[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 100 (Wednesday, June 20, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H6795-H6809]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, FOREIGN OPERATIONS AND RELATED PROGRAMS 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 498 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. 2764.

                              {time}  1814


                     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. 2764) making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign 
operations, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 2008, and for other purposes, with Mr. Capuano 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 gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to present to the House H.R. 2764, the 
fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill for the Department of State, 
foreign operations and related programs.
  I'm particularly pleased that the appropriations bill that I bring to 
the floor as chairwoman of the State Foreign Operations Subcommittee 
reflects a bipartisan process, and that the ranking member, Frank Wolf, 
was instrumental in pulling this bill together, as well as a very 
talented and engaged subcommittee.
  I'm very proud of our product. The bill before you totals $34.243 
billion in new discretionary budget authority, $2.9 billion above 
fiscal year 2007, not counting supplemental appropriations, and $700 
million below the President's request. This is the largest increase 
over the prior year enacted level that this subcommittee has received 
in over a decade. I appreciate Chairman Obey's recognition of the 
importance of this bill and the programs it funds.
  The bill includes over $7 billion to address our strategic priorities 
and national security interests, as well as increases for programs that 
promote development and reduce low global poverty, meet humanitarian 
needs, and respond to urgent health crises, priorities at the core of 
our interests abroad.
  For the war on terror, this bill includes $2.656 billion in economic 
assistance for our strategic partners and $4.509 billion in military 
assistance. While the bill includes $1.057 billion for Afghanistan, 
there are no additional funds for Iraq. In light of the $2.86 billion 
provided for Iraq reconstruction in the recently passed supplemental 
appropriations bill, and the $2.89 billion requested by the 
administration in the 2008 supplemental, I feel extremely strongly that 
there is no need at this time for additional funds for the same 
purposes in this bill, given the extraordinary needs to be met around 
the world.
  The bill includes over $4.7 billion to support State Department 
operations, both in the United States and abroad. The recommendation 
fully funds the President's request for worldwide security upgrades, 
and provides $364 million for public diplomacy efforts at the State 
Department, as well as $501 million for educational and cultural 
exchanges.
  The bill also provides $6.517 billion for global health. Addressing 
tuberculosis, avian flu, HIV/AIDS and other health threats is one of 
the best preventive measures to protect the health of the United 
States. We provide $5.082 billion for international HIV/AIDS efforts, 
which, in addition to appropriations in other bills, brings the total 
for international HIV/AIDS to $5.876 billion. This is $550 million 
above the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request, and includes 
$850 million for the global fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and 
malaria.
  The bill also includes $1.73 billion for development programs managed 
by the U.S. Agency for International Development, an increase of $225 
million above the fiscal year 2007 enacted level. The increased 
resources will fund an initiative on basic education for developing 
countries, as well as an expansion of safe water and environment 
programs.
  As many of you know, basic education has been one of my top 
priorities for years and, I'm pleased to say, a top priority of the 
members of this committee. I'm convinced that access to quality primary 
education not only improves an individual's chances for a better, more 
productive life, it creates a more tolerant and informed citizenry. 
I've provided a total of $750 million for basic education in the bill, 
an increase of $200 million from the fiscal year 2007 House-passed 
bill.
  This bill also provides $501 million for the environment and clean 
energy programs, including $106 million for the global environmental 
facility, and $175 million for biodiversity programs at USAID. We've 
also included a provision that encourages the Export-Import Bank to 
support projects in renewable energy and other environmentally 
beneficial products. This initiative could result in an estimated $1 
billion in additional green exports in 2008.
  There is $1.8 billion for the Millennium Challenge Account. This is a 
$1.2 billion reduction from the request, but $48 million above the 
fiscal year 2007 enacted level. I'm supportive of the MCA. I want to 
make this very clear. And while I believe the MCA is under the strong 
and capable management of Ambassador Danilovich, I would like to see 
more results on the ground from the $6 billion that has already been 
appropriated, $2.1 billion of which is not yet even obligated, before 
we significantly scale-up the MCA. The reduction to MCA helps us 
address the shortfalls for development assistance and health accounts. 
We have also funded a basic education initiative as well as expansion 
of safe water and environmental programs.
  With an investment of over $5 billion in the 6 years that Plan 
Colombia has been in effect, the numbers of hectares involved in coca 
production has increased by 42 percent. Because our efforts to combat 
narcotics in Colombia have been ineffective for some time, this bill 
restructures assistance for Colombia. We cut overall funding by 10 
percent, or $59 million, and shift greater resources to the 
development, interdiction, rule of law and justice programs. It is time 
for the Colombians to take ownership over their eradication and 
military assistance programs, and this cut reflects that position.
  The bill provides over $5.4 billion for Africa, including a total of 
$949.3 million for Sudan, $210.5 million of which is for Darfur, $104 
million above the request. We have provided $100 million in increased 
funding for the African Union Force in Darfur.
  This bill allows us to fully meet the President's request for Israel 
and Egypt. And I want to make it clear that Egypt is a friend, an 
important ally in the war on terror and a partner for peace in the 
Middle East. However, there are growing concerns about the independence 
of its judiciary, police abuses, and the smuggling operation from Egypt 
into Gaza. As a result, this bill requires the Secretary of State to 
certify that steps are being taken to address these issues before a 
portion of the military aid to Egypt can be released.
  Lastly, as you know, U.S. Government assistance for family planning 
is prohibited for groups that provide, promote, refer or counsel on 
abortions. Groups that merely exercise their legal rights to advocate 
for policies such as the legalization of abortion are denied U.S. 
assistance. This bill provides an exemption to those restrictions 
simply for the provision of contraceptive commodities. Foreign family 
planning organizations, which have been denied USAID family planning 
funds, could receive contraceptives from USAID to help reduce 
unintended and high-risk pregnancies, abortions and the spread of HIV, 
as well as save the lives of mothers and infants.
  This provision does not amend any of the provisions in existing law 
that prohibit assistance for abortions or otherwise restrict family 
planning funds.

