Congressional Record, Volume 153 Issue 101 (Thursday, June 21, 2007)

[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 101 (Thursday, June 21, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H6833-H6887]
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

Mr. SIRES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that, during further
consideration of H.R. 2764 pursuant to House Resolution 498, the Chair
may reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for electronic voting under
clause 6 of rule XVIII and clauses 8 and 9 of rule XX.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Perlmutter). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
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 further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 2764.

{time} 1017

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 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. Holden (Acting
Chairman) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose on
Wednesday, June 20, 2007, all time for general debate had expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
Pursuant to the order of the House on that day, no amendment to the
bill may be offered except those specified in the previous order of the
House of that day, which is at the desk.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

H.R. 2764

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, 2008, and for other purposes, namely:

TITLE I

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED AGENCIES

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Administration of Foreign Affairs

diplomatic and consular programs

(including transfer of funds)

For necessary expenses of the Department of State and the
Foreign Service not otherwise provided for, including
employment, without regard to civil service and
classification laws, of persons on a temporary basis (not to
exceed $700,000 of this appropriation), as authorized by
section 801 of the United States Information and Educational
Exchange Act of 1948; representation to certain international
organizations in which the United States participates
pursuant to treaties ratified pursuant to the advice and
consent of the Senate or specific Acts of Congress; arms
control, nonproliferation and disarmament activities as
authorized; acquisition by exchange or purchase of passenger
motor vehicles as authorized by law; and for expenses of
general administration, $3,820,018,000: Provided, That of the
amount made available under this heading, not to exceed
$10,000,000 may be transferred to, and merged with, funds in
the ``Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service''
appropriations account, to be available only for emergency
evacuations and terrorism rewards: Provided further, That of
the amount made available under this heading, not less than
$363,905,000 shall be available only for public diplomacy
international information programs: Provided further, That of
the amount appropriated under this heading, $5,000,000 shall
be available for the Secretary to establish and operate a
public/private interagency public diplomacy center which
shall serve as a program integration and coordination entity
for United States public diplomacy programs: Provided
further, That of the amounts appropriated under this heading,
$4,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be for
compensation to the families of members of the Foreign
Service or other United States Government employees or their
dependents, who were killed in terrorist attacks since 1979:
Provided further, That none of the funds made available for
compensation in the previous proviso may be obligated without
specific authorization in a subsequent Act of Congress:
Provided further, That of the amount made available under
this heading, $3,000,000 shall be available only for the
operations of the Office on Right-Sizing the United States
Government Overseas Presence: Provided further, That not less
than $5,000,000 shall be for the Program for Research and
Training on Eastern Europe and the Independent States of the
Former Soviet Union (title VIII) as authorized by the Soviet-
Eastern European Research and Training Act of 1983 (22 U.S.C.
4501-4508, as amended): Provided further, That funds
available under this heading may be available for a United
States Government interagency task force to examine,
coordinate and oversee United States participation in the
United Nations headquarters renovation project: Provided
further, That no funds may be obligated or expended for
processing licenses for the export of satellites of United
States origin (including commercial satellites and satellite
components) to the People's Republic of China unless, at
least 15 days in advance, the Committees on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives and the Senate are notified of
such proposed action: Provided further, That funds
appropriated under this heading are available, pursuant to 31
U.S.C. 1108(g), for the field examination of programs and
activities in the United States funded from any account
contained in this title.

[[Page H6834]]

In addition, not to exceed $1,558,390 shall be derived from
fees collected from other executive agencies for lease or use
of facilities located at the International Center in
accordance with section 4 of the International Center Act; in
addition, as authorized by section 5 of such Act, $490,000,
to be derived from the reserve authorized by that section, to
be used for the purposes set out in that section; in
addition, as authorized by section 810 of the United States
Information and Educational Exchange Act, not to exceed
$6,000,000, to remain available until expended, may be
credited to this appropriation from fees or other payments
received from English teaching, library, motion pictures, and
publication programs and from fees from educational advising
and counseling and exchange visitor programs; and, in
addition, not to exceed $15,000, which shall be derived from
reimbursements, surcharges, and fees for use of Blair House
facilities.
In addition, for the costs of worldwide security upgrades,
$964,760,000, to remain available until expended.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I offer an
amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida:
Page 2, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $36,700,000)''.
Page 40, line 26, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $36,700,000)''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday,
June 20, 2007, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart) and
a Member opposed each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, my amendment,
coauthored by my good friend, Mr. Albio Sires of New Jersey, restores
funds for Cuba democracy assistance to the administration's requested
level of $45 million by offsetting $36 million from the Department of
State General Administration Budget.
Unfortunately, as this chart so well demonstrates, the committee,
while generally meeting or far exceeding the administration's requests
for the rest of Latin America, something that I support, the bill funds
Cuba democracy programs at approximately 20 percent of the President's
request of $45 million; 20 percent for assistance for those brave men
and women who risk their lives and their families' safety, unarmed, in
a hard-line totalitarian police state to peacefully press for democracy
in Cuba; human rights activists, independent journalists, independent
librarians, independent physicians. This aid goes to them and to their
families, to the families of political prisoners.
As explained, Mr. Chairman, in the letter from nine members of the
pro-democracy movement to the six Cuban American Members of Congress,
they attest and affirm that the assistance is key, and that it reaches
them and that it has made and is making a great difference for the pro-
democracy movement at this time.
Now, Mr. Chairman, the opponents of this effort asked for a GAO
report on these programs, and I thank them for it.
First, the GAO report, after 18 months of thorough investigation,
confirmed that the program is working. And I quote from the GAO report.
``Dissidents we interviewed in Cuba said that they appreciated the
range and types of U.S. democracy assistance; that this assistance was
useful in their work, and that it demonstrates the U.S. Government's
commitment to democracy in Cuba.''
Mr. Chairman, the GAO report detailed many successes, despite
emphasizing the great challenges posed by the totalitarian police state
for aid distribution. It talked about the GAO report, 385,000 pounds of
medicines, food and clothing have been delivered to the pro-democracy
movement and their families; more than 23,000 shortwave radios,
millions of books, newsletters and other informational material.
U.S. assistance reported independent journalists and including the
publication of approximately 23,000 reports by those independent
journalists.
Mr. Chairman, I would call attention to the fact that the GAO report,
while making absolutely no recommendation for any cut whatsoever in
this program, does point out and make clear the case that it is an
important and effective program; and after the GAO report, it has been
significantly improved.
I call the attention of all of my colleagues to the reply to the GAO
report by the administrating agency, the USAID, where it delineates
that all the GAO report's recommendations have been implemented. All of
the recommendations have been implemented. That has made an effective
and important program even more effective and important.
Mr. Chairman, let us not turn our backs on the Cuban internal
opposition. They will play a key role in the inevitable democratic
transition that is approaching, and we must do all we can so that they
can survive the brutality of a totalitarian police state, of violence
and terror that, fortunately, to a great extent because of the pro-
democracy movement in Cuba, will soon be but a tragic and perverse
historical memory.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for
10 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, the Bush administration requested an
increase in economic support funds for Cuba from $9 million to $45.7
million.
Between 1996 and 2005, USAID and the Department of State signed
contracts worth $74 million for Cuba programs, according to the GAO's
study. The administration is asking for a 1-year, fiscal year 2008
request that is more than two-thirds the size of what was committed
over the 10 years, from 1996 and 2005. This request is 500 percent of
what USAID received in the last fiscal year. Given how ill-conceived
and ill-managed the program is, there is no justification for an aid
increase.
My friend from Florida has raised the GAO report and said that it has
not recommended that funding be cut. But the objective of the report
was not to recommend that funding should be increased or decreased. It
was to examine the roles and objectives of the agencies implementing
United States democracy assistance targeted at Cuba, and the
characteristics and selection of the grantees receiving Department of
State and USAID awards, the types, amounts, beneficiaries and methods
used to deliver assistance for selected grantees in 2005, USAID's
monitoring and oversight of these grantees, and the availability of
data to evaluate whether U.S. assistance has achieved its goals.
Although I believe that this program does little to help dissidents,
and very little to expand political space in Cuba, we have continued
funding at the same level as provided by our former colleague, Jim
Kolbe, when he chaired the subcommittee.
The bill has $9 million, and requires USAID and the Department of
State to present a plan for improved coordination and for oversight of
the Cuba program.
GAO concluded in a November 2006 report that ``poor monitoring and
oversight of the Cuba program did not provide adequate assurance that
funds were properly used.''
Administrative costs on the part of grantees were high, oversight of
the goods chosen inadequate; specifically, according to the GAO study,
there were instances in which cashmere sweaters, Godiva chocolates,
Nintendo Gameboys, Sony Playstations were among the items purchased in
the United States to be shipped to dissidents in Cuba.
The Cuba program is poorly managed and can be argued to be
counterproductive. It is not a productive use of limited U.S.
resources, and the result of this program is often to identify Cuban
dissidents as U.S. funded opponents of the regime.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, at this time I
yield 2 minutes to the distinguished coauthor of the amendment, Mr.
Sires.
Mr. SIRES. Mr. Chairman, the funding that has been provided over the
past 10 years to support the pro-democracy movement in Cuba has been
working. U.S. assistance has provided books, newsletters and other
informational material to the people of Cuba,

[[Page H6835]]

as well as over 385,000 pounds of medicine, food and clothing.
According to a USAID report, U.S. assistance has also funded
journalism correspondence courses for more than 200 Cubans, and the
publication of about 23,000 reports by independent Cuban journalists
about conditions and events in Cuba.
Although the Cuban regime restricts nearly all political dissent, and
denies its citizens the basic rights of free expression, association
and assembly, our funding and assistance has allowed the pro-democracy
and civil resistance movement in Cuba to dramatically increase in
recent years.
As evidenced in this chart, from just 2004 to 2005 there was a 54
percent increase in the number of civil resistance actions reported on
the island. Some of these civil resistance acts include citizens
unwilling to cooperate with regime officials in repressing pro-
democracy activities, and citizens boycotting regime control meetings
and mass gatherings.
By supporting this amendment, the pro-democracy movement in Cuba can
continue to organize, communicate their vision for the future of the
Cuban people, and prepare to assume the role in the process of
democratic transition.
But it is also important to realize that Cuba now is at the same
stage that Spain was many years ago when they had a dictator for 40
years. The world looked to Spain and saw that many of the institutions
promoting democracy prevailed. If we don't work to promote dissidents
who are pro-democratic dissidents in Cuba, we're not going to have any
institution when the changes for a Cuban democratic island will exist.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt).
Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, the committee recommends $9 million for
democracy programs in Cuba. I want to be sure that no one is misled by
a claim that this is a cut. This is the same amount that the program
received last year.
And last November, as has been noted, the GAO found serious problems
with the administration of this program, as well as a lack of
accountability which must be addressed, and this has not happened.
The report is entitled ``U.S. Democracy Assistance for Cuba Needs
Better Management and Oversight.'' So to increase the funding to almost
$50 million, or by about 500 percent, is not just irresponsible, it has
an Alice in Wonderland quality about it. Reward mismanagement and
incompetence.

{time} 1030

No, my friends. The committee has acted wisely and I applaud the
committee. It is demanding a spending plan and a strategy for how the
funds will be used so we no longer will be sending cashmere sweaters to
the tropical island of Cuba. Yes, this actually happened. I know it is
hard to believe.
This program does not need any more money. What it needs is what it
has never had before, and that is vigorous congressional oversight. Why
does it need oversight? There is simply no time to list all of the
programs. Read the report in full measure.
But I would note that I found it particularly informative that over a
10-year period, $62 million of the $65 million in USAID grants was
provided without competition. That is 95 percent of the money provided
in response to unsolicited proposals with no bidding, no public notice,
no compensation. No, this program doesn't need any more money. It needs
oversight.
And I agree, let's listen to the dissidents like my friend Miriam
Lay-VA, who is one of the founders of the Ladies in White. Here is what
she says:
``There must be no funds from any government allocated to the
dissidents . . . the opposition gets practically nothing and the main
thing is that it gives the Cuban Government a pretext to say that we
are mercenaries and put us in jail. I'm against any funds from the
American Government, and I think that if it wants to help the Cuban
people, it should lift the embargo and allow trade, tourism, and
academic exchanges, and Cubans should be allowed to travel without
restriction to the United States and send money to their families'' in
Cuba.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I would simply
remind my colleagues what if the policies advocated by those who are
against this program had succeeded during the 1980s in Poland and
Eastern Europe? Just ask yourself that question and remember when we
did what we are doing here in the 1980s, what happened in Eastern
Europe.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 1 minute to a distinguished
leader and human rights activist from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding the
time.
I rise in support of the amendment. I would like to first thank the
gentlewoman, the chairperson, for the funding she has supplied for this
program.
I believe we are at a crucial time in the southern part of our
hemisphere. I believe that it will go one way or the other in the years
ahead. It will either be a breeding ground for violence, trouble, and
difficulty; or it will be a breeding ground for the democratic values
that will make us safer and stronger and more prosperous. Cuba is not
the only country that will influence that decision, but it is a pivotal
country. And I think an investment in the long-term process of
promoting democracy and prosperity in Cuba is not only in the best
interest of the Cuban people but in the best interest of the American
people.
Many of the issues that my friend from Massachusetts talked about
have been addressed and corrected. But I think the largest mistake that
we could make would be to avoid our responsibility and opportunity to
influence positively those who wish to bring democracy and the rule of
law to Cuba at this very critical time in her history.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes
to the distinguished member of the Rules Committee, Mr. McGovern.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment,
which seeks to send five times the current level of funding to so-
called democracy assistance programs for Cuba. Five times the amount of
money to programs that are not transparent; smack of cronyism; are
noncompetitive; and, frankly speaking, foolish, corrupt, and just plain
embarrassing for the United States.
How bad is this program? So bad that Cuba's courageous Catholic
Church refuses to work with it. Many dissidents have told me that they
think that this program is a bad idea. For Cuban opposition leaders to
take money from the U.S. Government subjects them to the charge that
they are somehow U.S. agents. That is not the way to promote democracy.
I support the committee bill, which keeps funding level at $9
million. It is the smart thing to do until problems outlined in the
November GAO report have been addressed and the program redesigned and
better managed so that it might have at least some chance of being
effective.
Mr. Chairman, everyone in this House supports the work of Cuba's
dissident and pro-democracy community. But we do not need to squander
five times more money on leather coats, cashmere sweaters, Game Boys,
crabmeat, and Godiva chocolates purchased by groups pretending to
support them.
What do Godiva chocolates have to do with promoting democracy in
Cuba? Come on, give me a break.
The American people want accountability, and I hope a majority in
this Congress will too. Vote ``no'' on this amendment.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes
to the Congressman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart).
Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, at a time when the
Cuban terrorist dictator and dictatorship is ailing, this bill guts the
funding for the brave and heroic pro-democracy movement in Cuba.
Now, what has that money been used for in the last 10 years? This is
in the report: medicine, food and clothing for the families of
political prisoners; more than 23,000 shortwave radios; hundreds of
thousands of newsletters and other informational material, including
books; journalism courses to more

