is the 
point.
  Our long-term security is tied not just to Mr. Mubarak, but whoever 
comes after him. And what we are trying to do is to send a message to 
all levels in Egyptian society that we stand for what we say we stand 
for, which is a modicum of decency in dealing with your political 
opponents, absent other trappings of democracy.
  And it is important that a lot of people in Egypt besides Mr. Mubarak 
understand that we are serious about our democratic values, that we are 
serious about assuming that the country that is more identified with us 
than any other Arab country, that it is important that they reflect 
certain norms of decency with respect to the way they treat their 
population and treat their political opponents.
  And it is in the interest of the United States to make sure that 
every citizen of Egypt understands that, because otherwise, we allow 
other groups, like the Muslim Brotherhood, to paint caricatures of the 
United States, which will do us no good in the long run.
  I thank the gentleman for the time.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, only a few months ago, the Department of State reported 
on the type of Egypt that would receive more American tax dollars under 
this bill: ``The government's respect for human rights remained poor, 
and serious abuses continued in many areas.'' ``Security forces killed 
a number of opposition voters and protestors.'' ``A systematic pattern 
of torture by the security forces existed.'' ``At least seven persons 
died in custody at police stations or prisons'' during 2005. This on 
top of 120 such deaths in police custody ``as a direct result of 
torture'' over the prior decade ``among some 420 cases of torture.''
  I think Secretary of State Rice was absolutely correct to speak out 
on democracy in Egypt earlier this year, and she was also correct when 
she said previously ``that for 60 years, it has been the policy of the 
United States and our allies to turn a blind eye to the absence of 
freedom in the Middle East.'' The only problem is that the commitment 
of this Administration to democracy promotion is largely determined by 
its desperate attempt to find more excuses for its other foreign policy 
failures. And when it comes to Egypt, the Bush administration has 
merely changed that ``blind eye'' to a wink.
  Yes, just after President Mubarak last month extended emergency rule 
and dictatorial powers for himself, just after he locked up his 
electoral opponent, and just as his henchmen were beating peacefully 
assembled people brutally on the streets of Cairo, Vice President 
Cheney winked and accorded Mubarak, Jr. the prestige of a White House 
meeting. And the Administration advises that President Bush dropped in 
to say hello to Mubarak, Jr., but briefly because he only wanted to 
convey his best wishes to Mubarak, Sr.
  Well, the Mubarak strategy deserves more than that kind of wink and a 
nod toward democracy. His strategy has been, from the very beginning, 
to convince American leaders and American taxpayers to transfer their 
tax dollars to Egypt because he represents the only alternative to 
Islamic extremists. And to ensure that his strategy continues to pay 
dividends, he aggressively suppresses any moderate opposition that 
emerges.
  It is true that he doesn't boil his opponents alive like Secretary 
Rumsfeld's former buddy in Uzbekistan. But to follow the sad path of 
civic discourse in Egypt is to watch an authoritarian respond to his 
people's demand for a more open society with a big stick, with a view 
that he can beat that spirit out of them with fear and intimidation.
  What we need in Egypt, as several people have said on both sides of 
this debate, what we need is a pragmatic policy, a policy that realizes 
if we continue to associate ourselves with a corrupt regime, eventually 
the pressure cooker will explode, and we will have paid to create the 
very disaster that these dollars are allegedly designed to avoid.
  Now is the time to tell President Mubarak, through this amendment, 
that we have wasted more than enough money propping up tyranny. 
Ultimately, by approving the Obey-Lantos-Hyde-Green bipartisan 
amendment, this Congress can say to this latter-day pharoah, ``let your 
Egyptian people go.'' Doing that is the best way not only to help the 
people of Egypt, but also to help American families be safer.
  Some have asked about the headline that will likely run about this 
debate. I will tell you what the headline will be if this amendment is 
not approved. The headline will be: ``We got away with it again.'' 
Clearly, the Egyptian government has not heard the comments given 
quietly in private during the past. They have paid more attention to 
the winks they have gotten from this Administration. The only thing 
they will understand is in dollars and cents and in the votes that are 
cast for this amendment.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment because it 
will

[[Page H3545]]