[[Page H6796]]

They're all there; 10 of them are all there; and 5 for restricting 
family planning; 10 to be sure that there's no money for abortion, and 
5 to restrict family planning. All there.
  Mr. Chairman, this package of foreign assistance before you preserves 
our Nation's interests, reflects the values and priorities of the 
American people, and most importantly, helps to protect the security of 
Americans at home and abroad. It was developed in a bipartisan manner, 
and I expect it to have wide support as it passes the House.
  In closing, let me say again that it has been a pleasure working with 
Ranking Member Wolf and the minority staff, Christine Kojac, Rob Blair, 
Mike Ringler, Alice Hogans and Molly Miller. I would like to thank my 
vice chair, Jesse Jackson, Jr. for his hard work on this bill. I 
greatly appreciate the outstanding work and support of Nisha Desai, 
Lucy Heenan, Craig Higgins, Steve Marchese, Michele Sumilas, Mark Lopes 
and Celia Alvarado. They're all competent, professional and really a 
joy to work with. The work we have accomplished together in this bill 
will help make America more secure and will improve the lives of 
millions throughout the world.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to submit this bill, and urge your 
favorable consideration.

[[Page H6797]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH20JN07.001



[[Page H6798]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH20JN07.002



[[Page H6799]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH20JN07.003



[[Page H6800]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH20JN07.004



[[Page H6801]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH20JN07.005



[[Page H6802]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH20JN07.006



[[Page H6803]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH20JN07.007



[[Page H6804]]

  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1830

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me start by commending the chairwoman on putting together a 
thoughtful bill, her first as the chairwoman of this new and important 
subcommittee. I must also recognize the chairwoman's continuation of 
this subcommittee's bipartisan tradition, as well as stating how much I 
appreciate the chairwoman's willingness to listen to our concerns and 
accommodate them as much as possible.
  Overall, I think it is a very good bill, but I do have some concerns.
  First and foremost, I believe this bill sends a terrible message to 
the State Department's officers and foreign service nationals and our 
military fighting in Iraq. The report accompanying the bill clearly 
states that there is no funding provided for Iraq. I intend to offer an 
amendment to restore $158 million of the $391 million that the 
President requested. I believe that not providing the requested funding 
for counterterrorism and de-mining activities is shortsighted and 
potentially dangerous. This program has trained more than 1,000 Iraqis 
in explosive detection and removal, therefore helping to protect the 
lives of our military and also improving public safety to reduce 
insurgent access to deadly munitions.
  No funds are provided to develop effective civilian law enforcement 
and anti-terrorism programs in Iraq, specifically to focus on 
strengthening terrorist financing and money laundering.
  No funds are provided to continue English language training and 
professional training for military officers in the United States. This 
training focuses on international human rights, fostering respect for 
civilian control of the military and the rule of law. Such funding is 
crucial if public statements by Members about wanting Iraqis to be able 
to defend themselves are, in fact, accurate and not purely rhetorical.
  Also, this fits into the recommendations made by the Iraq Study 
Group, and when the resolution came up a while back that the other side 
had, I think 220-some Members said they supported the Iraq Study Group.
  Well, no funding is provided to help Iraq manage their national 
budget, a crucial step towards Iraq self-reliance. No funding is 
included to enable Iraq to stimulate local economies to counter the 
impact of the insurgents. Assistance was requested and denied that 
would help Iraq create jobs in the agriculture sector and create food 
production, thereby stimulating Iraq's second largest economic sector 
after the oil area. These funds would directly weaken the insurgent 
base in rural areas, which we all on both sides want to do.
  Finally, no funding is included to help national reconciliation, 
political reform, and fair provincial elections in 2008 and fair 
national elections in 2009. Additional funding was requested to develop 
the Iraqi criminal justice system. These necessary funds would allow 
the Iraqi government to identify, bring to justice, and incarcerate 
insurgents and terrorists who are trying to destabilize the country. 
So, hopefully, we can adopt that amendment.
  The second issue of concern for me is there are new provisions 
regarding funding for family planning programs overseas. The President 
clearly stated in a May 3, 2007, letter to the Speaker of the House 
that he would veto any legislation that weakens current Federal 
policies and laws on abortion. As a result of these language changes 
alone, I believe the bill will now be vetoed, which is unfortunate 
because there are so many good things in the bill.
  Thirdly, the bill does not include any funding to support the 
recommendations by Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba. The Castro 
regime is the only nondemocratically elected government in the Western 
Hemisphere. So now is the time to demonstrate a commitment to the 
future of freedom for Cuba and to fund the programs that will 
facilitate peaceful democratic transition. And, again, this has nothing 
to do with the whole trade issue that this place talks about or the 
whole travel issue. This is to help the democratic movement in Cuba.
  In conclusion, I believe this bill has the potential to do a lot of 
good, and I want to say that this bill will help save a lot of lives 
not only here but around the world. This is the work of the Lord. And I 
know Members are going to come down and are going to be against the 
bill. And I hope that we can change some of these things to prevent a 
veto, but this bill, eventually when it passes, assuming it will be 
vetoed, is really to feed the poor, the hungry, the naked, the sick. 
Almost a better title would be a Matthew 25 bill. So it has the 
potential to do a lot of good, and I hope to work with Chairwoman Lowey 
to ensure the State Department has what it needs to do these things, 
the war on terror, to provide humanitarian assistance to the most 
needy, and to improve human rights around the world.
  And Members on our side are offering amendments with regard to 
cutting. This is actually under the allocation with regard to the 
administration.
  I look forward to working with the chairwoman to resolve the 
differences.
  I also want to thank Nisha Desai, Craig Higgins, Steve Markes, Michel 
Sumilas, Celia, Rob, and also Christine, who were too embarrassed to 
put their names down. I wanted to put them down too. And I also want to 
thank the full committee staff on both sides, who have been very 
helpful.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to our 
distinguished vice chairman, a very hardworking member of our 
subcommittee, my partner in this effort, Mr. Jackson of Illinois.
  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding.
  I rise to voice my strong support for H.R. 2764, The State, Foreign 
Operations and Related Programs Appropriations bill. I can think of few 
things we do on an annual basis that are more important and crucial to 
the success of U.S. foreign policy than passing this bill.
  I would be remiss if I did not begin my comments by thanking the 
chairwoman, Congresswoman Nita Lowey, the first woman to chair this 
subcommittee and, in a very short time already, its most extraordinary 
chairman. I also want to thank Ranking Member Wolf and the majority and 
minority subcommittee staff for helping to produce a great bill.
  Despite the fact that the allocation for this bill is $700 million 
below the President's request, this is a well-written, well-measured 
bill, taking into account the concerns of both the majority and the 
minority. However, I am worried about the amendments I have seen that 
want to cut some of the vital programs in this bill in the name of 
fiscal discipline.
  I am worried, Mr. Chairman, because yesterday around the world nearly 
15,000 to 20,000 people died of extreme poverty. Today around the world 
15,000 to 20,000 people will die of extreme poverty. Tomorrow around 
the world 15,000 to 20,000 people will die of extreme poverty. Extreme 
poverty like malnutrition and disease are claiming tens of thousands of 
lives every day.
  This bill has a real opportunity to reverse these facts. Look at what 
has been done to date with our foreign aid bill. Smallpox eradication 
began in the 1960s; control of river blindness in the 1970s; increased 
child immunizations in the 1980s; initiatives to fight Guinea worm, 
trachoma, and leprosy in the 1990s; and the effort to end polio in this 
decade. Measurable results produced with the dollars in this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, let me point out some of the highlights of this 
measure. This bill before us today makes significant improvements in 
our aid package to Colombia, especially for Afro-Colombians, by 
emphasizing alternative development and rule of law, programs that 
work.
  This bill, Mr. Chairman, provides increases for both our multilateral 
and bilateral peacekeeping obligations. These funds will provide 
security for trouble spots like the Darfur region of Sudan and the 
Democratic Republic of the Congo.
  This bill provides increases for global health programs that fight 
the scourge of HIV, TB, and malaria. This bill provides increases for 
development assistance programs. Some of these funds are educating 
children and providing clean drinking water and sanitation around the 
world.
  The increases in this bill are the least we can do. I don't 
understand why some Members plan to offer amendments that cut some of 
the increases in