[[Page H6836]]

than 200 independent Cuban journalists who published almost 25,000
reports and publications from within the enslaved island.
I hold in my hand a letter from a diverse group of brave opposition
leaders in Cuba making it clear that this assistance is vital and
desperately needed in the effort for a free and democratic Cuba.
I read the GAO report, both the classified and unclassified parts of
it, and it does state that this assistance does reach the pro-democracy
movement in Cuba. And it is important to note that all of the
recommendations, every single one in that report, have been
implemented, unlike what you have heard today.
This is not the time to abandon those brave men and women, their
families, the political prisoners, the opposition leaders, the
independent journalists, labor leaders who are heroically and at a
great personal risk working for a democratic transition in Cuba. This
amendment, which is fully offset and CBO has scored as revenue neutral,
will rectify the unconscionable betrayal and abandonment of the brave
and heroic dissidents, the opposition leaders who are working under the
toughest of conditions for a free and democratic Cuba.
I urge the adoption of this amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
The speaker just said that unless we have this amendment, this
program will be gutted. The truth is the committee keeps the funding
level as it is, and I think given the GAO report, that is only proper.
As my colleagues have already mentioned, the GAO report that was
commissioned by myself and Congressman Delahunt noted that there were
items purchased with the money that is supposed to go to dissidents in
Cuba: a gas chainsaw, Game Boys, PlayStations, a mountain bike, leather
coats, cashmere sweaters. How is that going to help the dissident
community in Cuba? I would submit not very much. But yet the same ones
who support increasing this funding by five times also will not support
allowing individuals to visit their own family members in Cuba and take
toothpaste or clothing items or even to take a fishing poll so that
poor Cubans might supplement their meager diets. That, according to the
group that wants to increase funding here, should be outlawed. We
should continue to outlaw that but increase taxpayer funding for a
program that the GAO says there was intense mismanagement, cronyism. A
scathing report that came out: lack of bank reconciliations, lack of
documentation to determine compliance with cost-sharing requirements,
questionable travel expenses lacking adequate documentation,
questionable expenses paid to family members of a grantee manager,
hundreds of dollars of petty cash observed in the grantee's office that
was not controlled or properly cured.
This is not a good amendment. If you believe in fiscal sanity, please
defeat the amendment.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
Let's see what the dissidents in Cuba, in a letter and knowing full
well the risks they take by sending a letter to Members of Congress
about this issue today, what they say about the aid that this program
has sent to Cuba and is sending:
``We can affirm that the aid that for many years has flowed to the
pro-democracy movement takes into account the vast range of needs, from
medicine to keep a political prisoner or dissident from dying, to food,
water filters, medical equipment, clothing, shoes, coats, toys for the
children of political prisoners who suffer doubly the loss of a loved
one and social repression on the streets and in school, essential
vitamins, office supplies, the tools of democracy, computers printers,
phones, fax machines, among others that account for the long list of
articles and materials that have been made possible in Cuba.''
And they thank the American people in the same way in which the
people of Poland and the people of Eastern and Central Europe will be
eternally grateful to the American people, including the Congress of
the United States, for the support in their difficult days. The
dissidents and the pro-democracy movement in Cuba thank the American
people for this aid. And what President Bush has requested for the rest
of the hemisphere is either being funded or exceeded, and yet for the
only totalitarian police state in the hemisphere, the committee has
funded it at 19 percent. That is not justifiable, Mr. Chairman. That is
why we are asking for the funding fully offset to be at the requested
level by the administration.
Please support this amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson).
Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Chairman, let me just say very briefly, because I
don't need to repeat the fact that our taxpayer dollars have spent
money for cashmere sweaters, mountain bikes, and the like that really
aren't doing good for our dissidents, but I want to also mention the
letter that our colleagues from Florida mentioned, the one that USAID
sent. It did say that this program that we have is doing some good,
which is why I and my colleagues support the funding that we have in
the current bill. But what was not mentioned was that in the same
letter, the USAID also says that having restrictions on travel to Cuba,
restrictions on sending goods to Cuba don't serve the dissidents well.
So that begs the question, then. If the letter is important, the letter
is important in totality.
I think because of the GAO report and the fact that we do not have
good controls on the use of our taxpayer dollars that the old saying
that President Reagan said ``trust but verify'' is very important, and
it is time we verify before we send more money.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment.
Just to bring it back, one, this has nothing to do with trade. So the
trade issue is not even out here. It also has nothing to do with the
issue of travel, and I have asked for a visa to Cuba, and they denied
me when I tried to go.
This amendment should be called not the Diaz-Balart amendment. This
should be the Sharansky amendment. This should be called the Yelena
Bonner amendment. This should be the Havel amendment. I just read the
interview with Havel the other day.
What we want to do with this money is the same thing that was done in
Eastern Europe during the days of Ronald Reagan when we brought down
communism. This is what we did in Romania to bring down the Ceausescu
government. So this is a major cut. The Bush administration funds this
to the pro-democracy groups in Cuba. They need this for training. They
need this for their journalists. They need this for technical
assistance.

{time} 1045

They need this for so many other reasons. USAID reported U.S.
assistance supported journalism correspondence courses for 200 Cubans;
publication of 23,000 reports by independent Cuban journalists, on and
on. Dissidents are routinely rounded up.
If this amendment passes, imagine how they will feel in Cuba today to
know that the United States Congress stood with them. If it fails, they
will be demoralized.
This is really the Sharansky amendment of 2007. This is the Havel
amendment of 2007. This is the Yelena Bonner amendment of 2007. This is
the amendment that we used to do in the 1980s to bring down communism,
to help the civilian side, the dissidents.
This has nothing to do with travel; it shouldn't even be mixed with
that. That's a mixed issue; it has nothing to do with trade. It is what
do we do to help the dissidents; Armando Valadez has been in jail for
almost 19 years.
And so, I would hope that we can come together and send a message
that when this amendment is passed, the word goes forth as they listen
to their Radio Free Cuba tomorrow to know that the United States
Congress stood with them the way that they stood with Havel.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida for the balance
of the time.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Wolf has

[[Page H6837]]

said it all. This is an amendment not only of conscience, this is an
amendment to help people who are risking their lives. Thousands who are
in prison, hundreds recognized as prisoners of conscience by
international organizations such as Amnesty International. They are
risking their lives and their families' lives to peacefully advocate
for freedom and democracy as those heroes mentioned by Mr. Wolf
advocated and risked their lives in Eastern and Central Europe in the
1980s, and they finally achieved freedom. And have no doubt that the
dissidents in the pro-democracy movement in Cuba will be fundamental in
the transition. They will be leaders in the future tomorrow, perhaps
received in this Congress as the sovereign and elected leader of the
Republic of Cuba, perhaps one of those political prisoners, I have no
doubt, or those opposition leaders.
So it is time to help them and, as Mr. Wolf said, send a message of
solidarity and not retreat at this critical time.
Mr. WOLF. Reclaiming my time, if Sharansky served in this Congress
today, if Havel were serving here in this Congress today, if Yelena
Bonner was serving in this Congress today, Yelena Bonner and Sharansky
and Havel would be for this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. Before I yield to my colleague, I would like to respond
to my good friend, the ranking member, concerning his concern about the
impact on the dissidents. I would daresay as an American who is proud
of our values, if we open travel and communication and trade between
the United States and Cuba, they would really understand what it's like
to be an American. And I feel that's the best way to free the
dissidents and to create an open and democratic society.
Mr. Chairman, I am very proud to yield to my good friend, Mr.
Delahunt.
Mr. DELAHUNT. I thank the gentlelady for yielding, and I yield as
much time as she may consume to the gentlelady from Missouri.
Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Chairman, I misspoke, and I need to make a
correction for that.
When I was quoting about the restrictions, the people who wanted to
remove the restrictions, I meant to say it was a letter from the
dissidents, the Cuban dissidents, to us.
And also, I might add that the title of the report that our colleague
from Florida cited is entitled, ``U.S. Democratic Assistance for Cuba
Needs Better Management and Oversight,'' which is why the committee
report funding at $9 million is the right course today.
Mr. DELAHUNT. In response to the ranking member, I don't disagree
when he suggests that we listen to the dissidents because they're on
the island, they're fighting the good fight, not from the safety of
Washington or Boston or Miami, but they're there. Let's start to listen
to them.
This was a statement that was released by four of them, prominent and
well respected, on the island. It is a statement that was signed by
Marta Beatriz Roque, Jisela Delgado, Elizardo Sanchez and Vladimiro
Roca. Let's listen to what they say. Let's not reach our own
conclusions here in this House without listening to what they say.
``We consider it very important to achieve greater efficiency in the
use of these funds. We believe that one possible way to achieve this
would be the elimination of a series of existing restrictions on the
sending of aid and travel to Cuba, which doesn't at all help the pro-
democracy struggle that we are carrying out inside our country.''
With all due respect to the gentleman from Virginia, it is about
travel, it is about the embargo, because that's what the dissidents are
saying to us here, and we ought to listen to them.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to my friend and colleague from Massachusetts
(Mr. McGovern).
Mr. McGOVERN. And not only listen to the dissidents, but listen to
the courageous Catholic Church in Cuba, which refuses to participate in
this program.
We have had a policy for 50 years that has failed, it has been a
failure. This is a continuation of the same old, same old. But even if
you want to go down that road, the reason why you should oppose this
amendment is because this program has been plagued with corruption and
cronyism. We have used taxpayer moneys to buy Godiva chocolates and
cashmere sweaters. I mean, come on. That is not a way to support
dissidents. That is not a way to support the struggling democratic
movement in Cuba. This program has been mismanaged. It is up to the
Members of this Congress to make sure we do the proper oversight to
make sure that we're not wasting taxpayers' money.
Mr. DELAHUNT. I thank my colleague for the statement.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I call on Castro to not fear political
dissidents in Cuba, nor free press, nor trade or travel with the U.S.
But I also call on our government to consider the following: the U.S.
has tried 45 years of an embargo and restrictive travel; the State
Department has tried democracy assistance programs; and, the Treasury
Department has tried restricting U.S. farmers from easily selling their
products to Cuban consumers.
All these U.S. government policies have failed to bring about a
change of leadership in Cuba. Unfortunately throwing more money at TV
Marti or democracy programs is not going to bring about a real change
in Cuba. Real change can only be brought about by revolutionizing U.S.
policy towards Cuba. Lifting the travel embargo--allowing for the free
exchange of ideas and people between our country and Cuba--that's how
we will support Cuban political discourse! That's how we will support
freedom of expression in Cuba. Support lifting the embargo--vote
against the Diaz-Balart amendment and support a saner policy towards
Cuba!
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded
vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will
be postponed.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Wolf

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

Amendment offered by Mr. Wolf:
Page 2, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $158,000,000)''.
Page 40, line 26, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $140,000,000)''.
Page 58, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $16,000,000)''.
Page 63, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday,
June 20, 2007, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and a Member
opposed each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, this restores $156 million of the $458 million that was
cut. The amendment that we're going to offer today is in compliance
with the Iraq Study Group.
Now, about 226 Members of this body said they favor the Iraq Study
Group. What this does is this puts money back in for demining. If you
listen to the news today, there were 13 killed with regard to IEDs in
the effort for demining. This also puts money in for training for human
rights.
Now, whether you want to go out today or whether you want to do
whatever you want to do, we still need training for human rights, we
still need training for capacity for democracy and governance, we still
need ways for reconciliation to bring the parties together. We are
always hearing about the differences between the different factions.
That's what this money is for.
The administration originally asked for $458 million. We knocked it
down. We brought them in and said, what do you really need? They said,
this is what we really need.
This amendment is what the Iraq Study Group recommended. The Iraq
Study Group recommendation number 6 says, ``Building the capacity of
the

[[Page H6838]]

Iraqi Government should be at the heart of U.S. reconstruction efforts,
and capacity building demands additional U.S. resources.'' That's what
this is on.
I urge Members on both sides, this ought not be a political issue or
partisan issue, to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for
10 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. With great respect for my good friend and ranking member,
Mr. Wolf, we have just provided $2.863 billion in emergency
supplemental appropriations for Iraq, diplomatic operations and
reconstruction.
In addition, there are $3 billion for unexpended IRF funds. This
amendment is requesting $140 million in additional funding for
democracy, rule of law and governance programs. The supplemental
provided $250 million for democracy activities, $67.6 million for civil
society, $57.4 million for targeted development, $125 million in
governance programs, and $150 million in rule of law activities.
The amendment is also requesting $16 million in additional funding
for nonproliferation, anti-terrorism and demining activities. The
recently passed supplemental provided $7 million for demining in Iraq.
Additionally, nowhere in this bill is there language restricting
funding for humanitarian activities in Iraq. In my judgment, the
administration should substantially expend the funds we have provided
before Congress provides additional funding for the same purposes.
And lastly, if the situation on the ground changes and our assistance
can be used to make substantial achievements, we can address funding
for Iraq as the President has requested, $2.893 billion in emergency
appropriations for diplomatic operations and reconstruction in Iraq in
fiscal year 2008.
So, my colleagues, my good friend is requesting $158 million for
purposes that have already been funded in a $2.8 billion supplemental.
And there is another $2.893 billion supplemental coming up in
September. I know that $158 million can be used for the tremendous
needs around the world.
I strongly oppose this amendment, and I ask that my colleagues join
me.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul).
Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of
this amendment offered by Mr. Wolf of Virginia to restore $158 million
to this bill for democracy, governance, rule of law and human rights
programs. In addition, it will fund nonproliferation and anti-terrorist
programs.
Mr. Chairman, the debate in this Chamber over the future of Iraq and
the best course of action has been passionate and divisive. Each Member
of this House has their own opinion, yet the one thing we should be
united on is that our end goal should be the same, a secure and stable
Iraq.
Unfortunately, this bill predetermines failure by cutting off all
funds to important democracy-building programs in Iraq. The majority
has chosen to use this bill, as they have attempted several times
already this year, to force a premature end to Iraq's pursuit of
freedom and democracy. This will only lead to chaos and instability in
the region.
As a consultant to the Iraq Study Group, along with Mr. Wolf of
Virginia, we introduced a bipartisan bill, the Iraq Study Group
Recommendations Implementation Act of 2007 which provides a
comprehensive set of recommendations and a plan of action to succeed in
Iraq. Included in these recommendations are suggestions for funding
democracy, governance and rule of law, all the items that are funded by
this amendment.
This bill has garnered 52 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle,
who have recognized the potential we have by implementing these
recommendations together and moving forward as a united Congress. If we
allow this bill to pass without the money for building an Iraq
democracy, we condemn our mission to failure and declare that the
sacrifices we made over the past several years were in vain. It will
also squander any opportunity we have to give the Iraq Study Group
recommendations a chance to succeed.
I strongly urge my colleagues to support the Wolf amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 4 minutes to the
vice chair of this committee, my distinguished friend, Mr. Jackson.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
We have just provided $2.863 billion in emergency supplemental
appropriations for Iraq's diplomatic operations and reconstruction. As
the gentleman has accurately noted in committee, the funding in this
supplemental is tied up due to benchmarks; benchmarks that reflect the
will of the American people and the Congress; benchmarks that
presumably reflect the President's concurrence, as he signed them into
law; benchmarks that can be argued are in the best interest of Iraq in
becoming a stable democracy.