not only protect American tax dollars, it will lead to more safety for 
American families.
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Obey-Hyde-Lantos-Green 
amendment to increase disaster assistance funding for Darfur by $50 
million and to increase HIV/AIDS assistance by $50 million. In order to 
pay for this funding, this bipartisan amendment will cut $100 million 
in economic budget support for Egypt.
  Mr. Chairman, when we provide money to any organization or 
government, we should demand accountability and results in return. 
However, we have heard over and over again that in just the last year 
the government of Egypt has imprisoned the leading opposition candidate 
in their 2005 elections, which were themselves marred by fraud; 
extended so-called emergency laws despite promises to repeal them, 
cracked down on pro-democracy groups, harassed and arrested members of 
the press, and suspended a United States Government funded program to 
promote democracy. This is simply not acceptable. Perhaps some tough 
love and leaner times will help refocus the Egyptian government on 
Democratic reforms.
  While our funds are obviously finite, the need for true humanitarian 
assistance around the world is seemingly infinite. The World Food 
Program has recently had to cut rations for refugees in the Sudan due 
to a shortfall in funding. The global HIV/AIDS initiative is funded at 
$121 million below the President's request. I am sure that nearly all 
of us would rather see our taxpayers' money used to support refugees 
and children orphaned by AIDS than used to throw dissidents and 
reporters into Egyptian jails.
  Just a day or two ago, I was arrested in front of the Sudanese 
Embassy as a result of all of the difficulty and the genocide and the 
instability taking place in Darfur. Certainly a little bit of 
additional money to help provide resources for those refugees, for 
those individuals whose lives are disrupted would go a long way. So I 
urge support for the Obey amendment.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Obey-Hyde-Lantos 
amendment because the lifesaving interventions that would be 
effectuated by the amendment to enhance by $50 million money for PEPFAR 
and another $50 million to meet the needs for refugees and IDPs in 
Darfur are compelling.
  The money diverted from Egypt, I want to make very clear, will be 
very well used. I have actually visited camps in Darfur, Mr. Chairman, 
and they are underfunded. Despite our best efforts and many of the 
efforts of the international community, people do need more, food, 
medicines, as well as the shelter and security that ensures that the 
food and medicines can go to the people.
  Let me also point out that the PEPFAR program did not receive in this 
bill the amount of money that the President had asked for. Some of that 
money was put into the Global Fund. And I think it is unfortunate that 
PEPFAR, that has worked so well and is still growing in its 
capabilities as well as its impact, should be funded at least at the 
level the President has asked for. This gets us closer to that number.
  I recently visited a number of the programs that are funded by PEPFAR 
in Uganda and saw firsthand how there is behavioral change that is 
occurring as part of the abstinence, be faithful approach. But 
especially for those under the age of 30, there is a profound change. 
The infection rate is dropping dramatically, and has been for a few 
years now in places like Uganda.
  We went out into the bush and into areas where U.S. funded teams are 
going out two by two to bring the message of health, including testing 
as well as what needs to be done if one is found to be infected by HIV/
AIDS. We also saw that the PEPFAR monies were being used very 
efficaciously using faith-based initiatives and others to get the 
antiretroviral drugs to those infected. But clearly, there is not 
enough medicine available. Whether it be for young people or people who 
are older, there is just not enough antiretroviral medicine being 
funded to reach all of those who could get their lives back if indeed 
that money was there. So this money, at least $50 million of it, will 
be put there.
  Let me also say with regards to Egypt, we all know pursuant to the 
Camp David agreement, and because of the boycott, the Egyptians did 
receive significant amounts of money, as they should have, and they do 
so every year. They continue to do so even if the Obey-Hyde-Lantos 
language is adopted. But I am very concerned, as someone who spends a 
great deal of time working on human rights, that there has been a 
deterioration of human rights in Egypt, Christians and others, the 
government has not done all it can do to try to mitigate these abuses.
  Yes, I like Mubarak. We all like him. He is a very affable and a very 
effective leader in many ways. But it seems to me much more has to be 
done on a human rights record that the Country Reports on Human Rights 
Practices this year again has said is poor, as well as the 
International Religious Freedom Report with regards to Egypt.
  So for all of these reasons, I strongly urge that we support this 
amendment. It is a good amendment. And, again, we are still, even if 
this passes, major providers of U.S. taxpayer funds to Egypt, even if 
this amendment passes. So I urge support of the amendment.
  Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Friends, it is absolutely true that we need friends in this region, 
but it is also true that it is not easy to be our friend in the region. 
It is not easy, first of all, because a lot of folks in that area are 
not very fond of the United States of America, and Egypt has been an 
exception and a dear friend in troubling times and in a troubling 
region.
  It is not easy also because, as a friend, we are sometimes rather 
condescending.

                              {time}  1630

  I have listened to some of the language that has been used here. We 
talk about tough love. Tough love is something you do not do with 
someone of mutual stature; tough love is something parents do to 
children. I have heard language like ``get their attention.'' We have 
Egypt's attention. They understand that we care about democracy, but it 
is presumptuous of us to assume that Egyptians do not care about 
democracy and human rights as well.
  I had the privilege of traveling to Egypt recently with some of my 
good colleagues. We met with a number of moderates and business leaders 
who said it would be counterproductive if the House of Representatives 
seeks to punish Egypt or teach Egypt a lesson by withholding these 
appropriations. It would be counterproductive. Human rights activists 
told me that. The reason it would be counterproductive is because Egypt 
has made a number of reforms that we have asked them to make. They are 
engaging in economic liberalization. They are engaging in progress 
towards democracy after thousands of years.
  Our own country certainly did not start perfectly. As any African 
American or woman knows, we passed the Alien and Sedition Acts under 
John Adams. Our own country had a slow and tortuous progress towards 
full democratic participation.
  Egypt is moving in that direction. If we are condescending and 
patronizing at this critical time, it will send the wrong message, not 
the right message.
  Egypt has boots on the ground in Darfur helping the refugees. They 
are operating a field hospital in Afghanistan, treating our own wounded 
and Afghani civilians. Egypt has been critical to helping negotiate the 
tense situation with the Palestinian Authority. Egypt has been involved 
in training the Iraqi troops.
  Yes, there are concerns. But goodness gracious, could you not turn on 
the TV occasionally and see demonstrators clashing with police in our 
own country? And do we not have other allies in that country and 
elsewhere on this planet that have treated journalists harshly?
  If we expect perfection from our friends or we will punish them or 
teach them a lesson or engage in tough love, we are going to have 
precious few friends left in the world. Precious few. We need to treat 
the Egyptians with the respect their long and proud history deserves. 
We need to continue to support them with appropriations, and we need to 
work with them as partners