[[Page H6805]]

key development programs, tearing apart the majority party as tax and 
spenders. Our former colleague from Illinois, my friend John Porter, 
used the term ``noblesse oblige,'' the belief that the wealthy and the 
privileged are obliged to help those who are less fortunate. In Luke 
chapter 12, verse 48, Jesus simply says, ``To whom much is given, much 
is expected.'' In Matthew chapter 6, verse 21, Jesus said, ``For where 
your treasure is, there will your heart be also.'' If this verse is 
true, what does it say about these amendments that want to cut these 
crucial programs that are improving millions of lives around the world? 
I have a master's degree in theology from the Chicago Theological 
Seminary, and I have read my Bible from cover to cover. And nowhere 
does it say, ``only clothe the naked and feed the poor after you have 
cut taxes for very wealthy people.''
  In 1984, referring to Marxist-ruled Ethiopia, President Ronald Reagan 
said, ``A hungry child knows no politics.'' All he knows is that he is 
hungry.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 2764, the State, Foreign 
Operations Appropriations bill. I hope that Democrats and Republicans 
will rally behind an extraordinary product created by the chairman of 
this committee, the ranking member of this committee, and the 
extraordinary Foreign Operations staff.
  Mr. WOLF. Before I yield to Mr. Lewis, I want to comment on the 
gentleman's remarks. I wouldn't question what his interpretation is, 
but in Luke it says ``To whom much is given, much is required.'' Some 
versions say ``expected,'' but it is actually a requirement, and we 
know a requirement in college, you have to do it to pass. So I think 
the authentic version says ``To whom much is given, much is required.'' 
But I see it makes the gentleman's statement much more powerful, and I 
appreciate the reference.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the former 
chairman and the ranking member, who has been very generous and very 
interested in this subcommittee's work, Mr. Lewis.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Wolf and Madam Chairman, I can't tell you how much I respect the 
work that the two of you have done together, and to join on the floor 
with my friend Jessie Jackson in expressing support for this bill, 
indeed, is a privilege.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise today to support H.R. 2764, the 
State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations bill for 
the fiscal year 2008.
  I want to express my appreciation for the work of Mrs. Lowey as well 
as Mr. Wolf. They are a demonstration project of what we can do when we 
set partisanship aside and work together on behalf of really our 
responsibility to lead in this world.
  This bill is the primary legislative vehicle through which Congress 
reviews the U.S. international affairs budget and influences our 
foreign policy. It provides a total of $34.243 billion including $10.76 
billion for State Department operations, international broadcasting, 
and related agencies, and $23.62 billion for foreign assistance 
programs. The total is $2.95 billion over last year's level and $700 
million less than the President's request.
  This bill addresses critical issues such as the AIDS pandemic, Child 
Survival and Health programs, anti-narcotics programs, and our efforts 
in the global war on terror.
  Mr. Chairman, it is important that we realize what a critical role 
this bill plays in the well-being of the world and the security of our 
Nation. The United States is the last remaining superpower and the sole 
voice of freedom and democracy around the world. What we do in this 
bill saves the lives of countless numbers of people in nations that are 
less fortunate than ours. These funds stabilize fragile democracies 
around the globe and help our allies in the global war on terror.
  Now, I know most Members feel they weren't elected to support 
international assistance programs. In fact, Mr. Chairman, I am sure 
there are many Members who feel that the United States should 
dramatically reduce the amount of money we spend around the world and 
focus our resources on domestic priorities. This sort of isolationist 
point of view has no place in today's shrinking world. One needs only 
to look to Europe as an example of a once powerful and influential 
nation withdrew its resources from around the world and focused inward. 
What has since been termed as the ``French model'' resulted in massive 
inflation, high unemployment rates within the country, and severe 
internal crises. The United States should not follow the ``French 
model,'' a misguided path that essentially has caused the French to 
disappear as a powerful force in the world.