{time} 1100

Furthermore, I believe the gentleman's argument is not valid, as the
$2.863 billion we just provided will be available long before this bill
comes back from the President's desk signed. Additionally, while I
believe we provided sufficient funds for Iraq, I want to point out that
the administration should substantially expend the funds that we have
provided before Congress provides additional funding for the exact same
purposes. Besides, Congress provided an extension of the authority to
deobligate and then to reobligate prior-year appropriations to the Iraq
Relief Construction Fund, which, as of May 1, 2007, had $3.119 billion
in unexpended balances.
In the committee, the gentleman raised the issue of visible support,
as my last colleague raised in his remarks. I take a little bit of
offense to that, because I think that every day our troops, our
diplomats and aid workers are in harm's way, we show the greatest
levels of support. What's more, none of the funding in the gentleman's
amendment would go towards providing a safer environment for our men
and women serving in the country of Iraq. We just provided $2.863
billion.
So let's take the gentleman's amendment apart for a moment and be
clear on what we are considering. This amendment is requesting $140
million in additional funding for democracy, rule of law and governance
programs. The supplemental provides $250 million for democracy
activities; $67.6 million for civil society, and $57.4 million targeted
for development, $125 million in governance programs, and $150 million
in rule of law activities.
On page 58, line 18, the amendment is requesting $16 million in
additional funding for nonproliferation, anti-terrorism, and demining
activities. I want to make a couple of points about that.
The recently passed supplemental provided $7 million for demining in
Iraq. We do not appropriate nonproliferation, anti-terrorism, demining-
related program accounts by country. We appropriate this account by
program to allow the administration the flexibility to adjust to
emerging priorities and opportunities. This amendment would seek to
change that and radically affects how the President performs his
duties.
Additionally, this bill, and I want to emphasize this, this bill for
the first time fully funds the President's request for NADR, something
I would note that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle could
not claim when they were in the majority. The humanitarian demining
account is funded at the President's requested level of $56.5 million.
It does not need further funding.
On page 63, line 23, of the gentleman's amendment, where he requests
an additional $2 million, the amendment is requesting this $2 million
for foreign language training of Iraqi Security Forces. To date, we
have provided $18 billion in training for the Iraqi Security Forces. $2
million. Where does this figure come from? We have provided $18
billion, and, now the distinguished ranking member seeks an additional
$2 million.
We have provided sufficient funding. Most of these accounts and
numbers are unexpended. The administration should substantially expend
those funds we have provided before Congress

[[Page H6839]]

provides additional funding for the exact same purposes, Mr. Chairman.
Lastly, what is more, none of the funding in the gentleman's
amendment would go toward providing a safer environment for our men and
women serving in the country of Iraq.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Lowey) for
yielding.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).
Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, I thank our ranking member for yielding
time to me.
Mr. Chairman, while there are many disagreements about policy in
Iraq, we can all agree that a military solution is insufficient. More
evidence is clearly needed on the political, diplomatic, and economic
fronts. But I have concerns about what I am hearing from across the
aisle. Given the history, if we look back at the CR at the beginning of
the year, there is a lack of clarity about how funds could be used by
our State Department.
Furthermore, we saw a marked reduction in human intelligence funding
in the Intelligence authorization bill. In the supplemental, economic
support funds were basically withheld. But some funding was restored
through administration waivers. And now, in this bill, economic
stabilization funds were basically zeroed.
Mr. Chairman, I thank our colleague, our ranking member, for trying
in subcommittee and in full committee to restore this funding. With
this amendment, which I believe is very essential to success in Iraq,
he has put forth this effort. This funding is clearly important if we
are going to fund the political and economic endeavor in Iraq. The
State Department cannot complete its planning and implementation of
phase three of putting together these provincial reconstruction teams
which are absolutely necessary to the success of the mission. So it is
clear that we need for this amendment to pass to allow the State
Department to plan and move.
In the post-Cold War environment, we have grave responsibilities as a
Nation. Yet we are refusing to fund our State Department worthy of this
position of responsibility. The United Kingdom alone, which has one-
fifth the population of the United States, has 5,600 diplomats
worldwide and 130,000 troops. The U.S. has a mere 6,500 diplomats
worldwide with 1.4 million troops, 2.5 million if you count our
Reserves.
Mr. Chairman, I urge the adoption of this amendment. Clearly, it is
the responsible thing to do to move forward. It restores $140 million
in economic support funds, $16 million in nonproliferation, anti-
terrorism and demining efforts, a critical, critical piece to this, and
$2 million to increase international military education and training.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is a responsible thing to do. I urge all
of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, my colleagues, I have a question for Mr. Boustany, my
good friend, and the ranking member. I believe, Mr. Boustany, that you
recommended that we fund this $158 million. Yet this amendment takes
the money away from the State Department. Ambassador Ryan Crocker is
doing a superb job. We just appropriated $2.8 billion in the
supplemental. The American people have requested, and this Congress has
requested, that we see some response to the benchmarks, that we see
some response on the part of the Iraqi Government to the benchmarks
that have been put in place.
So if I understand correctly, even though the supplemental funded,
and I am not going to repeat it, every single category that my dear
friend, the ranking member and my friend, Mr. Boustany, are advocating
for, you want to fund $158 million with funds from the State Department
which are supporting Ambassador Ryan Crocker and other ambassadors
around the world who are doing such an amazing job representing us.
Mr. Chairman, I really think there is a disconnect here. I want you
to know that for those of us who are opposing this amendment, with
great respect, again, to my ranking member, we feel that the
supplemental that has passed and the $2.8 billion that is coming up in
September requested by the administration can address these issues if,
in fact, there is an understanding that they are not being funded
adequately.
So, again, I strongly object to this amendment. I strongly object to
taking funds away from Ambassador Ryan Crocker and our other
ambassadors around the world and representatives of the State
Department.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Shadegg).
Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment
by the gentleman from Virginia. I think it is important to focus on
this debate. There is no challenge greater than this facing America
right now. It is vitally important that we succeed in Iraq and allow
that nation to establish a democracy. I hear on the other side that,
well, we have amply funded this already.
We are imposing dramatic increases in spending in thousands of other
areas, a 56 percent increase in HIV/AIDS funding alone. What message do
we send if we reduce spending in this area at this time? I would argue
that whether you want out of Iraq tonight or whether you support the
current course, it is vitally important that we send every message we
possibly can to the Iraqi people and to our Nation that we are doing
everything we can to support democracy.

{time} 1115

That is what these funds are for. Of course, other funds have been
spent, but these funds continue the effort to tell the Iraqi people we
stand with them. These are funds for domestic purposes, for their
security, for governance and for rule of law. I believe it is vitally
important, indeed critically important for our Nation, that we fund
this money now. I rise in strong support of the gentleman's amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, just for the record, did the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Shadegg) suggest that we decrease the money for HIV-AIDS around
the world?
Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman will yield. No, we are
increasing it.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thought you were suggesting that you didn't think that
was a good idea; that it was more important to add to the $2.8 billion
another $158 million and take it from the HIV funds. If I
misunderstood, I apologize.
Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman will yield further, by
no means was I suggesting we should not be doing that. In fact, that is
a discussion for another day. What I was suggesting is that there are
many places where we are increasing spending even more dramatically
than is suggested by the gentleman's amendment here for what I believe
is a vitally important purpose, which is democracy, rule of law and
governance in Iraq.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, so the gentleman
believes that the $2.8 billion in the supplemental is not adequate and
we must add $158 million now, even though there is another $2.8 billion
supplement requested by the President for the fall.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my good friend, the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Jackson).
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished
chairwoman for yielding me the time.
The question here is one of unexpended balances. The amendment is
requesting an additional $140 million for rule of law democracy-related
programs, but the supplemental that is still warm on the President's
desk provided $250 million for those democracy activities, and they
have not been expended; $67.6 million for civil society and $57.4
million targeted for development for $125 million in governance
programs, and they still haven't been expended; $150 million in rule of
law activities that have not been expended as we move forward with the
surge.
So, Mr. Chairman, it is premature to request $140 million additional
dollars, page 40, line 26 of the gentleman's amendment, for moneys that
have not been expended that the Congress just voted on in this
particular bill. The same can be said of the gentleman's request on
page 58, line 18, and page 63, line 23, $2 million. We have $18 billion
to date appropriated for Iraqi Security

[[Page H6840]]

Forces. Where does the figure $2 million come from? It comes from
nowhere, Mr. Chairman.
Support the chairwoman's request to defeat this amendment.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Shays). Members should know that Mr. Shays has been to
Iraq 17 times and has been outside the umbrella of the military four
times, and probably understands this issue in the Congress probably
better than anybody else.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
First I want to salute Mrs. Lowey. I think you have done a very fine
job on this legislation. I know you are focused on a lot of issues, and
I congratulate you for that.
We have disagreement on a few items in a very significant bill. I
have strong concern about the lack of any dollars for economic
development in the fiscal year 2008 budget, and that is what we are
talking about. We are not talking about an emergency supplemental,
which, by the way, has lots of strings attached, which may mean,
ironically, money may not be spent ever.
We Republicans and Democrats, want to succeed in Iraq, economically,
politically, socially and militarily. We want to succeed. The challenge
is I feel like we are pulling the rug out from under the chance to
succeed economically and politically.
The reason why I say ``politically'' is I have been there before,
during and after the elections. This money helped educate the Iraqis on
how to have elections. They did their elections better than we do our
elections in the United States.
When I was outside the umbrella of the military, people would say,
why have you put my father, my uncle, my brother, my cousin, my son out
of work, when we abolished all of their military. So when I hear we
spent $18 billion to reconstitute their military, that is not a large
number. It is money that had to be used because of what we did. We
attacked them. They did not attack us.
We have a moral obligation, I believe, to put Iraq in a better place.
If we don't do it economically and politically, any effort militarily
fails.
I mean no disrespect, but it is almost like there is an interest in
having Iraq fail, so all the predictions that it will fail will be
proven right. We need to prove ourselves wrong. We need to succeed.
These dollars should be, in my judgment, in the 2008 account, not in
an emergency supplemental, whether now or in the future. The
administration asked for $458 million. We asked the NGO's to say, what
are your absolute needs for economic support, the rule of law,
governance and democracy? And they have come back to us and said, we
need $158 million.
I just hope that the gentlewoman in her wisdom will reconsider her
decisions.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, with great respect, again, for our ranking member and
for my friend Mr. Shays, who I know has been to Iraq many times, I do
hope that in light of the supplemental, which has been funded at $2.8
billion, and an additional supplemental which will be presented to the
Congress in September for another $2.8 billion, we won't cut the rug
from under our good friend, the competent Ambassador Ryan Crocker, and
take this $158 million from the State Department for several lines that
have been funded already in the supplemental. I won't go through that
again.
Mr. Ryan Crocker represents us, and I am so proud of his good work. I
would like to support him and the other good men and women in the State
Department around the world.
So let's defeat this amendment. I urge my colleagues to vote against
this amendment.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlelady from Miami, Ms. Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I fully support the amendment offered by my good friend
from Virginia (Mr. Wolf). This amendment gives vital assistance for
demining, counterterrorism, rule of law programs, funding for Iraq
military training and international human rights. We must remain
committed to assisting the development of Iraq into a nation that is
capable of governing itself, sustaining itself, defending itself and
independently taking all necessary actions to root out terrorists and
militias that seek to undermine the transition to a free and sovereign
Iraqi Government, continue to promote democracy and the rule of law,
continue to provide necessary services to the people of Iraq and
maintain the authority of the Government of Iraq in all parts of its
national territory.
My colleagues seek to cut integral components of our effort for
cooperation and coordination with Iraqi leaders. Mr. Wolf's amendment
correctly is aimed at strengthening the Iraqi Government to make sure
that that nation can truly become self-reliant and stable, and not
count on the U.S. as a blank check any longer.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, just in closing, the
gentlewoman has been very good, and I appreciate the work of Mrs. Lowey
on a lot of the issues. As Mr. Shays said, there are a lot of good
things in the bill.
This, in closing, deals with the whole issue of demining, human
rights training, criminal justice, rule of law and human rights. None
of these things really ought to be controversial for anybody, whatever
their position. Also they fit into the recommendations of the Iraq
Study Group.
I think to offer an opportunity to heal and to build the private
sector, the civilian sector in Iraq on these issues of human rights
training is important, so when the United States is out, there will be
respect for human rights, there will be criminal justice, there will be
rule of law.
Mr. Chairman, I urge an ``aye'' vote.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
yielding. I guess I am asking him to yield really to a question so I
can have a better understanding of the gentleman's amendment.
Is it the intent of the gentleman's amendment that these funds would
somehow not be subject to the benchmarks established in the
supplemental bill for funding and future funding in Iraq? Is this
around the benchmarks?
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I believe they would be.
The reason we did this, I will tell my friend from Illinois, is when
the $458 million was cut, we asked the administration to come up and
tell us what they really needed, because we said this is a very
difficult issue. The gentlewoman put a lot of programs with good money
in. What do you honestly need? So everything would be in compliance
with the benchmarks. But it would also give them the initial funding.
They said, we actually need this $158 million.
But they would be, to answer your question, in compliance.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would
continue to yield, if in fact, I certainly hope the Iraqi Government is
able to achieve the benchmarks, but if in fact, for whatever reason,
they are unsuccessful in achieving the benchmarks and the Congress of
the United States is to recontemplate elements of the supplemental and
additional funding for the efforts in Iraq, does this gentleman's
amendment appropriate dollars that are not subject to the specific
requirements of the benchmarks established in the supplemental? Is this
a funding in addition to that funding?
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, this is fiscal year 2008,
and these would be all issues that I think everybody on both sides,
Republican, Democrat, independent, moderate, conservative, would be
for.
If you go out on the street and say do you favor funding in the 2008
bill for demining, I think you would get a 90-10 yes. If you said do
you favor funding for human rights training or whatever the case may
be, people would say yes. Do you favor funding with regard to the human
rights rule of law, they would say yes.
This is what the administration and the State Department, not so much
the administration, the State Department really felt they would need.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H6841]]