[[Page H3546]]

with mutual respect and honor in the long tradition that we have 
established with this great country.
  I understand the good motives of the ranking member and the others 
who have supported this amendment. I understand their intentions and I 
respect that. I just think it is a strategy that may actually backfire 
on us in the region, and for that reason I urge rejection of this 
amendment and we continue to work with the Egyptian Government to 
encourage and support the many achievements they have made and to 
support future achievements as they move forward.
  That is the message I heard on the ground in Egypt, and I hope my 
colleagues will share that and reject this amendment.
  Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number 
of words.
  Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to support Mr. Kolbe in 
opposing this amendment to decrease economic support to the government 
of Egypt.
  I think it is important to note that I fully appreciate the concerns 
raised by the sponsors of this amendment and their commitment to 
political and human rights reform in Egypt. The imprisonment of Mr. 
Noor, a presidential candidate, other prisoners of conscience, as well 
as serious violations of religious freedom, are very serious affronts 
to human dignity and freedom. I believe that we have a responsibility 
to raise the issue of reform with the Egyptian Government which the 
United States has done on numerous occasions and continues to do.
  However, it is also important to note that Egypt has borne 
significant sacrifices for the cause of peace and freedom in the Middle 
East.
  President Sadat paid a very high price for Egypt's rapprochement with 
Israel. More recently, Ambassador Ihab al-Sherif paid with his life for 
daring to defy the foes of peace in Iraq.
  When I visited the Sinai as an 18-year-old in the aftermath of the 
1973 war, I was struck by the graffiti scrawled on a twisted heap of 
concrete, a scene so typical throughout the Middle East. The message in 
Arabic and English read: ``Here was the war. Here is the peace.''
  For close to 30 years now, Egypt has stood by a courageous choice, 
daring to chart a new course. President Sadat could have made another 
choice. While no government is perfect, this choice has been consistent 
with a march toward democratic reform. Much is left to do. Many 
challenges remain. But the loosening of our hand of friendship with 
Egypt will potentially harm that which this amendment seeks to achieve.
  Egypt is one of our most important strategic allies in the Middle 
East, and a cultural and historical leader of the Arab world. I believe 
this amendment would achieve nothing short of damaging an important 
relationship at a critical time.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank God that Members Obey, Hyde and Lantos have had 
the courage to bring this amendment. And I say so because, Mr. 
Chairman, a human crisis of the highest magnitude exists in Darfur. As 
we speak, we have had 2.5 million people displaced. Something has got 
to be done about that. We have had 3 million people put in a position 
such that they have to exist on emergency assistance. 400,000 people 
are dead. These are real people; these are real numbers. There is real 
suffering going on in Darfur.
  I do not know what the headlines will read tomorrow in Egypt. I do 
not know what they are going to read here in my hometown of Houston or 
here in Washington, D.C., but I know this: at some point on the 
infinite continuum that we call time, the omniscient, the omnipresent, 
and the omnipotent will come together and every one of us will have to 
answer the question: Where were you when there was murder and rape and 
hunger in Darfur? Where were you when your brothers and your sisters 
were suffering?
  I want to let you know that this is the least we can do for the 
people of Darfur.
  Mr. Chairman, $50 million will go to the World Food Program that 
needs help. It only has 32 percent of what it needs to meet the demands 
of this crisis.
  Mr. Chairman, we have to ask ourselves the question: If not now, 
when? When will we give help and aid to those in need?
  If not here, where? Where will the help come from?
  If not us, who? Who will the help come from?
  Mr. Obey, God bless you. You have done the decent thing for people 
who have been suffering for too long. I thank you for what you have 
done.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBEY. 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 Wisconsin will be 
postponed.
  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope in just a moment here that we will be able to 
have the committee rise and we will have a unanimous consent agreement 
to propound. But let me say before that moment that I do think this 
debate that we have just concluded has been a very constructive debate, 
a very productive one.
  As I said in the committee, I hope that our friends in Egypt, whether 
they are here in the United States or whether they are listening to 
this abroad, have taken some message from this debate that we have just 
had on the question of our relationship with Egypt and the support and 
the strategic partnership which we all recognize as an important one. 
But I hope the message that our friends in Egypt take from this is that 
democracy is about this kind of a debate.
  In a democracy, you not only allow this kind of debate, you encourage 
it. What we hope to be able to say to our friends in Egypt is that this 
debate is an important one, and we have had a very constructive debate 
that I believe is very important.
  Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Boozman) 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. 5522) 
making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, and 
related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for 
other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________