                              {time}  1845

  I remember as a young man attending UCLA I was fortunate to 
participate in a program that preceded the Peace Corps called Project 
India. As I joined other young students in traveling to villages around 
a country where poverty and ever-present caste systems were always 
visible, I was struck by the importance that personal freedom and 
opportunity have on the human condition, especially if you had the good 
fortune of being born in the United States of America.
  Today, India has outlawed the caste system and is the largest 
democracy in the world, as well as our strong ally in the global war on 
terror. I am particularly pleased that in any congressional district 
there are large numbers of my constituents who are actively involved, 
advocating for increases in our international assistance program.
  In recent meetings with the Results Group, with CARE, Bread for the 
World and others, I have noticed that more and more people are 
beginning to understand that they, too, have a role in our role for 
leadership in the world. Theirs are the voices from the grass roots, a 
perspective that we need as Americans to recognize that we must 
continue to lead in the world, for indeed, without our leadership, the 
poor of the world will suffer most.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to support this fabulous demonstration of 
work on both sides of the aisle together.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from California, a valuable member of our subcommittee, who 
has focused his intellect on nuclear nonproliferation, on 
counterterrorism and on demining and I look forward to working together 
for many years on this committee (Mr. Schiff).
  Mr. SCHIFF. I want to begin by commending Chairwoman Lowey for her 
extraordinary work on this bill and the really exemplary way that she 
has chaired this committee. I also want to commend our ranking member, 
Mr. Wolf.
  Our Chair and ranking member have crafted a bill that I think 
reflects the bipartisan approach to America's engagement in the world 
that we should have. It supports a view that I share that a healthier, 
better educated and more secure developing world means a safer world 
for America.
  After several years where diplomacy was marginalized and the men and 
women of the State Department were relegated to junior-partner status 
in the national security policymaking apparatus, this committee is 
moving our policy towards a new primacy for diplomacy.
  This bill is important to our efforts to fight terrorism, foster 
peaceful diplomacy, and improve the quality of life for millions of the 
world's most vulnerable citizens.
  The bill recognizes the inextricable ties between development and 
security. It is mindful of the fact that we are ultimately locked in a 
struggle for hearts and minds and that an excessive reliance on 
military force as the primary lever of American policy can be 
counterproductive, and that terrorists often seek to draw an American 
military response and may be strengthened by it.
  I also want to point to two provisions that I think have broad 
implications for the global environment and the quest to stem the 
proliferation of small arms and light weapons.
  The bill supports innovative new approaches to fostering renewable 
energy that Steve Israel and I have advocated by including a provision 
to encourage the Export-Import Bank to seek out investments in 
renewable energy and other environmentally beneficial products. This 
initiative could result in an estimated $1 billion in additional green 
exports in 2008 and will encourage the

[[Page H6806]]

use of renewable energy worldwide while helping the U.S. producers of 
renewable energy and green products. This is a step forward in our 
competitiveness and a step forward for the environment.
  The bill also includes language that supports the Small Arms/Light 
Weapons destruction program, a State Department initiative to destroy 
grenades, guns and man-portable air defense systems that might 
otherwise fall into hostile hands. By funding this important program, 
we have increased our commitment to countering the proliferation of 
small arms and light weapons, weapons that could end up in the hands of 
terrorists, criminals and human rights-abusing governments around the 
world.
  I thank the chair and ranking member for their extraordinary efforts.
  Mr. WOLF. I recognize the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding. I 
appreciate the opportunity to speak this evening.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak to the importance of this bill and the 
many issues associated with U.S. foreign policy.
  As a member of the Foreign Operations Subcommittee for over 12 years, 
I commend first the new chairwoman, Mrs. Lowey, as well as the new 
ranking member, Mr. Wolf, for putting together a good bill with the 
allocations that they received. But let me be clear. The chairwoman and 
the ranking member have done a commendable job crafting our foreign 
assistance policies, and I support most of this bill. However, there 
are a few provisions that are in strong contrast to my views.
  First let me highlight the provisions I strongly support. The bill 
fully funds the administration's request for Israel and Egypt. Ten 
years ago, the U.S. entered into a proportional agreement with the two 
countries. This bill marks the last year of this agreement. I am 
pleased that Congress has met its obligations to these two important 
allies in the Middle East.
  The committee has also fully funded the Refugee Resettlement Program 
in Israel at $40 million. And further, this legislation almost doubles 
the President's request for Armenia. This funding is absolutely crucial 
as Armenia is still dealing with an illegal blockade by its neighbors, 
Turkey and Azerbaijan. Armenia's economy has suffered, but U.S. 
assistance has helped stymie the economic detriment of these blockades.
  The administration continues to deny Armenia adequate economic 
support in their request, and I commend the chairwoman again for seeing 
the importance of our ally, Armenia, and increasing economic funding 
for the country. Chairwoman Lowey has also continued military parity 
between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which sends a strong signal that the 
United States does not condone Azerbaijan's military threats towards 
Armenia.
  Now, there are also a number of provisions and funding levels within 
this bill that trouble me. First among them is funding for the 
Millenium Challenge Account.
  In 2004, Congress authorized a new and innovative program which 
fundamentally changed the way we view foreign assistance. The MCA 
provides assistance to developing nations that are pursuing political 
and economic reforms. Their motto, ``reducing poverty through growth'' 
speaks to the validity of the program. The MCA specifically awards 
compacts to countries that have shown improvement in eliminating 
corruption and investing in people and ruling justly, and fostering 
enterprise and entrepreneurship.
  Before entering into a compact, the MCA and the eligible country work 
together to draft the parameters of the compact. Each compact is 
different because the needs of individual countries are different. For 
instance, the MCA and Armenia signed a compact that focuses on rural 
development and Armenia's agricultural industry.
  What this program also does is to ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars 
are not wasted. Eligible countries are held accountable for how the 
money is spent as well as how their government is performing. I 
strongly believe that this program is the future of U.S. foreign 
assistance, where accountability and results are the top priorities.
  This bill, however, underfunds the MCA by $1.2 billion. While I 
understand the subcommittee made every effort to accommodate funding 
given its allocation, funding the MCA at only $1.8 billion for fiscal 
year 2008 will stop the program in its tracks and slow the process of 
signing compacts with eligible countries.
  Last year during the debate on the fiscal year 2007 Foreign 
Operations bill, the House approved $2 billion for the MCA. Now, a year 
later, the new majority has cut the MCA below the President's request 
and below the House-passed level for fiscal year 2007. This is no way 
to grow a program.
  Mr. Chairman, during the full committee markup of the bill, the 
chairwoman expressed her support for the MCA and her willingness to 
work with me to find more funding for the MCA through the process. I 
very much appreciate her support and look forward to continuing to work 
with her on what I believe is a very, very important issue.
  Lastly, Mr. Chairman, there are provisions within this bill that go 
against the fundamental value of life. The United States has a long 
history of supporting nongovernmental organizations and other groups 
that support abstinence and prevention but do not promote abortion. 
Current policy is fair and balanced and has worked for years. However, 
this bill, I believe, goes against the will of the U.S. citizens and 
allows NGOs that promote abortion to receive U.S. Federal assistance. I 
understand there are going to be amendments to strike these provisions 
within this bill, and I intend to support these amendments. And 
although there are many things I support in this bill, if those 
amendments fail, I cannot support final passage.
  I would hope the majority would work with the President and the 
minority to ensure that core American values are upheld as the bill 
moves forward.
  Mrs. LOWEY. I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to a new member of 
the committee, a valuable addition, an expert on Africa and HIV/AIDS, 
Ms. Lee of California.
  Ms. LEE. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. But also let me just 
commend you, Chairman Lowey, for your brilliance, your leadership and 
your hard work in crafting this very good bipartisan bill. It is an 
honor to serve with you and our ranking member (Mr. Wolf) on the 
committee because I see how you two work together to make this a bill 
that we can all support.
  Let me just highlight three provisions of this bill. First, I'm 
pleased that it includes $949 million for humanitarian assistance in 
the Sudan. Of this, $210 million is specifically designed to help the 
victims of the genocide in Darfur. Having traveled there three times, I 
have seen the plight of the Darfurian people firsthand. This bill will 
help the United Nations and the African Union to bring food, clean 
water, security, and other basic humanitarian assistance. It also urges 
our good friend and ally, Egypt, to do more to help the genocide.
  Secondly, I am pleased that this bill includes nearly $5.1 billion to 
fight the global AIDS pandemic, including $550 million for the Global 
Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria.
  In 25 years, HIV and AIDS has infected nearly 70 million people 
throughout the world and has killed more than 25 million. We have made 
significant steps in the last few years, and this increase reaffirms 
our commitment to stop the spread of this dreadful disease.
  As the bill moves ahead, however, I hope we can go even further. As 
the New York Times pointed out in a recent editorial on Monday, we must 
try to provide $1.3 billion to the global fund this year and help put 
the world on course to universal access to AIDS treatment by 2010.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to insert the New York Times editorial 
into the Record.