The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Shays

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

Amendment offered by Mr. Shays:
Page 2, line 22, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced
by $1,000,000)''.
Page 17, line 19, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday,
June 20, 2007, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment would provide $1 million to the U.S.
Institute of Peace, referred to as USIP, for the purposes of
reestablishing the Iraq Study Group (ISG). We want the ISG to revisit
Iraq to evaluate the condition in Iraq 1 year later, to look at their
findings and compare them to a year ago, and to look at their
recommendations to see where they might alter them. That is what the
amendment does.
I have spoken to Richard Solomon at the U.S. Institute of Peace, who
said the Institute is prepared to do this, to reconstitute its expert
working groups.
This would be done at the same time that we are going to hear from
Ambassador Ryan Crocker and General David Petraeus, who will be giving
us their findings. But the Institute wanted to make clear they would
not be there to look at and evaluate the Crocker-Petraeus findings and
recommendations, but it would simply be a report that would be provided
at the same time to which people then could compare.
I spoke to one of the principals of the Iraq Study Group, Lee
Hamilton. He said he is willing to take this effort on, provided it is
to review what they did, to look at what has taken place in Iraq, to
review their observations, their findings and their recommendations,
but they would not be eager to take the Petraeus-Crocker report and
analyze it. It would be done so there would be two instruments that
Congress could look at.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's
amendment and ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from New York?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment will move $1 million from
the Diplomatic and Consular Programs account to the United States
Institute for Peace to reconstitute the Iraq Study Group. Although I
feel compelled to point out the likelihood that by the time this bill
is signed into law, the study on the effectiveness of the President's
surge in Iraq will have passed, but, nevertheless, I support this
amendment because I feel there is value added to reconstituting the
Iraq Study Group, something that our ranking member continues to
deserve kudos for establishing in the first place.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to say to the
gentlewoman, thank you very much. I would point out that the Iraq Study
Group was an instrument created by both sides of the aisle, but
particularly by Mr. Wolf. It is a bipartisan effort, and it would be
good to continue this bipartisan effort.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Wolf).
Mr. WOLF. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairwoman for accepting the
amendment. I appreciate it very much. I thank Mr. Shays for offering
it. I think this is really the way the country is going to go.
There may be a vote here. Mr. Udall and other Members, along with Mr.
Shays and Mr. McCaul, have a bill in to make the Iraq study the policy
for the Nation.
I want to thank the gentlewoman for accepting it and thank Mr. Shays.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I just want to close by thanking Mr. Shays
again and my distinguished ranking member, who deserves our praise for
establishing the Iraq Study Group in the first place. I thank you both.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my
strong support for this amendment.
U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker and Multi-National Force Commander
General David Petraeus will provide an assessment of Iraq this fall.
The assessment will include the military, economic and political
situation in Iraq.
The assessment will be a key determinant for future U.S. involvement.
The debate over what to do in Iraq will continue and the Crocker-
Petraeus assessment will be challenged.
If the report is positive Crocker and Petraeus must provide specific
signs of progress and lay out in detail how long and how many troops
will be needed in Iraq.
If the report is negative then Crocker and Petraeus should provide
definitive steps on a phased withdrawal plan that reduces the number of
lives lost.
Whatever the outcome of the Crocker-Petraeus assessment we need an
independent validation of the assessment.
This is why I am supporting Mr. Shays' amendment to reconstitute the
Iraq Study Group.
This bipartisan group, that provided observations and recommendations
to the President last December concerning the situation in Iraq would
be reengaged and provide the American people a bipartisan perspective
of what we can expect for the future of Iraq.
With all the partisan debate we witness week in and week out in
Washington, we must reconstitute this nonpartisan group, which has as
its only goal, moving forward American interests.
Mr. Chairman, it is time we come together and support this amendment
to provide a bipartisan assessment of the situation in Iraq.
Mrs. LOWERY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I thank Representative Lowey and
Representative Wolf, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Connecticut
will be postponed.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

capital investment fund

For necessary expenses of the Capital Investment Fund,
$59,062,000, to remain available until expended, as
authorized: Provided, That section 135(e) of Public Law 103-
236 shall not apply to funds available under this heading.

office of inspector general

For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General,
$32,508,000, notwithstanding section 209(a)(1) of the Foreign
Service Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-465), as it relates to
post inspections.

educational and cultural exchange programs

For expenses of educational and cultural exchange programs,
as authorized, $501,400,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That not to exceed $5,000,000, to remain
available until expended, may be credited to this
appropriation from fees or other payments received from or in
connection with English teaching, educational advising and
counseling programs, and exchange visitor programs as
authorized: Provided further, That of the amount made
available under this heading, $6,000,000 shall be transferred
to the Fund established by section 313 of the Legislative
Branch Appropriations Act, 2001 (2 U.S.C. 1151).

representation allowances

For representation allowances as authorized, $8,175,000.

protection of foreign missions and officials

For expenses, not otherwise provided, to enable the
Secretary of State to provide for

[[Page H6842]]

extraordinary protective services, as authorized,
$28,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009.

embassy security, construction, and maintenance

For necessary expenses for carrying out the Foreign Service
Buildings Act of 1926 (22 U.S.C. 292-303), preserving,
maintaining, repairing, and planning for buildings that are
owned or directly leased by the Department of State,
renovating, in addition to funds otherwise available, the
Harry S Truman Building, and carrying out the Diplomatic
Security Construction Program as authorized, $729,898,000, to
remain available until expended as authorized, of which not
to exceed $25,000 may be used for domestic and overseas
representation as authorized: Provided, That none of the
funds appropriated in this paragraph shall be available for
acquisition of furniture, furnishings, or generators for
other departments and agencies.
In addition, for the costs of worldwide security upgrades,
acquisition, and construction as authorized, $806,900,000, to
remain available until expended.

emergencies in the diplomatic and consular service

(including transfer of funds)

For expenses necessary to enable the Secretary of State to
meet unforeseen emergencies arising in the Diplomatic and
Consular Service, $14,000,000, to remain available until
expended as authorized, of which not to exceed $1,000,000 may
be transferred to and merged with the ``Repatriation Loans
Program Account'', subject to the same terms and conditions.

repatriation loans program account

(including transfer of funds)

For the cost of direct loans, $678,000, as authorized:
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.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct loan program, $607,000, which may be
transferred to and merged with funds in the ``Diplomatic and
Consular Programs'' account.

payment to the american institute in taiwan

For necessary expenses to carry out the Taiwan Relations
Act (Public Law 96-8), $16,351,000.

payment to the foreign service retirement and disability fund

For payment to the Foreign Service Retirement and
Disability Fund, as authorized by law, $158,900,000.

International Organizations

contributions to international organizations

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary to meet
annual obligations of membership in international
multilateral organizations, pursuant to treaties ratified
pursuant to the advice and consent of the Senate, conventions
or specific Acts of Congress, $1,354,400,000: Provided, That
the Secretary of State shall, at the time of the submission
of the President's budget to Congress under section 1105(a)
of title 31, United States Code, transmit to the Committees
on Appropriations the most recent biennial budget prepared by
the United Nations for the operations of the United Nations:
Provided further, That the Secretary of State shall notify
the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days in advance
(or in an emergency, as far in advance as is practicable) of
any United Nations action to increase funding for any United
Nations program without identifying an offsetting decrease
elsewhere in the United Nations budget and cause the United
Nations budget for the biennium 2008-2009 to exceed the
revised United Nations budget level for the biennium 2006-
2007 of $4,173,895,900: Provided further, That any payment of
arrearages under this title shall be directed toward special
activities that are mutually agreed upon by the United States
and the respective international organization: Provided
further, That none of the funds appropriated in this
paragraph shall be available for a United States contribution
to an international organization for the United States share
of interest costs made known to the United States Government
by such organization for loans incurred on or after October
1, 1984, through external borrowings.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey

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

Amendment offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey:
Page 8, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $20,000,000)''.
Page 58, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $20,000,000)''.

{time} 1130

Terrorists disregard the rules of warfare and strike at pure
innocents. They wear no uniform and often do not even care about saving
their own lives. Despite the fact that the world is in the throes of
the violence of terrorism, the U.N. has done so very little to fight
this threat on humanity.
The U.N. marks progress against terrorism by how many committees they
have formed and how many documents have been signed. We need a world
body that does not consider an expanded bureaucracy as success. We need
a world body that is a partner in the war on terror.
Instead, the U.N. spends its time passing toothless resolutions on
counterterrorism that even countries such as Iran, Libya, and Syria can
support. These nations will continue to funnel money to terrorist
organizations like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Mahdi Army knowing that
there will be absolutely no repercussions from the U.N.
My amendment proposes to shift $20 million, approximately 3 percent
of the U.S. contribution to the U.N., to antiterrorism assistance
programs. If the U.N. is unwilling to join the fight against terrorism,
we should reallocate our dollars, reallocate a portion of the funds
intended for them to programs which are truly working to bring real
peace to the world.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. This amendment would cut $20 million from the
contributions for international organizations. The question posed by
this amendment is straightforward: Do you want to take funds away from
an account that is saving lives every day around the world?
Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld last year told Senate
appropriators that U.N. peacekeeping was an example of the benefit of
empowering partner nations, and it would cost the United States
taxpayers almost eight times as much.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Would the gentlelady from New York yield
for a clarification?
Mrs. LOWEY. Of course.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. This amendment is not as to where our
funds are coming from.
Mrs. LOWEY. I apologize, we were responding to another amendment.
Would the gentleman please clarify your amendment so we can direct our
debate to the appropriate amendment. Is this the one you are going to
offer and withdraw?
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Exactly.
Mrs. LOWEY. I would be delighted to respond to you then. I thank the
gentleman for withdrawing the amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I have not yet officially
withdrawn my amendment. I would appreciate a comment from the
gentlelady with regard to her support in general of our ideas on this
amendment and the agreeability to work together to achieve what we are
aiming for in this regard.
Mrs. LOWEY. Would the gentleman from New Jersey yield?
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. I yield to the gentlelady.
Mrs. LOWEY. I really do apologize to the gentleman because the order
of the amendments was changed.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. I understand.
Mrs. LOWEY. And international peacekeeping is very important to me,
but as soon as I understand what your amendment is that you are going
to withdraw, I would be delighted to comment on the gentleman's
amendment.
Could the gentleman redesignate the amendment? There seems to be a
question. My comments were concerning

[[Page H6843]]

the amendment to cut CIPA. May I have some clarification on what
amendment we are discussing?
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will report the
amendment.
There was no objection.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, hopefully that redesignation
is a clarification.
What we are trying to do is not, as in a subsequent amendment where
we will be taking funds from the peacekeeping mission, which is what
the gentlelady was referring to here, instead is to take money from the
U.N. international organization line and redesignate those $20 million
to join us in the fight against terrorism.
As my opening comments to the Chair stated, the U.N. has done a
woefully poor job when it comes to fighting terrorism around the world.
We only have to look at the situation in the Sudan and Darfur, where
they are not even able at this late date to define and tell us a
genocide is going on. My goodness, the U.N. has not been able to
grapple with the definition of what a genocide is, let alone take
responsive action to try to bring it to an end.
Likewise in the area of terrorism, the U.N. has again willfully and
woefully failed to step up to the plate and be an instrument in
fighting terrorism with so many of the world nations, the United States
obviously taking a lead in that course.
If the U.N. is not going to be the international body to step up and
take affirmative action in these areas, I think it is incumbent upon us
here in this House to make sure that our dollars, our limited American
taxpayer dollars, do not go to an organization, the U.N., an
international body that is not getting the job done; but instead, to
reallocate those dollars, to reallocate $20 million. That is only 3
percent of the U.S. contributions to the U.N. to antiterrorism
assistance.
Homeland security, fighting terrorism, is one of the hallmark
principles that I came to Congress to work on and to achieve end
results on, and this amendment to this legislation will go to that end.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to respond to the gentleman
from New Jersey.
I do believe that nuclear nonproliferation must be a key focus of
this committee and this Congress. In fact, in this bill because of the
recommendations of so many members of our subcommittee and Members of
Congress, we have increased money for nuclear nonproliferation efforts.
So I look forward to working with the gentleman on this issue as we
move ahead.
However, I do think that your offset, taking money from U.N. dues, is
actually unwise and not a very good policy decision.
Many people have criticized the U.N., want to disband the U.N., want
to cut off dues to the U.N., and then when we need the U.N., they
wonder: What are we going to do if we didn't have a United Nations?
I look forward to working with the gentleman from New Jersey in
strengthening the committees of the U.N. and working together to face
the tremendous challenges we have internationally. So I support the
gentleman's concerns about nuclear nonproliferation, and I look forward
to working with the gentleman; but I strongly oppose taking the money
from U.N. dues.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Jackson).
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, let me be clear, we are in
opposition to the gentleman's amendment. I understand that the
gentleman is going to withdraw his amendment, but let me be clear, the
various international organizations for which this account is
designated and the dues that we pay not only to the U.N. but to other
member organizations that our country is a part of, believe me when I
tell you, the State Department has made it very clear in each of those
organizations that we are in a global war on terror and our
contributions to those organizations, part of our mandatory obligations
to those organizations for which the gentleman seeks to cut funding,
would quite frankly undermine our ability to maintain our own status
within those international organizations as we try to direct the global
war on terror.
The spirit of the gentleman's amendment, some aspects of it are
actually covered in the supplemental bill and some aspects of it are
obviously covered in our bill, is something that is very difficult to
argue against, an additional $20 million for demining activities. Part
of this amendment was offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf)
in his amendment, and it is something in principle that we can support.
Sufficient in this bill are the resources to advance democracy
activities and demining activities, but by cutting aid to international
organizations and contributions, cutting our contribution, our
mandatory contribution to those organizations, is something that I
believe the chairman and the majority would reject.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully understand
there was a misunderstanding as to which amendment we were dealing
with, and I appreciate the Chairman redesignating the amendment.
The previous speaker made reference to ending nuclear
nonproliferation and the like. Again, this amendment does not go to
that point. This amendment simply goes to the point of taking money
from the international organizations funds and trying to fight
terrorism.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
do not withdraw the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. All time for debate has expired.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, parliamentary inquiry.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman may state his parliamentary
inquiry.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Is my understanding correct that the
gentleman was going to withdraw his amendment, and now he is not going
to withdraw his amendment?
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has not withdrawn his amendment.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Then let me make it clear on behalf of the
distinguished chairman and the committee that we rise in opposition to
this amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. All time for debate has expired.
The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Garrett).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey
will be postponed.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Foxx

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

Amendment offered by Ms. Foxx:
Page 8, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $203,082,000)''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday,
June 20, 2007, the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx) and a
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from North Carolina.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering would restore the
funding level for international organizations provided in this bill to
the fiscal year 2007 level.
The purpose of my amendment is twofold. First, it would help bring
accountability to organizations that have demonstrated limited
effectiveness. Second, this amendment would help control the out-of-
control Federal deficit.
This keeps the funding level at last year's level, which was very
reasonable. In fiscal year 2006, total interest payments on Treasury
debt securities amounted to $405.9 billion, or about 14 percent of
Federal outlays. That amounts to 1.7 percent of the U.S. GDP.
Translated, that means 1.7 cents of every dollar produced by Americans
is used to pay interest on the Federal debt.

[[Page H6844]]

As a percentage of GDP, the Federal debt ratio is larger for the
United States than it is in Finland, Ireland, Spain, Switzerland and
the United Kingdom. By any measure, it should be clear to any
responsible fiscal steward that Congress needs to do more to control
deficit spending to help reduce the Federal debt.
My amendment would take a small but much-needed step in that
direction. With a little help from the majority party in Congress, we
could reduce unnecessary spending and return more money to the American
people who earned it in the first place.
Second, I wonder what our constituents would think if they knew they
were being forced to pay millions for perpetual, never-ending funding
increases for organizations such as the International Bureau for
Weights and Measures, the International Coffee Association, the
International Copper Study Group, the International Hydrographic
Organization, the International Lead and Zinc Study Group, the
International Rubber Study Group, and the World Organization for Animal
Health.
Given the tremendous amount of funding contained in the bill for the
United Nations, I am particularly interested in encouraging that body
to reexamine its spending habits so it can be more effective at
fulfilling its mission.