                [From the New York Times, June 18, 2007]

                       Two Cheers on Global AIDS

       Now that the Group of 8 industrialized nations has pledged 
     to commit $60 billion to combat AIDS and other diseases 
     around the world in coming years--a substantial sum by any 
     reckoning--Congress and other national legislatures ought to 
     look hard for additional funds to close a looming gap between 
     the funds committed and the needs of desperate patients.
       The advanced nations--both the G-8 countries and other 
     donor nations--have greatly

[[Page H6807]]

     increased their funding for AIDS programs in recent years in 
     belated recognition that the epidemic threatens to destroy 
     not just its victims, but also the social and economic fabric 
     of many countries in sub-Saharan Africa. We are pleased that 
     President Bush has proposed spending some $30 billion to 
     combat AIDS abroad over a five-year period, from 2009 to 
     2013, but in truth that represents only a modest increase 
     from the spending trajectory we were already on. At its 
     recent summit meeting, the Group of 8 pledged to commit $60 
     billion to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria ``over the 
     coming years,'' including the American contribution.
       Yet even these pledges will not be enough to keep up with 
     the devastating epidemics. Tens of billions of dollars more 
     will be needed to provide treatment, care and preventive 
     services for AIDS alone over the next five years.
       Although the Group of 8 pledges are welcome, they actually 
     represent a retreat from previous goals. In 2005, at its 
     meeting in Gleneagles, Scotland, the group pledged to provide 
     ``as close as possible to universal access to treatment'' for 
     all people suffering from AIDS by 2010. That should mean at 
     least 10 million people in treatment by then, judging from 
     estimates by United Nations AIDS experts. Yet at the recent 
     meeting, the G-8 said it was aiming to treat only some five 
     million patients in Africa by an unspecified date. That 
     sounds like consigning millions of untreated people to death 
     and disability.
       To its credit, the United States has been by far the 
     largest AIDS donor in recent years, providing almost half of 
     the funding commitments made by donor governments. But when 
     measured against the size of the national economy, the 
     American donations rank only fifth. There is room to do more.
       As Congress wrestles with the fiscal 2008 appropriations 
     bills this year, it ought to provide the full $1.3 billion 
     being sought by Congressional health advocates as the 
     American contribution to a global fund to combat the three 
     diseases--not just $300 mlilion as proposed by the 
     administration or the $850 million approved by the House 
     Appropriations Committee. Congress should also set the 
     nation--and by its example, the world--on course toward 
     universal access to AIDS treatment by 2010.

  This bill, Mr. Chairman, also takes steps to recognize the importance 
of our Caribbean neighbors by urging the State Department to promote 
professional and scholastic exchanges within the region. This is a 
significant way to welcome the heads of the Caribbean countries, 
CARICOM, as they convene in Washington, D.C. this week to consider our 
common future as neighbors. This is a region which has been, for the 
most part, neglected and ignored.
  In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me just say that this bill provides the 
correct path to global peace and security, and does take care of and 
address the least of these. However, I only wish the amount in this 
bill was more than just the 1 percent of the Federal budget, which is 
what this is. This is a $34 billion bill, but I wish, Mr. Chairman, 
that it was $340 billion.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I recognize the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Kirk) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KIRK. I want to thank Mr. Wolf and our chairwoman for building a 
bipartisan bill that I think we all should support.
  This legislation funds critical programs that advance our values 
overseas, it supports key allies of the United States, and it meets 
many of the humanitarian aspirations of the American people to do our 
part to relieve human suffering.
  As a staffer, I helped found the global program on AIDS in 1985, and 
in this bill we have record funding to accomplish a great humanitarian 
mission of fighting the HIV/AIDS pandemic.
  In this legislation, we support our best ally in the Middle East, 
Israel, now caught between two satellites of Iran: Hezbollah in Lebanon 
and Hamas in Gaza. In this bill, I helped sponsor language that 
increased the audit responsibilities over UNRWA programs in the West 
Bank and Gaza, a $2 million audit especially to look at incidents in 
which an al Qaeda cell was allowed to form in a UNRWA camp now 
bedeviling the Government of Lebanon, and where we saw Gaza Islamic 
University, a U.S.-funded foreign assistance recipient who is running 
in its chemistry lab a cell of Iranian military officers training 
students in the chemistry of making suicide bombs.
  In this bill, I also helped fund increasing assistance in the 
Frontier Autonomous Tribal area of Pakistan. This is a program of 
almost theologic importance to the people of the United States because 
it is in north and south Waziristan and surrounding areas, that we 
think the world's most wanted man, Osama bin Laden, is hiding. And with 
this $20 million assistance package, we will bring new links and new 
friends in this region to help complete the arrest and bringing to 
justice of Ayman Al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden for the murder of 
3,000 Americans.
  In this bill we also preserved new funding in fiscal year 2007 to 
help Christian communities in Iraq. There are still 600,000 Christians 
in Iraq, now concentrating in the Nineveh plain.

                              {time}  1900

  The $10 million designation we do there is a great help to these 
communities.
  This bill makes a major forward step also in supporting a new 
democracy program for Syria, that one day that murderous and pernicious 
dictatorship may one day be replaced; and also backing women's rights 
programs in Iran, another country in need of a serious democracy make-
over.
  Lastly, this bill continues funding for Radio Free Asia and a voice 
supporting Western values, democracy, and human rights in a critical 
part of the world.
  Before I was elected to Congress, I was a staff member with this 
subcommittee. I want to thank Christine Kojac and Rob Blair, Mike 
Ringler and Nisha Desai, Clelia Alvarado, Steve Marchese, Craig Higgins 
and Michele Sumilas, Mark Lopes, Lucy Heenan, Molly Miller, and my 
staff member, Richard Goldberg, for their work on this legislation.
  In sum, this appropriations bill is bipartisan. It is supporting the 
interests of the United States, and it is strongly backed by our 
allies. It makes peace more likely and achieves important humanitarian 
goals of the United States.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to my 
good friend and colleague from New York, another new member of the 
subcommittee, who has had a particular interest and has great knowledge 
in the environment and made a major contribution to this bill in 
encouraging Ex-Im to focus on supporting projects that will contribute 
to the environment.
  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Chairman, I thank my distinguished chairwoman and my 
wonderful partner in the New York delegation for her wonderful 
leadership. I want to thank the ranking member, Mr. Wolf, for producing 
a bill that says to adversaries and allies alike that politics can stop 
at the water's edge here in the United States Congress, that when it 
comes to foreign policy, Republicans and Democrats work together and 
strive to work together because we understand that a strong, muscular, 
fair foreign policy is in the best national security interests of our 
country, that where we can produce and facilitate stability and the 
conditions of peace, that we won't have to exert military force.
  I want to thank the chairwoman and the ranking member for supporting 
three very specific provisions that I sought. One the chairwoman had 
mentioned, and that is asking the Export-Import Bank to dedicate part 
of their export authority to green exports, to renewable energy 
investments.
  The Ex-Im Bank has supported $400 billion of U.S. exports in the past 
70 years. That is job creation here in the United States. It is the 
formation of capital that supports businesses right here. I support the 
Ex-Im Bank. But we are hoping that they will focus on new efforts to 
create green jobs, green manufacturing jobs to reduce global warming, 
which is a national security issue. And the provision that Congressman 
Schiff and I requested would require the Ex-Im Bank to dedicate some of 
its export authority to those green technologies and could result in an 
estimated $1 billion in additional exports in 2008, encouraging the use 
of renewable energy worldwide.
  The second provision that I am very proud of concerns Libya and the 
bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. It is a matter of fact that in 1988 
Libyan-backed terrorists killed 270 people, including 189 Americans, by 
bombing Pan Am Flight 103. They made an agreement. They agreed to a 
settlement that would provide payment to those families. That 
settlement, those promises have not been kept. I am very proud of 
language that we added that says that the government of Libya, if it 
wants to be part of the international community, if Libya wants to be 
part of the community of nations, they need to keep their

[[Page H6808]]