{time} 1145

As most would agree, the purpose of the United Nations is to help
promote peace and security throughout the world. However, it has
obviously failed miserably in that respect. Iran's nuclear weapons
program is still chugging along at a rapid pace, threatening Israel and
the entire region. Genocide persists in Sudan. All of the minds at the
United Nations can't even agree on a definition for the word
``terrorism'' in an age where terrorism remains one of the biggest
threats to humanity and civilization.
Furthermore, despite the implicit purpose of the United Nations Human
Rights Council to promote global human rights, this body has among its
membership notorious human rights abusers such as Angola, China, Cuba,
Egypt, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Iran serves as the Vice Chair of the
U.N. Disarmament Commission, Syria is the Rapporteur of the U.N.
Disarmament Commission, Zimbabwe is the Chair of the U.N. Commission on
Sustainable Development, and Sudan serves on the Executive Committee of
the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees.
And if that wasn't enough, an examination of a ranked list of
countries subject to the most U.N. condemnation for human rights
violations in 2006 reveals Israel ranking first, having received 135
actions, nearly twice as many as Sudan, the next country listed, and
more than the number of actions directed at Iran, China, Colombia,
Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Syria combined. The United States ranks fourth
on this list, having been subject to 38 actions. This indicates that
the United Nations is more interested in condemning Israel and the
United States than it is in horrendous human rights abusers throughout
the world.
With that being said, the part of my amendment that should draw
support from both sides of the aisle is the fact that my amendment
doesn't cut a dollar from U.S. spending on international organizations.
My amendment simply maintains the fiscal year 2007 level. By holding
the line on spending, Congress can have another year to work on
balancing the books and finding other ways to fund the increased
spending proposals contained in the underlying bill.
Mr. Chairman, at a time when Americans are being asked to do more
with their budgets, it is only reasonable to expect the same out of
those who benefit from generous American donations. That is why it
should be clear to all of my colleagues why they should support my
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentlewoman's
amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. This amendment would cut $203 million from our
contribution to international organizations. This amendment fails to
realistically address the effect our arrears have on our standing in
the world community. At a time when the United States is increasingly
relying on international organizations to further our security
interests around the world, shortchanging our treaty-obligated
contributions to these organizations undercuts our foreign policy goals
and undermines our reputation around the world. It also countermands
our new Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad's call to pay our dues in full and
on time. As of today, the United States is $291 million in arrears at
the U.N. for regular budget contributions alone. The United States has
chosen to belong to each of these organizations. They leverage U.S.
taxpayer dollars and advance a wide range of U.S. foreign policy
objectives, including monitoring nuclear proliferation through the
IAEA, creating norms for international telecommunications through the
ITU, and fending off global pandemics through the WHO.
The administration and the Congress have underfunded and cut this
account in recent years. This amendment would continue this trend. The
United States has an $80 million deficit in the CIO account and the
State Department is paying U.S. dues late or incurring arrears in
virtually every organization in this account. Shortfalls to the CIO
account in 2006 caused the State Department to pay all of its regular
dues to the IAEA almost a full year late, even as we relied on that
organization to track nuclear developments in Iran and North Korea; pay
dues to our allies in the OECD almost a year late; pay all of our dues
to the WHO about a year late, even as we asked WHO to help contain
avian flu; and pay the vast majority of our regular dues to NATO a year
or so late, even as we relied on that organization to shore up security
in Afghanistan.
This amendment has no appreciation of the influence this increasing
trend of paying late and underfunding international organizations has
on our ability to sway others and it is difficult to justify why our
priorities should be given full consideration when we chronically pay
our dues late. Paying these international organizations late is
counterproductive to achieving United States international security
goals. The increasing trend of paying late and underfunding
international organizations confounds U.S. demands for better
management in them.
An example of this detrimental effect is seen at the World Health
Organization which reports that the arrears owed by the United States
are preventing well-managed budgets and resulting in programs not
reaching optimal effectiveness for a year or more after they were
planned to be fully operational. Further, other dues-paying countries
take note when the United States fails to honor its commitments in
these international organizations. As a result, our influence on making
budgetary and policy decisions in them is lessened. For example, the
U.S. consistently wants the Food and Agriculture Organization to
increase its capacity to set worldwide food and plant standards, yet it
is very difficult to justify why U.S. priorities for the FAO should be
given full consideration when the U.S. is chronically paying its dues
there about a year late.
Therefore, I strongly object to the gentlewoman's amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from North Carolina has 30
seconds remaining.
Ms. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate what my colleague has
said. But these organizations do nothing to help the security of the
United States. The U.N. is an ineffective and corrupt organization and
our continuing to provide much of its funding implicitly endorses that
corruption and ineffectiveness. If we put this to a vote of the
American people, they would say, fund nothing of the United Nations.
Keeping this at level funding is the right thing to do.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from New York has 30 seconds
remaining.
Mrs. LOWEY. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Illinois.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I thank the chairwoman.
Well, here we go again, cutting a multilateral account that allows us
to

[[Page H6845]]

hold our head up high in the international community as we organize the
international community in the global war on terror in favor of
unilateralism.
To fight the war on terror, we must be multilateral and not
unilateral. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Khalilzad said pay our dues on
time and pay it in full. Every time there's a crisis that confronts our
country, we run to the U.N., we run to the international community
demanding their involvement to help provide security for the American
people.
Mr. Chairman, reject this amendment.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WOLF. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
Everyone has frustrations. I think the U.N. could do certainly a lot
more on Darfur and many of the other things. They stood by and frankly
didn't do very much in Rwanda, either. But what this amendment would
do, I think, is people have to look at it. This would actually cut NATO
fees, and NATO is sort of the backbone of what we're doing in
Afghanistan and many other places, but particularly $41 million out of
this fund goes to NATO.
Also, on the World Health Organization with regard to avian flu and
things like that, this is not the time to do that. Also, there is
another issue that I have personally made a cause, of funding the war
crime tribunals to bring people to justice. This would cut the war
crimes tribunal in Rwanda where over 800,000 people have died between
the Hutus and the Tutsis and that whole issue. Also the former
Yugoslavia where after the genocide that took place, Milosevic was
brought to the court.
So for those reasons, I understand what the gentlelady is trying to
do. But I think this would be the wrong place to kind of do it, from
NATO and IAEA and the World Health Organization and the war crimes
tribunal.
Lastly, this is at the request of President Bush, of the Bush
administration. This is what the Bush administration, President Bush,
has requested.
For those reasons, I urge a ``no'' vote.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from North
Carolina will be postponed.

Amendment Offered by Mr. McCaul of Texas

Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. McCaul of Texas:
Page 8, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $30,000,000)''.
Page 52, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $30,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday,
June 20, 2007, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. McCAUL of Texas. I thank the chairman.
I rise today to offer an amendment that will partially restore the
administration's funding request for the International Narcotics
Control and Law Enforcement account in the FY08 State Department and
Foreign Operations appropriations bill. This amendment would add $30
million to the account, halfway between the committee funding level and
the President's request. This is a bipartisan amendment. I would like
to thank my colleague on the other side of the aisle, Mr. Cuellar, for
his support as an author and cosponsor.
Earlier this month I attended the U.S.-Mexico Interparliamentary
Group in Austin, Texas, and for 3 days we talked about issues important
to the United States and Mexico. The major topic discussed was the
issue of increasing violence and lawlessness along the U.S.-Mexico
border. The drug cartels have taken control over northern Mexico and
law enforcement has become corrupt and ineffective. Since his
inauguration earlier this year, President Calderon has begun a renewed
effort to reestablish law enforcement's control over his country and
their borders. However, the drug kingpins are ruthless in their efforts
to retain control and the Mexican Government's law enforcement
capabilities are sorely outdated. Just recently, the drug cartels
brazenly ordered the assassination of a Mexican state legislator.
I would like to take a moment to commend Chairwoman Lowey and Ranking
Member Wolf for including $27.5 million in the bill for this effort and
for recognizing in the report language of the bill the need to address
this problem which so devastatingly impacts our southern border, our
national security and the citizens of this country. However, I believe
that additional funding would go a long way to eradicating the drug
cartels.
The offset in this amendment is a $30 million reduction in the
contributions to the international organization's account. I believe
it's a worthwhile transfer of funds that will benefit not only our
border with Mexico but also our counterdrug efforts worldwide. One of
the most important international peacekeeping efforts today should be
on the southern border against the violent criminal enterprise of the
narcotraffickers.
The cartels control the corridor routes into this country, exporting
drugs and human trafficking across our southern border. The
intersection between these criminal enterprises and potential
terrorists could be deadly. In the post-9/11 world, we can no longer
continue to ignore this threat.
At a time when the newly elected Mexican Government has stepped
forward and made a commitment to reform its law enforcement and combat
the drug cartels, it is important that we provide as much funding and
resources as possible to the International Narcotics Control and Law
Enforcement program.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Cuellar).
Mr. CUELLAR. Again, Madam Chair, I thank you for the time and I also
appreciate the work that you have done in making sure that we help the
Mexican Government fight the drug cartel problems that they have. We
have a perfect opportunity at this time, and I think Mr. McCaul
understands this since we have been working on this for a while, that
they have a President now, President Calderon, that is willing to go
ahead and take on the powerful drug cartels. Being from Laredo, Texas,
I see what's been happening across the river. We had, talking about one
of the Congressmen, my counterpart right across Laredo in Nuevo Laredo,
there was an attempt to assassinate him, he ended up in the hospital,
his chauffeur got killed, because again he wanted to go ahead and fight
the drug cartels.
It is extremely important that we provide this extra funding because
if we don't, what you're going to have, you're going to have a bigger
problem than what we're seeing right now across the river. It has
permeated not only the law enforcement, it has not only permeated also
the judiciary, but it has also affected other parts of the society.

{time} 1200

The Mexican Government wants to work with us, and I want to make sure
that we work on increasing the dollars.
My understanding is, and I am hoping that my colleague will be
willing to do that, that if we can withdraw this amendment, I believe
we have a commitment from the chairwoman that in conference committee
she will go ahead and increase the dollars, because we need more than
what's been appropriated so far, what's currently in the bill itself.
I believe we have a commitment that, Mr. McCaul, if you are willing
to

[[Page H6846]]

withdraw, together, both of us, we do have a commitment from the
chairwoman. She has been very good at keeping her word on this.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank the gentleman for your important work with Mr.
McCaul on this issue.
I understand the urgency and the impact of methamphetamine in your
areas and the tremendous negative impact on the people you represent.
I have a problem with the offset. Therefore, if you will withdraw
this amendment, I would be delighted to work with the gentlemen as we
approach our conference in increasing money for this very important
need.
Mr. McCAUL of Texas. I will consider withdrawing the amendment. I
would like to get a few assurances from the gentlelady, if I may, and
that is that this funding would be directed primarily, would be
targeted towards the problem at the U.S.-Mexico border with the drug
cartels who have controlled these corridors that I mentioned.
If I could just add, my subcommittee on Homeland Security issued this
report on the border last conference confirming the threat. This was
given to President Calderon by Secretary Chertoff.
He understands this. I have met with the Mexican Congress. They
understand it. Our State Department actually does understand this.
While they may not ask overtly, they really could use these funds to
confront this threat.
I would ask, in exchange for withdrawing, that we try to come as
close as possible to the number I have requested and that that money be
directed towards the threat that Mr. Cuellar and I see so often down in
a border State.
Mrs. LOWEY. I would say to the gentleman that in my discussions with
Mr. Cuellar he is very clear about the urgency of this issue and the
impact of these concerns on the citizens that you both represent.
I would be delighted to work with you. We will certainly search for
funding as close to the numbers you mention as we possibly can.
Again, the only issue with this amendment was the offset, not the
important need for the funding.
I thank the gentleman, and I look forward to working with you. I
thank you for withdrawing the amendment.
Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, with those assurances, I will
withdraw my amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

contributions for international peacekeeping activities

For necessary expenses to pay assessed and other expenses
of international peacekeeping activities directed to the
maintenance or restoration of international peace and
security, $1,302,000,000, of which 15 percent shall remain
available until September 30, 2009: Provided, That none of
the funds made available under this Act shall be obligated or
expended for any new or expanded United Nations peacekeeping
mission unless, at least 15 days in advance of voting for the
new or expanded mission in the United Nations Security
Council (or in an emergency as far in advance as is
practicable): (1) the Committees on Appropriations and other
appropriate committees of the Congress are notified of the
estimated cost and length of the mission, the national
interest that will be served, and the planned exit strategy;
(2) the Committees on Appropriations and other appropriate
committees of the Congress are notified that the United
Nations has taken appropriate measures to prevent United
Nations employees, contractor personnel, and peacekeeping
forces serving in any United Nations peacekeeping mission
from trafficking in persons, exploiting victims of
trafficking, or committing acts of illegal sexual
exploitation, and to hold accountable individuals who engage
in such acts while participating in the peacekeeping mission;
and (3) a reprogramming of funds pursuant to section 615 of
this Act is submitted, and the procedures therein followed,
setting forth the source of funds that will be used to pay
for the cost of the new or expanded mission: Provided
further, That funds shall be available for peacekeeping
expenses only upon a certification by the Secretary of State
to the appropriate committees of the Congress that American
manufacturers and suppliers are being given opportunities to
provide equipment, services, and material for United Nations
peacekeeping activities equal to those being given to foreign
manufacturers and suppliers.

Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey

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

Amendment No. 16 offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey:
Page 10, line 17, insert before the semicolon the
following: ``, including the prosecution in their home
countries of such individuals in connection with such acts''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday,
June 20, 2007, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. First of all, I want to begin by saying
that I am pleased that the committee has taken steps to see that the
United Nations peacekeeping forces are not or will not be engaged in
human trafficking or other sex crimes. But I am concerned that the
language in the bill, quite frankly, does not go quite far enough.
The facts are that between 2004 and 2006, 179 peacekeepers from the
U.N., under their charge, under their control, were dismissed or
repatriated following investigations for sex crimes. Yet only a very
few of these have been successfully prosecuted for their crimes.
Earlier this year, The Daily Telegraph newspaper revealed that
members of the U.N. force in southern Sudan had abused children as
young as 12. Just last year, the U.N. had tried to claim that these
reports were just unfounded rumors, but only after these reports did
the U.N. admit to repatriating four of these individuals for these
crimes. Yet none of these four have ever been prosecuted in their home
country of Bangladesh.
Just this week, the Government of Sudan agreed to a substantial
peacekeeping force in Darfur. We must ensure the people of Darfur, who
have been subject to a systemic rape and violence constituting
genocide, do not suffer further at the hands of the people who are
there to protect them.
I am concerned that the language in the present bill that the U.N.
``hold accountable'' these individuals will mean that the U.N.
peacekeepers will continue to get away scot-free. All national armed
forces have processes for court martial and punishing crimes committed
by their personnel. The U.N. must see to it that these countries
offering peacekeepers actually apply their system of justice when a
crime is committed.
The U.N. is supposedly committed to high ideals of human rights and
justice. We are merely asking that they keep them to ensure that their
own personnel and others operating under the U.N. flag do not use their
position to commit gross crimes. Let us be clear that the United States
taxpayers funding these important missions will not stand for this
injustice.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I accept the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. I thank the gentlelady for accepting the
amendment, because I do believe, as I am sure she does as well, that
this is the right thing to do for the people of the world and not only
for the people here in the United States as well.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

International Commissions

For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, to meet
obligations of the United States arising under treaties, or
specific Acts of Congress, as follows:

international boundary and water commission, united states and mexico

For necessary expenses for the United States Section of the
International Boundary and Water Commission, United States
and Mexico, and to comply with laws applicable to the United
States Section, including not to exceed $6,000 for
representation; as follows:

salaries and expenses

For salaries and expenses, not otherwise provided for,
$30,430,000.

construction

For detailed plan preparation and construction of
authorized projects, $15,725,000,

[[Page H6847]]

to remain available until expended, as authorized.

american sections, international commissions

For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided, for the
International Joint Commission and the International Boundary
Commission, United States and Canada, as authorized by
treaties between the United States and Canada or Great
Britain, and for the Border Environment Cooperation
Commission as authorized by Public Law 103-182, $10,630,000,
of which not to exceed $9,000 shall be available for
representation expenses incurred by the International Joint
Commission.

international fisheries commissions

For necessary expenses for international fisheries
commissions, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by
law, $26,000,000: Provided, That the United States share of
such expenses may be advanced to the respective commissions
pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3324.