promises, and funds for diplomatic relations to Libya will not be 
expended unless those promises are kept.
  Kara Weipz, as the President of Victims of Pan Am Fight 103, said 
that they are deeply encouraged by this important step by Congress to 
hold Libya accountable before it is rewarded with diplomatic relations, 
and that this settlement represents a promise to the families, an 
acknowledgement of the victims, and some form of punishment to the 
perpetrators.
  Finally, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairwoman and ranking 
member for their steadfast support against the genocide in Darfur. As 
we debate this bill tonight and tomorrow, a genocide is being 
perpetrated in our midst. We have said to other genocides, never again. 
This bill turns that statement into action.
  I want to thank the gentlewoman and the gentleman for their 
commitment to make sure that never again means never again.
  Mr. WOLF. I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Weldon).
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to commend Chairwoman Lowey for working 
diligently on this bill. She has produced a fairly good product here, 
and I want to commend her more for working with Mr. Wolf and myself to 
address many of our concerns.
  She has produced a bill that is good in many respects. I appreciate 
the efforts as well of the staff that have worked very hard on this 
bill. A great example of working together is what my colleague from New 
York, Mr. Israel, was talking about in dealing with Darfur. I want to 
commend Mr. Wolf for his passion on that issue and his passion for the 
issue of human rights throughout the globe. I also want to commend 
Ranking Member Wolf and Chairwoman Lowey for their work on Colombia, 
and I am very pleased with the final product that they have there.
  I am also very pleased that we have included language dealing with 
better accountability for the Global Fund to provide greater 
transparency. I commend Chairwoman Lowey for including the language 
that I introduced, the amendment, to get a better understanding of why 
the participation of faith-based organizations in the Global Fund 
appears to be significantly underrepresented. Numerous faith-based 
groups have been on the ground providing health care in many of those 
these countries for decades. In recent decades they have been on the 
frontlines in fighting against the spread of AIDS.
  I saw the critical role that many of those faith-based groups 
provided firsthand when I visited Africa twice in recent years. I can 
tell you what part of the problem is, and it is really spelled out very 
nicely, and I will include for the Record this brief 3-page article 
from Catholic News Services, ``African Churches Find Global Fund Money 
Fairly Inaccessible.''
  Basically, what I feel is going on here with those faith-based groups 
is relatively simple. They are small. They are out there. They are 
going into these villages on foot and on mopeds. They don't have the 
ability to apply for grants with multi-billion dollar organizations in 
Geneva. It is going to require the Global Fund to reach into these 
countries, identify the groups, the church groups, the faith-based 
groups, that are doing the work. Frequently, they are on the pointy end 
of the spear. So I commend the gentlewoman for that language.
  I know there are a few issues that we disagree on. The Mexico City 
policy language, we will have amendments to address that. Certainly, I 
understand that the gentlewoman has tried to reach out on this issue.
  For me personally, the issue is an organization that is not only 
maybe providing abortion but as well is actually actively lobbying to 
overturn pro-life laws in many of those countries. We should not be 
supporting them even indirectly.
  Finally, let me just close on the PEPFAR language. I played a role in 
getting the President's plan through the Congress, the authorizing 
language and the appropriations language. To me one of the most 
important things was the requirement that a portion, actually a small 
portion, I think it is 20, 25 percent of the preventive dollars go to 
abstinence education and abstinence training.
  I want to make it very clear to my colleagues the reason why I felt 
so strongly about that and why I feel that we should continue the 
requirement that abstinence education be included in the preventive 
dollars is my experience in going into Uganda. Uganda lowered its AIDS 
incidence from 18 percent to 6 percent, a two-thirds reduction in AIDS.
  The Global Fund didn't exist. PEPFAR did not exist when they did 
this. They did not do this through distributing condoms and 
comprehensive sex education. They did it through what they called ABC, 
abstinence before marriage, be faithful in marriage. We all know, you 
can't expect everybody to comply. But what is amazing to me is when you 
educate people on this thousands of people comply.
  I just want to share with my colleagues that I had a meeting just 2 
weeks ago with a Parliamentarian from Uganda who was an epidemiologist 
and a physician who was there from the ground up, and he verified just 
what I said, that people responded to the message.
  Let me just finish up on that. Last July, southern African AIDS 
experts met and they officially listed ``reducing multiple and 
concurrent partnerships'' as their number one priority for the 
prevention of spreading HIV. It was not distributing condoms and 
comprehensive sex education, it was reducing concurrent and multiple 
partnerships. That is what this is really all about.
  Let me just close and again commend the gentlewoman for a bill that 
has a lot of good in it. I am focusing on some of the things I disagree 
with. But for everything I disagree with, there are 10 to 20 different 
things that are good in it.
  The spending level, I am very concerned that the President may veto 
this bill. I know there are a lot of worthwhile programs covered in the 
spending. I certainly would like to see us get a bill enacted into law. 
I think that would be to the credit of the chairwoman and the ranking 
member, the good gentleman from Virginia.

                    [From the Catholic News Service]

      African Churches Find Global Fund Money Fairly Inaccessible

                           (By Michael Swan)

       Nairobi, Kenya (CNS)--In Kenya churches provide about 40 
     percent of all health care in remote and impoverished areas 
     with no government services, but for their AIDS programs, 
     churches receive no money from The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, 
     Tuberculosis and Malaria.
       ``Since the inception of the Global Fund, the Kenyan 
     bishops' conference has not accessed any direct funding from 
     the Global Fund, even after applying to all the rounds,'' 
     said Titus Munene, an HIV/AIDS program coordinator for the 
     Kenyan bishops' conference.
       ``It isn't rocket science to say if 40 percent of the 
     health care is in the church system in Kenya, you would think 
     a good portion of (Global Fund money) is going to go to our 
     operational system. But unfortunately, it isn't that way,'' 
     said Maryknoll Father Ed Phillips, who runs seven community-
     based health care clinics.
       The Geneva-based Global Fund, established in 2002, is a 
     partnership among governments, civil society, the private 
     sector and affected communities.
       The Catholic Church alone provides more than 25 percent of 
     all AIDS care in the world, according to Caritas 
     Internationalis, the Catholic aid network. All faith-based 
     organizations combined have received just 6 percent of the 
     Global Fund's money since the first disbursements in 2002.
       The Southern African Catholic Bishops' Conference, which 
     represents South Africa, Botswana and Swaziland, has almost 
     stopped applying for Global Fund money.
       More than 18 percent of adult South Africans are HIV-
     positive, and the church is the largest health care provider 
     after the government. But church bodies have been unable to 
     access Global Fund money either directly or through the South 
     African National AIDS Council, which coordinates South 
     African applications to the Global Fund.
       ``I have sat on SANAC, the South African National AIDS 
     Council, which is also the CCM (country coordinating 
     mechanism) for the Global Fund. It has not been a helpful 
     process,'' Dominican Sister Alison Munro said in an e-mail 
     from Pretoria, South Africa.
       ``The Global Fund process is too large and too cumbersome 
     for the churches,'' said Sister Alison. ``If they (the 
     churches) could apply directly to the Global Fund, some 
     would. They can't because of the procedures. . . . The work 
     involved is too much for any church group other than a 
     national structure or a group with lots of capacity.''