Other

payment to the asia foundation

For a grant to the Asia Foundation, as authorized by the
Asia Foundation Act (22 U.S.C. 4402), $15,000,000, to remain
available until expended, as authorized.

center for middle eastern-western dialogue trust fund

For necessary expenses of the Center for Middle Eastern-
Western Dialogue Trust Fund, the total amount of the interest
and earnings accruing to such Fund on or before September 30,
2008, to remain available until expended.

eisenhower exchange fellowship program

For necessary expenses of Eisenhower Exchange Fellowships,
Incorporated, as authorized by sections 4 and 5 of the
Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Act of 1990 (20 U.S.C. 5204-
5205), all interest and earnings accruing to the Eisenhower
Exchange Fellowship Program Trust Fund on or before September
30, 2008, to remain available until expended: Provided, That
none of the funds appropriated herein shall be used to pay
any salary or other compensation, or to enter into any
contract providing for the payment thereof, in excess of the
rate authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5376; or for purposes which are
not in accordance with OMB Circulars A-110 (Uniform
Administrative Requirements) and A-122 (Cost Principles for
Non-profit Organizations), including the restrictions on
compensation for personal services.

israeli arab scholarship program

For necessary expenses of the Israeli Arab Scholarship
Program as authorized by section 214 of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (22 U.S.C.
2452), all interest and earnings accruing to the Israeli Arab
Scholarship Fund on or before September 30, 2008, to remain
available until expended.

national endowment for democracy

For grants made by the Department of State to the National
Endowment for Democracy as authorized by the National
Endowment for Democracy Act, $80,000,000, to remain available
until expended.

RELATED AGENCIES

Broadcasting Board of Governors

international broadcasting operations

For expenses necessary to enable the Broadcasting Board of
Governors, as authorized, to carry out international
communication activities, including the purchase, rent,
construction, and improvement of facilities for radio and
television transmission and reception and purchase, lease,
and installation of necessary equipment for radio and
television transmission and reception to Cuba, and to make
and supervise grants for radio and television broadcasting to
the Middle East, $671,632,000: Provided, That of the total
amount in this heading, not to exceed $16,000 may be used for
official receptions within the United States as authorized,
not to exceed $35,000 may be used for representation abroad
as authorized, and not to exceed $39,000 may be used for
official reception and representation expenses of Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty; and in addition, notwithstanding any
other provision of law, not to exceed $2,000,000 in receipts
from advertising and revenue from business ventures, not to
exceed $500,000 in receipts from cooperating international
organizations, and not to exceed $1,000,000 in receipts from
privatization efforts of the Voice of America and the
International Broadcasting Bureau, to remain available until
expended for carrying out authorized purposes.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Mack

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

Amendment offered by Mr. Mack:
Page 14, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $10,000,000) (reduced by $10,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday,
June 20, 2007, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mack) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. MACK. Mr. Chairman, while we in this Chamber can debate in
freedom, and the American people can hear and see our every word,
thanks to a free press, in Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, the only thing that
people can see or hear are the things that Hugo Chavez lets his media
print and broadcast.
Freedom of the press died in Venezuela on May 27, 2007, when Chavez
shut down RCTV. This was just the latest in a long line of actions to
snuff out free press, free speech, and free thought. By shutting down
the largest and oldest TV network in the country, Chavez is sending a
message to all other media that he has the power to do anything he
wants to with radio and television stations in Venezuela.
The government is targeting opposition voices because of their
massive reach, appeal, and influence throughout the country. Chavez
said: ``I am going to go after those who resist the revolution and
eliminate them one by one.'' This was in reference to one of the only
remaining independent voices left in Venezuela.
As the window of independent media in Venezuela closes, Voice of
America will play a critical role in getting the truth out about what
is happening in the country.
Voice of America must provide and create additional programs. With
targeted funding, Voice of America can have an even greater ability and
capability to broadcast longer with more programming. Voice of America
serves as a significant counter to Chavez's propaganda being exported
to Nicaragua, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Cuba.
My amendment would significantly grant the Broadcasting Board of
Governors the tools to increase broadcasting to Venezuela and Latin
America.
Chavez's communist plans for the future do not include independent
media and freedom of the press. We must recognize the war on terrorism
is in our backyard. The gang of countries lining up with Chavez is
powerful: Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua and others, together with the
likes of Iran.
We must recognize a serious threat to our national security. In fact,
just this morning, Chavez announced plans to visit Iran in a few weeks,
following a long courtship between the two countries.
The window of freedom is closing fast. We cannot turn our backs on
the people of Venezuela. We must do more to promote freedom inside
Venezuela.
America has always been a beacon of freedom in our hemisphere. Now we
must be the pillar of hope for the people of Venezuela and our friends
and neighbors in Latin America who fear Hugo Chavez and his communist
revolution.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. I want to thank the gentleman for bringing this issue to
the attention of the House. International broadcasting is an essential
component of our Nation's public diplomacy strategy, enjoys broad
bipartisan support in our committee.
The bill before the House includes $671.6 million for the
international broadcasting operations of the BBG. It restores over $30
million in cuts to BBG language services proposed in the President's
budget. It includes program increases requested for high-priority areas
such as $2.9 million for broadcasting to North Korea, $.5 million for
enhanced broadcasting to Somalia, $1.2 million for Radio Sawa in the
Middle East, $5 million to retain BBG's broadcast capability.
The matter of broadcasting to Venezuela is an emerging issue. I
commend the gentleman for his amendment and join him in urging its
adoption.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. MACK. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairwoman for accepting
the amendment.
Venezuela is going down the wrong path, and I think this will help us
set a new course so the people of Venezuela can continue to enjoy the
freedom and democracy they deserve.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mack).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to my good friend, Mr. Skelton, for the purpose
of a colloquy.

[[Page H6848]]

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage the chairwoman of the
State, Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee in a colloquy on
oversight on Iraq funding.
Madam Chairwoman, I want to thank you for your hard work in ensuring
that funds spent in Iraq are properly overseen. Your bill on the floor
today contains a section concerning the Special Inspector General for
Iraq Reconstruction that extends the authorities of that office.
The National Defense Authorization Act, which came out of the Armed
Services Committee and passed the House on May 17, contained a
provision with similar goals that I had worked out with Chairman Lantos
of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
I want to thank, first, the chairwoman for pursuing this issue so
strenuously. Also, I want to express my appreciation that we were able
to work out a way forward so that our two committees worked together on
the issue, rather than pursuing separate paths.
Rather than contesting it at this time, the inclusion of this
authorization language in the State Department, Foreign Operations and
Related Programs appropriations bill, I rise to assure you that you
will be involved in the Defense authorization conference on the SIGIR
issue. I am glad that in return you have offered to drop your provision
in conference on your bill so that together we can ensure that there is
only one version of the language instead of competing versions.
I yield to the chairwoman for a response.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank Chairman Skelton for his hard work on this
project.
We included the SIGIR provision in our appropriations bill to ensure
that this subject does not fall out somewhere in the process. You and I
agree completely on the importance of the SIGIR office.
I look forward to working with you to make sure that the version
ultimately included in the National Defense Authorization Act
conference report achieves the goals our respective bills laid out. It
is my intention to drop section 696 of the State, Foreign Operations
appropriations act in conference so that we do not end up with
competing versions of the same language.
Mr. SKELTON. Let me sincerely thank the chairwoman. I do look forward
to working with you on this issue. I think this is the right way to
approach this, and I certainly appreciate it.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

broadcasting capital improvements

For the purchase, rent, construction, and improvement of
facilities for radio and television transmission and
reception, and purchase and installation of necessary
equipment for radio and television transmission and reception
as authorized, $10,748,000, to remain available until
expended, as authorized.

Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad

salaries and expenses

For expenses for the Commission for the Preservation of
America's Heritage Abroad, $499,000, as authorized by section
1303 of Public Law 99-83.

{time} 1215

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word to enter
into colloquy with Mr. Blumenauer.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. I yield to Mr. Blumenauer.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy, as I
appreciate the hard work that she and her committee have done bringing
forward, I think, a really terrific bill.
I wish to enter into colloquy with you, Madam Chair. At the end of
2005 Congress passed the Senator Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act with
broad bipartisan support. At the time it was called landmark
legislation.
Unfortunately, today it's clear that the intent and many of the legal
requirements in the Water for the Poor Act are not being met by the
State Department and USAID.
Earlier this month the State Department delivered its second report
on the required drinking water and sanitation strategy. Unfortunately,
it continues to be more of a recitation of the work they're doing,
rather than a strategic, forward-looking road map to move from the
current state of access to achieving the international commitment to
cut in half the percentage of people without access to safe drinking
water and sanitation.
While our legislation was specifically written so that it would
improve aid quality at any level, there was also a call to increase the
amount of resources devoted to the very poor. For instance, as part of
the strategy, we required an increase in the percentage of assistance
going to high-priority countries, defined as countries with the
greatest need, and countries in which assistance would be expected to
make the greatest difference. Many, if not most of these countries
would be in sub-Saharan Africa.
For too long the State Department has used disaster funding to
artificially inflate the numbers it used to meet congressional
requirements, instead of giving the necessary focus to long-term
sustainable access to safe drinking water and sanitation for the poor.
For too long, sub-Saharan Africa has gotten funding that is inversely
proportional to the level of need. For too long the State Department
has treated Water for the Poor Act as if it were a guideline or a
suggestion, rather than a law passed by Congress and signed by the
President that they're obligated to fully implement.
I very much appreciate the work of Chairwoman Lowey and Chairman
Obey, for whom I know this is a particular interest. I deeply
appreciate increasing the overall level of funding for water and
sanitation to $300 million, and directing that much of it be spent
pursuant to the Water for the Poor Act.
I hope for the opportunity, as we move forward towards conference, to
work together to ensure that as much money as possible is made
available to the long-term development of safe drinking water and
sanitation programs in the areas of greatest need, with a strategy
needed to ensure that we're make the most effective use of our AIDS
dollar.
Most important, I hope that the Appropriations Committee will
continue to help with the oversight needed to make the Water for the
Poor Act fully implemented and the United States lives up to our
international commitment.
Mrs. LOWEY. I appreciate the gentleman's interest in this issue and
applaud your work over the past few years. As you have stated, the
committee bill increased funding for safe water by $100 million and
placed priority on long-term and sustainable safe water programs.
The report provides clear direction to the agency that funding must
be provided in accordance with the strategy based on the Paul Simon
Water for the Poor Act.
Finally, we share the gentleman's concern about the reliance on
emergency programs to meet this recommendation, and will work with the
agency in the coming year to ensure that this does not happen again.
I thank you for raising these issues today. I look forward to working
together on this issue in the coming year.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. If the gentlewoman will yield.
Mrs. LOWEY. I yield.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I just can't tell you how much I appreciate what
you've done and this commitment. I appreciate your words and everything
the committee has done to make our water investments go to the right
places in the right ways for the right thing.
I am reassured that your intention that only $80 million of the $300
million level come from disaster assistance. That's an important step
in making the necessary long-term investments to deal with this leading
cause of preventable death in the world.
I'm particularly pleased by the requirement that funds be spent in
accordance with the Water for the Poor Act, which was carefully crafted
to provide a framework, a policy and a goal for ensuring affordable and
equitable access to safe drinking water and sanitation for the poorest
in this world. I look forward to the opportunity to continue to work
with you.
There was, at one point, our colleague, Chairman Payne of the Africa
Subcommittee was going to be here I

[[Page H6849]]