[[Page H6809]]

       While many nongovernmental organizations employ grant 
     application experts, church-based agencies have tended to 
     regard such functions as wasteful of donor money.
       Munene said when the churches do not get Global Fund money 
     it weakens the fight against AIDS among some of the poorest 
     Africans. A lack of international and Kenyan-government 
     funding has forced mission hospitals, clinics and 
     dispensaries to charge some of the poorest people in Kenya 
     for AIDS treatment and services, while relatively well-off 
     people in the cities are accessing free services.
       Munene said when church agencies charge for health care it 
     ``means some of the poor cannot access services, since there 
     are no government facilities in those rural areas.''
       The 6 percent of Global Fund money going to faith-based 
     organizations translates into $325 million spread over five 
     years in dozens of countries. The Global Fund recognizes the 
     number is too low, said spokesman Oliver Sabot.
       ``Given the essential role that they play in health care in 
     many countries, particularly in Africa, we would like to see 
     the amount of funding to FBOs (faith-based organizations) 
     increase,'' Sabot said.
       Part of the problem has been that churches have not done 
     enough to fulfill conditions that might be expected from 
     major international funders, such as making detailed 
     applications for funding and monitoring expenditures to the 
     satisfaction of donors, said Father Robert Vitillo of Caritas 
     Internationalis, the Vatican's most prominent adviser on HIV/
     AIDS policy.
       ``Each of these funding mechanisms comes with its own set 
     of challenges for (faith-based organizations), which are more 
     expert in providing support, care, treatment and prevention 
     education than in completing such complicated funding 
     applications and then in monitoring and reporting on the 
     funds received,'' said Father Vitillo.
       Even if it is a lot of red tape, church organizations have 
     to be willing to fight through it in order to continue 
     delivering effective AIDS prevention and care, said Father 
     Phillips. But the Global Fund also has a responsibility to 
     help churches through the red tape, he said.
       ``The churches have to get more proactive,'' said Father 
     Phillips. Sabot said the Global Fund has taken steps to 
     ensure that faith-based organizations are able to apply for 
     money. But by relying on countries' coordinating agencies or 
     mechanisms, the Global Fund has become subject to the 
     politics of Africa.
       ``This hands-off approach does mean that bias at the 
     country level is sometimes reflected,'' said Sabot. He said 
     sometimes faith-based groups are excluded from country 
     proposals ``either because of deliberate efforts by the 
     government or other groups, or simply because they are less 
     experienced with applying for international aid funding, and 
     not enough outreach and support was provided to them'' by 
     country coordinating agencies.
       ``We have taken steps to help correct both these problems, 
     but there is still more to be done,'' Sabot said.
       Father Phillips said more than bureaucratic bias is 
     involved in shutting churches out of national applications to 
     the Global Fund.
       ``The church was considered in some of these countries to 
     be the opposition to the government,'' he said. ``Naturally, 
     if they are considered to be opposition, well, they're 
     (government mechanisms) going to make sure they're not going 
     to target a lot of money'' for the church.
       Father Phillips said African bishops must get tough and 
     vocal about demanding that they be represented fairly in 
     national applications to the Global Fund, but Munene said the 
     churches may be talking to a brick wall when they demand fair 
     representation.
       ``The Kenyan bishops have made frantic efforts to meet the 
     minister of health on several occasions, and even his 
     excellency, the president. And promises were given, but to 
     date the pledges have not been fulfilled,'' Munene said.

  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), a valuable member 
of the full committee, an alumnus of the Peace Corps and an advocate 
for so many parts of this bill. He was a real partner in helping us 
craft this great bill.
  Mr. FARR. Thank you, Madam Chairman, for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support and with a congratulatory note 
to Chairwoman Nita Lowey for her bold leadership on this bill, and also 
to the ranking member, Frank Wolf.
  I am particularly proud of the fact that the committee, for the first 
time in many, many years, fully funded the Peace Corps. As a returned 
Peace Corps volunteer, a volunteer that served in Colombia, I am also a 
strong supporter of that country and the programs we are doing there. I 
want to thank the committee for rebalancing the United States-Colombia 
policy in the Andean Initiative.
  I believe Colombia is a country of enormous potential. But Colombia's 
full potential as a democratic nation is not being realized because of 
its coca production. The Colombia that I know and loved as a Peace 
Corps volunteer is often not seen through the debate of the coca 
problems.
  Eighty percent of the U.S. assistance has been allocated on military 
assistance and aerial fumigation, yet 80 percent of rural Colombians 
still live below the poverty line. Let me say that again. Eighty 
percent of the rural Colombians still live below the poverty line.
  Tragically, after 7 years and $4 billion-plus in U.S. assistance, it 
is overwhelmingly apparent that we must change our course in this 
country. Imagine if 80 percent of rural Americans lived below the 
poverty line. There would be riots in the streets, and every farmer 
would be growing coca in their backyards to feed their families.
  Folks, we need to wake up and smell the coffee, preferably Colombian 
coffee. It is the poverty in Colombia that breeds the problems. Coca is 
a symptom.
  The bill realigns Colombia-U.S. assistance so that 45 percent is 
allocated to economic and alternative development, which enables 
campesinos to grow crops like coffee, tropical fruits and chocolate 
that command better market prices so they can feed their families.
  Why does this matter to you? Because stemming Colombia coca 
production stops the flow of drugs to Main Street USA.
  Yesterday in El Tiempo, a Colombian newspaper equivalent to the New 
York Times, in an editorial stated ``Alternative development should 
stop being a little sister charity case to the antidrug strategy, and a 
substantial part of the assistance should go to rural development.'' 
This committee does that, and I commend them.
  I hope soon that the State Department will comply with U.S. policy 
and force contractors to reach benchmarks when they must transfer their 
counternarcotic programs to Colombians to run.
  I must urge my colleagues to support the Foreign Operations bill. 
Help Colombia realize its potential to eliminate the root causes of the 
culture of poverty. Support these increased funds for economic and 
alternative development.

                              {time}  1915

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Wolf, my ranking 
member, again. I do believe that we have created a good, strong 
bipartisan bill. I appreciated the comments on both sides of the aisle. 
Although there may be some differences, I know that when the amendments 
are presented, these differences will be apparent.
  I do hope in the final analysis, as a result again of both Republican 
and Democratic members of the committee, this bill passes. This is a 
good, strong bill, and it is so needed by the people of this world. I 
know that both my ranking member and all the members of the committee 
and myself understand the important responsibility we have in this 
committee, and I look forward to passing this bill tomorrow with a 
good, strong vote.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Ms. 
Clarke) having assumed the chair, Mr. Capuano, 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. 2764) 
making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign operations, 
and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and 
for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________