thought, and I apologize, I don't see him. But I know he has done
outstanding work with the subcommittee. And I think between the three
of us, great things could happen.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank the gentleman. And I know of Mr. Payne's
important work on water, in Africa in general, so many other issues.
And I thank you.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. I am delighted to yield 3 minutes to my good friend, Mr.
Payne, who is really an expert on Africa and all phases of African
development, and has a keen interest in water. And I thank you for
coming.
Mr. PAYNE. Let me thank Congresswoman, Chairwoman Lowey and, of
course, Congressman Blumenauer for the opportunity to join in this
colloquy.
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health, I
recently called a hearing on the implementation of the Water for the
Poor Act where Congressman Blumenauer testified. I agree with him that
the State Department, in its 2007 report to Congress, reflects inflated
figures and a lack of concrete strategies for providing sustainable
access to drinking water and sanitation for the poor.
The Millennium Development Goals, a catalyst for the Water for the
Poor, aimed to reduce by one-half the proportion of people without
access to basic sanitation and safe drinking water by 2015. Due, in
part, to the State Department's inefficient execution of sustainable
programs, the MDG target is being missed in sub-Saharan Africa, which
has had the slowest rate of improvement in this category compared with
all other regions.
Furthermore, the State Department reported that in fiscal year 2006,
the U.S. helped 9 million people receive improved access to water. Of
the beneficiaries, 75 to 80 percent was in the Middle East, and 25
percent was outside this region. According to the United Nations, most
countries in the Middle East and North Africa are on track towards
reaching the MDG targets. Our efforts should be directed to regions
such as sub-Saharan Africa, which has the highest proportion of people
living without access to improved water sources of any region in the
world, and is not on track to meet its MDG target. Therefore, of the
$150 million appropriated to Africa and the Middle East, I feel that
more than 50 percent should be allocated to the countries in Africa,
where the need is greatest.
So I conclude by saying also, the State Department's water funding in
Africa has primarily been used for emergency relief efforts, rather
than water supply and management projects that deliver sustainable
results. In maintaining the vision of the Water for the Poor Act,
assistance should be focused on improving the sustainable management of
drinking water and sanitation.
I agree with Congressman Blumenauer and Chairwoman Lowey that of the
$300 million appropriated for fiscal year 2008, a significant amount
should be directed towards sustainable water management with programs
in Africa.
With efficient execution and adequate funding, the objectives of the
Water for the Poor can be accomplished. Access to safe water and
sanitation plays a central role in promoting global public health,
economic growth, poverty reduction and environmental sustainability.
I look forward to working with Congressman Blumenauer and
Congresswoman Lowey in increasing our funding to regions with the
greatest need and improving the strategies in place to provide the
world's poor with sustainable, safe, drinking water and basic
sanitation.
Mrs. LOWEY. I yield 1 additional minute to Mr. Blumenauer.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I would just like to express my deep appreciation,
Chairman Payne, for what you have done with your Africa Subcommittee
shining a spotlight on the international water issue. The hearing that
you convened was riveting, and I thought it was the best expression of
the needs we've had in Congress.
The prospect of our Subcommittee on Foreign Ops, working with your
subcommittee, on Africa, being able to focus on this, I think, is the
brightest spot, and it's going to make a difference for millions of
lives around the world. I appreciate your leadership and your focus on
this, and thank you both for your efforts.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I am pleased to yield to my good friend, Mr. Cuellar from Texas.
Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, again I also want to echo what the other
Members have said on your leadership on this particular bill, very
important bill.
But what I want to do, Madam Chair, is point out two things that you
have selected that are very important to my district, south Texas, the
border area. The first one has to do with the funding that has been
increased for the International Boundary Water Commission that provides
funding for the levees that we have along the U.S. and Mexico border.
The current budget right now is at $2 million. You have brought that up
now to an amount of almost $16 million. This, again, is appreciated
again by my office, my constituents, but also by Congressmen Ruben
Hinojosa and Solomon Ortiz that have levees down there. This is an
issue that has to be addressed because, again, we don't want to see
what happened in another part of the United States. This levee work is
very important. It's important to the areas of mission, McAllen and the
other areas in south Texas. This will go a long way and, again, Madam
Chair, I want to thank you for that.
I also want to thank you for some report language that you added,
something that, again, Michael McCaul and myself have been very
interested in, and that is the issue of the trafficking of human, what
we call human cargo, also drugs, cash and of course the missing
Americans. As you know, there are people that live in the United States
that have gone over across the river into Nuevo Laredo and have been
kidnapped and have not been found. We've been asking the Mexican
Government for years to provide us information so we can bring some
sort of closure to this particular situation. And again, we have not
gotten this, and we're hoping that the Mexican government will provide
us this information as soon as possible.
But this report language, Madam Chair, that you have added will
provide us this incentive and hopefully an incentive to the Mexican
Government to work with us to provide us information on the missing
Americans.
Again, Madam Chair, I want to thank you very, very much for adding,
increasing the amount of the levees from $2 million to almost $16
million. On behalf of Congressmen Ruben Hinojosa and Solomon Ortiz, we
thank you very much for your leadership.
Mrs. LOWEY. Thank you very much for your kind words and your
important interest in this area. And I look forward to continuing to
work with you.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Commission on International Religious Freedom

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses for the United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom, as authorized by title II of
the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (Public Law
105-292), $3,400,000, to remain available until September 30,
2009.

Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses of the Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe, as authorized by Public Law 94-304,
$2,037,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009.

Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses of the Congressional-Executive
Commission on the People's Republic of China, as authorized,
$2,000,000, including not more than $3,000 for the purpose of
official representation, to remain available until September
30, 2009.

United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses of the United States-China Economic
and Security Review Commission, $4,000,000, including not
more than $5,000 for the purpose of official representation,
to remain available until September 30, 2009: Provided, That
for purposes of costs relating to printing and binding, the
Commission shall be deemed, effective on the date of its
establishment, to be a committee

[[Page H6850]]

of Congress: Provided further, That compensation for the
executive director of the Commission may not exceed the rate
payable for level II of the Executive Schedule under section
5314 of title 5, United States Code: Provided further, That
section 1238(c)(1) of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001, is amended by
striking ``June'' and inserting ``December'': Provided
further, That travel by members of the Commission and its
staff shall be arranged and conducted under the rules and
procedures applying to travel by members of the House of
Representatives and its staff: Provided further, That section
1238 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2001 is amended by striking subsection
(g).

United States Institute of Peace

operating expenses

For necessary expenses of the United States Institute of
Peace as authorized in the United States Institute of Peace
Act, $25,000,000, to remain available until September 30,
2009.

GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED AGENCIES

allowances and differentials

Sec. 101. Funds appropriated under title I of this Act
shall be available, except as otherwise provided, for
allowances and differentials as authorized by subchapter 59
of title 5, United States Code; for services as authorized by
5 U.S.C. 3109; and for hire of passenger transportation
pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1343(b).

unobligated balances report

Sec. 102. The Department of State and the Broadcasting
Board of Governors shall provide to the Committees on
Appropriations a quarterly accounting of the cumulative
balances of any unobligated funds that were received by such
agency during any previous fiscal year.

embassy construction

Sec. 103. (a) Of funds provided under title I of this Act,
except as provided in subsection (b), a project to construct
a diplomatic facility of the United States may not include
office space or other accommodations for an employee of a
Federal agency or department if the Secretary of State
determines that such department or agency has not provided to
the Department of State the full amount of funding required
by subsection (e) of section 604 of the Secure Embassy
Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (as enacted
into law by section 1000(a)(7) of Public Law 106-113 and
contained in appendix G of that Act; 113 Stat. 1501A-453), as
amended by section 629 of the Departments of Commerce,
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2005.
(b) Notwithstanding the prohibition in subsection (a), a
project to construct a diplomatic facility of the United
States may include office space or other accommodations for
members of the Marine Corps.

peacekeeping missions

Sec. 104. None of the funds made available under title I of
this Act may be used for any United Nations undertaking when
it is made known to the Federal official having authority to
obligate or expend such funds that: (1) the United Nations
undertaking is a peacekeeping mission; (2) such undertaking
will involve United States Armed Forces under the command or
operational control of a foreign national; and (3) the
President's military advisors have not submitted to the
President a recommendation that such involvement is in the
national security interests of the United States and the
President has not submitted to the Congress such a
recommendation.

denial of visas

Sec. 105. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available under title I of this Act shall be expended
for any purpose for which appropriations are prohibited by
section 616 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and
State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 1999.
(b) The requirements in subsections (b) and (c) of section
616 of that Act shall continue to apply during fiscal year
2008.

senior policy operating group

Sec. 106. (a) The Senior Policy Operating Group on
Trafficking in Persons, established under section 105(f) of
the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of
2000 (22 U.S.C. 7103(f)) to coordinate agency activities
regarding policies (including grants and grant policies)
involving the international trafficking in persons, shall
coordinate all such policies related to the activities of
traffickers and victims of severe forms of trafficking.
(b) None of the funds provided under title I of this or any
other Act making appropriations for Department of State and
Related Agencies shall be expended to perform functions that
duplicate coordinating responsibilities of the Operating
Group.
(c) The Operating Group shall continue to report only to
the authorities that appointed them pursuant to section
105(f).

united states citizens born in jerusalem

Sec. 107. For the purposes of registration of birth,
certification of nationality, or issuance of a passport of a
United States citizen born in the city of Jerusalem, the
Secretary of State shall, upon request of the citizen, record
the place of birth as Israel.

e-government initiatives

Sec. 108. Any funds provided under title I of this Act used
to implement E-Government Initiatives shall be subject to the
procedures set forth in section 615 of this Act.

consulting services

Sec. 109. The expenditure of any appropriation under title
I of this Act for any consulting service through procurement
contract, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109, shall be limited to
those contracts where such expenditures are a matter of
public record and available for public inspection, except
where otherwise provided under existing law, or under
existing Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.

limitation on diplomatic or consular post in the socialist republic of
vietnam

Sec. 110. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available under title I of this Act shall be expended
for any purpose for which appropriations are prohibited by
section 609 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and
State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 1999.
(b) The requirements in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
section 609 of that Act shall continue to apply during fiscal
year 2008.

state department authorities

Sec. 111. Funds appropriated under title I of this Act for
the Broadcasting Board of Governors and the Department of
State may be obligated and expended notwithstanding section
15 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956,
section 313 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act,
Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 103-236), and section
504(a)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C.
414(a)(1)).

restriction on contributions to the united nations

Sec. 112. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available under title I of this Act may be made available to
pay any contribution of the United States to the United
Nations if the United Nations implements or imposes any
taxation on any United States persons.

personnel actions

Sec. 113. Any costs incurred by a department or agency
funded under this Act resulting from personnel actions taken
in response to funding reductions included in this Act shall
be absorbed within the total budgetary resources available to
such department or agency: Provided, That the authority to
transfer funds between appropriations accounts as may be
necessary to carry out this section is provided in addition
to authorities included elsewhere in this Act: Provided
further, That use of funds to carry out this section shall be
treated as a reprogramming of funds under section 615 (a) and
(b) of this Act and shall not be available for obligation or
expenditure except in compliance with the procedures set
forth in that section.

restrictions on united nations delegations

Sec. 114. None of the funds made available under title I of
this Act may be used to pay expenses for any United States
delegation to any specialized agency, body, or commission of
the United Nations if such commission is chaired or presided
over by a country, the government of which the Secretary of
State has determined, for purposes of section 6(j)(1) of the
Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App.
2405(j)(1)), has provided support for acts of international
terrorism.

TITLE II--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, $1,000,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2009.

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, 2008: Provided further,
That not less than 10 percent of the aggregate loan,
guarantee, and insurance authority available to the Export-
Import Bank under this or any prior Act should be used for
renewable energy and environmentally beneficial products and
services.

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, $68,000,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2011: Provided, That
such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall
be as defined

[[Page H6851]]

in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:
Provided further, That such sums shall remain available until
September 30, 2026, for the disbursement of direct loans,
loan guarantees, insurance and tied-aid grants obligated in
fiscal years 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011: 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, $78,000,000: 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, 2008.

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 $47,500,000: 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, $20,000,000,
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 2008, 2009, and 2010:
Provided further, That funds so obligated in fiscal year 2008
remain available for disbursement through 2016; funds
obligated in fiscal year 2009 remain available for
disbursement through 2017; funds obligated in fiscal year
2010 remain available for disbursement through 2018: 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,
$50,400,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009.

TITLE III--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, 2008,
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, $1,955,150,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2009: Provided, That
this amount shall be made available for such activities as:
(1) immunization programs; (2) oral rehydration programs and
pneumonia prevention and treatment 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 infected or affected 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: $374,150,000 for child survival and
maternal health; $15,000,000 for vulnerable children;
$350,000,000 for HIV/AIDS; $591,000,000 for other infectious
diseases; and $375,000,000 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
$250,000,000 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 of the funds appropriated under this
heading, $70,000,000 should 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 any determination made under the
previous proviso must be made no later than six months after
the date of enactment of this Act, and must be accompanied by
a comprehensive analysis as well as the complete evidence and
criteria utilized to make the determination: 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) 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

[[Page H6852]]

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.

{time} 1230

Amendment Offered by Mr. Payne

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

Amendment offered by Mr. Payne:
Page 29, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert
``(decreased by $25,000,000) (increased by $50,000,000)''.
Page 40, line 26, after the dollar amount, insert
``(decreased by $25,000,000)''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, June
20, 2007, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment which
increases the amounts available in the Foreign Operations
appropriations bill to fight the global spread of tuberculosis by
adding an additional $50 million by taking $25 million from the
Economic Support Funds account and $25 million from within the Child
Survival and Health Programs account.
According to the World Health Organization estimates, someone is
infected with the organism that develops into TB every second. Every
second. An infected person may not develop full-blown TB, but in 2004,
of the 9 million people who were newly infected, 2 million died. The
good news is that it is entirely curable.
However, the treatment requires patients to be on a drug regimen for
6 months. If they do not complete the regimen, or if they complete it
but take an incorrect number of pills during the treatment, the
infection can develop into what is known as multiple drug resistance or
MDR-TB. MDR-TB is not responsive to either of the two first-line TB
drugs, and the treatments that are available take longer and are more
expensive than regular TB medications.
But as news headlines earlier this month have shown, there is an even
more deadly threat: extensively drug-resistant TB. XDR-TB is not only
resistant to the two first-line drugs but also to three of the six
second-line drugs. The treatment required to cure a patient can be
radical, including the removal of part of the lung that has been
infected.
Earlier this month, a Georgia man who had been diagnosed with a
dangerous strain of TB known as extremely drug-resistant tuberculosis,
or XDR-TB, traveled through four countries, completely unimpeded. If he
had been infectious at the time, there could have been an outbreak
across two continents.
We must also keep in mind that XDR-TB has a deadly linkage with HIV
and threatens to undermine all of the investments we have made in the
global fight against HIV/AIDS. The devastating effect of patients with
HIV first gained global recognition last August with reports of an
outbreak in a hospital in South Africa where 52 of 53 patients with
XDR-TB died. Half of them died within a matter of 16 days.
This tragedy serves as a sobering example of what may happen across
Africa if we do not act to prevent another outbreak. Given XDR-TB's
resistance to both the low-cost, first-line anti-TB drugs and to
several of the classes of second-line drugs used, we are faced with a
burgeoning epidemic driven by HIV infection that is lethal.
Since the initial outbreak, South African medical authorities have
documented some 400 cases in dozens or more hospitals in South Africa.
What is troubling, however, is that no one knows for sure that these
400 cases represent the extent of the outbreak because XDR-TB typically
kills quickly and doctors' ability to identify it is severely limited;
so many people may have simply died without its even being diagnosed.
Experts believe that XDR-TB has moved beyond South Africa into other
countries in the sub-region where the capacity to identify it and
control it is significantly weaker than in South Africa and where the
HIV/AIDS rate continues to drive the epidemic. As a matter of fact,
there are only two laboratories in 48 countries in sub-Saharan Africa
that can determine this disease.
All of us here today must work together to take the necessary steps
to enhance the ability of the medical establishments in Africa and
other developing countries to identify, treat, and stop the spread of
drug-resistant TB, primarily in Africa, and to head off further
incursions of XDR-TB into the United States. Failure to do so will
result in potentially devastating health catastrophes.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from New Jersey has expired.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed 1
more minute.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, each side will control 1 additional
minute.
There was no objection.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen was strongly supporting
this and was hoping to come here, but she is not here at this time.
So I will just conclude by saying that it is my intent that none of
the $25 million in this amendment that comes from the Economic Support
Fund will come out of Economic Support Fund assistance to countries and
programs in the Middle East or ESF-funded programs that support Afro-
Colombians or ESF-funded programs for Sudan, Liberia, and Congo, ESF
funds that are to be channeled towards the Trans-Saharan Counter
Terrorism Initiative, or ESF funds that are for democratic assistance
programs. So I wanted to make that clear so that we know exactly where
these funds come from.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
On behalf of Ms. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, she wanted to thank you very
much for the clarification and she appreciates it very much.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment.
I agree with the intention of the amendment. And I thank my friend
for raising this important issue. As we know, tuberculosis is taking a
terrible toll on men, women, and children in the developing world, with
approximately 3 million people dying every year. The recent highly
publicized case of extremely drug-resistant tuberculosis has brought
this issue to the forefront, and the additional funding of this
amendment will be used to strengthen the global tuberculosis treatment
and care network. I appreciate the gentleman's interest in this issue
and would be happy to accept this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield to my good friend, the vice
chairman of the committee, Mr. Jackson.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for
yielding.
I rise in strong support of the gentlewoman's generosity in
supporting the Payne amendment.
I want to just share with the full committee some of the views of the
members of the subcommittee, because I think their views need to be
taken into account.
While we overwhelmingly support the gentleman's amendment for an
increase in $50 million, the offset does

[[Page H6853]]

have the effect, Mr. Payne, of robbing Peter to pay Paul. The committee
worked very hard to increase the child survival account, which is
another health care account that includes maternal health, that
includes malaria accounts, and we worked very hard to increase the ESF
account, which does impact profoundly sub-Saharan Africa, Afro-
Colombian programs, and Israel and Egypt. And while these funds are
extremely important, the subcommittee did the best that it could in the
original mark to increase funding for tuberculosis, particularly the
extremely drug-resistant strands of tuberculosis.
So I rise in strong support of the gentleman's amendment, and I also
rise in strong support of the committee's initial mark, which did
everything it could within its power to increase child survival and ESF
funds.

{time} 1245

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, we accept the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

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

Amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas:
Page 34, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,000,000) (reduced by $5,000,000)''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, June
20, 2007, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me begin by thanking the chairwoman and
her staff and the vice chairman of the committee for working with my
office, and of course the ranking member and their staff.
It is evident how hard this committee has worked on a very broadband,
wide-reaching initiative as it relates to appropriations in the foreign
relations, foreign affairs of this Nation.
As a member of the authorizing committee, we recognize that this
committee touches the heartbeat of every aspect of the world's
business, and the importance of the United States in creating
internationalism for the greater good of the world.
As I listened to Mr. Payne, my amendment falls squarely in track of
improving the health conditions of Africa and recognizing the need for
hospitals that in fact will respond to a number of issues.
My amendment reallocates an additional $5 million to the Child
Survival and Disease Fund to increase the amount of funds appropriated
for child and maternal health.
The purpose of this amendment is to direct additional funds for
technical assistance to provide capacity-building for hospitals in
Africa that deal with child-surviving and other relevant needs.
We have been, if you will, screening the research annals across this
Congress to try to find out how many full-service hospitals are on the
Continent of Africa. Some have said 200, some say I know that there's
one in Sierra Leone. Some say they know there's one in South Africa.
But I can assure you that the plight of women who are pregnant in
Africa is a severe plight. Take, for example, that every minute
somewhere in the world, a woman dies from pregnancy-related causes,
with 95 percent of those deaths occurring in Africa and Asia.
Worldwide, about 529,000 women die from pregnancy-related causes every
year. A woman in sub-Saharan Africa has a 1 in 16 chance of dying in
pregnancy or childbirth. Part of the care and prevention of such is
preventative care, the money that is in this particular account. But I
also believe part of it is the importance of building full-capacity
hospitals that deal with women in the maternal aspect as well as in the
pregnancy aspect. And so this amendment seeks to provide that
opportunity.
And I might cite, as an example, the Mutombo Hospital in Kinshasa,
Congo. It is a hospital that has 300 beds, three operating rooms, an
outpatient clinic, an emergency room, a pharmacy. You cannot find that,
Mr. Chairman, across Africa. Therefore, I believe there is a definitive
need to provide them technical assistance so that we don't have to
guess what number of hospitals are in and on the continent, but we will
know that they look somewhat like this, with operating rooms, with
expansive facilities to provide treatment for mothers and babies,
treatment that will be lifesaving.
Madam Chairwoman, let me simply say that I had an experience in a
hospital in Africa. One of my first medical experiences was to require
sutures in an accident in Africa. Let me thank those medical
professionals who helped me be here today, but I want you to know that
I was laying out on a wooden slab and looking through tattered curtains
and looking at the sky as the doctors were working on me. That was the
hospital that I was in on the continent. I do not say it in degradation
or insult. What I say is I would venture to say that if we go to Africa
today, and many other countries, the kinds of facilities that are there
reflect that kind of lack of resources.
This will help not only in maternal and child survival because of the
loss of life of mothers who are pregnant and who give birth with
facilities that would provide hospital resources, but it will also, if
you will, give encouragement to the continent, as has been done by the
hospital in Kinshasa, Congo, Mutombo, who I hope will also be, as they
say, ``in the mix'' on providing opportunities for others to see what
can be done.
I hope that this amendment will be accepted because it will go a long
way for expanding the lives of mothers and children, but it will also
go a long way for ensuring that we believe in good hospital care,
excellent hospital care across the Continent of Africa.
Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and I rise to speak in
support of amendment #2 to H.R. 2764, the State and Foreign Operations
Act of 2008. I would first like to thank Chairwoman Lowey for her
extraordinary leadership and guidance in crafting this bill.
H.R. 2764 will play a crucial role in restoring the global respect to
this country that many around the world had so eagerly rewarded it in
the past for its historical humanitarian efforts. America, that beacon
upon the hill, will shine a little bit brighter amongst those who will
through this bill, be able to get healthcare, and whose very lives are
dependent upon such care. Among these spared lives are many, many
children and women who would needlessly perish from the perils of
poverty without our support.
Mr. Chairman, sparing lives of children and women starts with
ensuring that they have adequate healthcare. That is why I offer my
amendment which provides: on Page 29, line 1, after the dollar amount,
insert (increased by $5,000,000) (reduced by $5,000,000). In offering
this amendment, my intent is to increase the amount of funds
appropriated for child and maternal health by $5,000,000. The reason
that I urge support for increased funds for child and maternal health
is that the greatest threat for the quality of life for our children
all around the world is lack of health care for the mother and child.
In the United States, the birth of a child in most instances is a
time of joy because the mother and baby go home from the hospital
together, healthy and happy. Sadly, however, in poor countries
childbirth can be dangerous and potentially tragic for both mother and
child. Take, for example, that every minute, somewhere in the world a
woman dies from pregnancy-related causes, with 95 percent of these
deaths occurring in Africa and Asia. Worldwide, about 529,000 women die
from pregnancy-related causes every year--about the number of women and
girls who live in Dallas, Texas or San Diego, California. A woman in
sub-Saharan Africa has a one in 16 chance of dying in pregnancy or
childbirth.
Mr. Chairman, with less than 200 full-service hospitals, Africa
desperately needs our assistance because without it, Africa will
continue to fall far short of providing the necessary and proper life
saving healthcare for its population. About 3.4 million babies die
every year due to poor maternal health and inadequate delivery care. In
addition, an estimated 100,000 women a year in poor countries develop
obstetric fistulas, a condition caused by obstructed labor and creates
permanent holes in their bladders that cause continual leaking of
urine.

[[Page H6854]]

Every year, more than 10 million children under the age of five die
from totally preventable deaths. Some are directly caused by illness
such as pneumonia, diarrhea, and malaria. Others are caused by indirect
causes including conflict and HIV/AIDS. Malnutrition, poor hygiene and
lack of access to safe water and adequate sanitation contribute to more
than half of these deaths.

What is even sadder, Mr. Chairman, is that two thirds of both
neonatal and young child deaths--over 6 million deaths every year--are
preventable. Half a million women die in pregnancy each year, most
during delivery or in the first few days thereafter. Obstructed labor,
hemorrhaging, and infection, can all be averted provided a woman has
access to safe and appropriate pre-natal care. Madam Chair, the
increased funds from my amendment would be dedicated to providing women
with this vital care. Specifically, these funds would contribute to
capacity building for hospitals in Africa which engage in child-
survival and maternal health programs. We have seen the positive impact
that these facilities have made within the health care environment.
Professional basketball star Dikembe Mutombo established the Biamba
Marie Mutombo Hospital and Research Center, a hospital that provides
desperately needed healthcare to the impoverished population in
Kinshasa, the capital of the Democratic Republic of Congo. At full
capacity, it will include 300 beds and will offer the following
services to the population: pediatrics; gynecology/obstetrics/women's
health; internal medicine; surgery (general and subspecialties);
emergency medicine; intensive care; outpatient care; laboratory
services; and radiology.
Existing low-cost, low-technology and high impact interventions such
as vaccines, antibiotics, micronutrient supplementation, insecticide-
treated bednets, improved breastfeeding practices and adoption of safe
hygiene practices can prevent unnecessary maternal and child deaths as
well as reduce malnutrition. By packaging services and implementing at
scale, high impact and evidence-based maternal, newborn and child
survival interventions, we can save millions of lives.
As I stand here today, I reflect upon my visit to Honduras in 2001,
and I remember how important the child and maternal health crisis was,
and now recall how that it was in part the impetus behind my founding
of the bi-partisan Congressional Children's Caucus in 1997. As I have
done since 1997, I will continue to make it a priority to support
initiatives that protect the health and welfare of children worldwide.
Mr. Chairman, the success in reducing infant and maternal mortality
and reducing family size and nutrition strongly depends on support from
this noble nation. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this
amendment that will go a long way to save the lives of many women and
children.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank my good friend for your important work in Africa
and for your observations.
I rise to accept this amendment, and I agree with the intention of
the amendment. I really do thank my friend for raising this very
important issue.
This committee made global health a priority in this fiscal year. We
provided a total of $6.517 billion for global health. And I do agree
with the gentlewoman that strengthening the public health
infrastructure should be central to our global health strategy. So I do
appreciate the gentlewoman's interest in this issue, and I look forward
to working with you.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LOWEY. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I appreciate the accepting of this
amendment, and I look forward to working with you as we go to
conference. Laying the groundwork for the infrastructure of health care
on the continent goes a long way in saving lives.
I thank you for your leadership and the leadership of the ranking
member. I ask my colleagues to support the amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

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,
$1,733,760,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009:
Provided, That $519,000,000 shall 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 $35,000,000 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 in this Act,
$300,000,000 shall be made available for access to safe water
and water management programs: Provided further, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading, $175,000,000 shall be
made available for biodiversity and environmental programs:
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.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 29, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,000,000) (reduced by $5,000,000)''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, June
20, 2007, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. To the chairman of the Foreign Affairs,
Foreign Relations Appropriations Committee, let me thank you for your
leadership, and to the ranking member as well.
Mr. Chairman, I think we know the story of Liberia. And I want to
applaud the new President of Liberia, who has visited us, someone who
understands economics and is committed to the success of this nation.
She cannot, however, do it without friends.
Liberia has an enormously important nexus to the United States. It
was where slaves were returned back to the Continent of Africa after
having been enslaved here in the United States. I look forward to
reenergizing the relationship, not only with the continent, but also,
particularly with the nation of Liberia after a very troubling and very
violent time.
Our new President of Liberia is tracking all of the needs, accounting
for all of the dollars. My amendment simply seeks to reallocate an
additional $5 million for the Republic of Liberia of the $365 million
Development Assistance account. The net effect would be to increase
developmental assistance to the Republic of Liberia to $35 million. Let
me explain why this would be a wise investment.
We have heard recently from Bob Johnson, the former chairman of BET,
who has taken a special interest, private sector initiative in Liberia.
And if I recall his remarks correctly, he believes that Liberia can be
on the precipice of a rebirth. It can be on the precipice, if you will,
of a renaissance of economic development, educational achievement and
infrastructure repair.
In 2003, 14 years of civil war left Liberia in shambles. Nearly
200,000 civilians have died. Nearly one-third of the population, or 1
million citizens, have been displaced. And 300,000 have fled the
country. Women are involved on all sides of the war from combat to
slavery to rape. Child soldiers were involved in this terrible,
horrific tragedy. Physical violence often accompanied the rape. A
highly regarded survey of six selected Liberian counties revealed that
roughly 7 percent of women have been raped during the war, although
female minors were frequently targeted.
The war ended, and as I indicated, we now have a woman President.
Liberian President, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, underlines this in her
statement to the 2006 International Symposium on Sexual Violence. ``In
studies conducted in many of the countries of Liberia in 2004, a large
percentage of women and girls reported that they were victims of
various forms of violence.''
This reprogramming of dollars will refocus on the need for
developmental assistance that will be able to assist those who are
making their first steps,

[[Page H6855]]

their first steps of achievement, both business-wise, education-wise
and building up the confidence of women, men and families, turning
child soldiers into constructive, giving adults, and participating with
President Sirleaf's commitment to moving Liberia forward as a shining
star on the continent. I know they know how to do it, but we need to
give them the extra added tools, and to be able to emphasize in this
bill that their development is key.
I ask my colleagues to consider where Liberia has been, where Liberia
is today, and where they will be 20 years from now. I believe in
President Sirleaf and the commitment of Bob Johnson, the Clinton
Foundation, and many others who have targeted the Liberian people and
the Liberian Government as an achievable goal of economic
developmental, educational, political democracy that can be again the
shining star.
I ask my colleagues to support this amendment that will provide this
extra direction for developmental assistance in Liberia.
Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and I rise to speak in
support of this amendment to H.R. 2764, the State and Foreign
Operations Appropriations Act of 2008. But before I do, let me commend
Chairwoman Lowey for her exceptional leadership in shepherding this
bill through the legislative process.
The legislation she has so ably crafted is an indispensable measure
in restoring America's international prestige and leadership position
in the global community. Equally important, this legislation reflects
what is good about America: its generosity, its concern for the less
fortunate, its commitment to protecting the weak and uplifting the
downtrodden, and the recognition that we live in an interdependent
world. You will recall the wise counsel of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr., who said, ``we will either live together as brothers or we
will perish as fools.''
Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple. It simply seeks to reallocate
an additional $5 million for the Republic of Liberia out of the $365
million Development Assistance account. The net effect would be to
increase developmental assistance to the Republic of Liberia to $35
million. Let me explain briefly why this would be a wise investment.
In 2003, fourteen years of civil war left Liberia in shambles. Nearly
200,000 civilians had died. Nearly a third of the population, or one
million citizens, had been displaced, and 300,000 had fled the country.
Women were involved on all sides of the war from combat to slavery to
rape. Physical violence often accompanied the rape. A highly regarded
survey of six selected Liberian counties revealed that roughly 7
percent of women had been raped during the war. Moreover, female minors
were frequently targeted.
The war ended more than 4 years ago but the plight of Liberia's women
is still problematic. Rape and domestic violence continue to plague
Liberia. Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf underlines this in
her statement to the 2006 International Symposium on Sexual Violence in
Conflict and Beyond: ``In studies conducted in many of the counties of
Liberia in 2004, a large percentage of women and girls reported that
they were victims of various forms of violence and abuse. International
organization reports show that a large percentage of these women were
raped.''
Mr. Chairman, traditional Liberian culture stigmatizes rape, so
victims often choose to stay silent, hiding what they see as a shameful
and incriminating experience from their family and townspeople. Until
recently, Liberian government courts had no systems in place to assist
rape survivors. Traditional culture around rape was one of shame for
women and acceptance for men. But times are slowly changing. And it
began with the historic election of President Sirleaf, Liberia's first
female head of state.
Raised in Liberia and Harvard-educated, President Sirleaf began her
long involvement with the Liberian government as its Assistant Minister
of Finance during the 1970s. She went into exile after a military coup
destabilized the country in 1980, but returned to Liberia to run for
Senate 5 years later. When she was running for Senate, she was briefly
imprisoned for speaking out against Liberia's leader at the time,
Samuel Doe.

You will remember how she described her capture and close encounter
with rape when she addressed a joint session of the Congress on March
15, 2007: ``In 1985, after challenging the military regime's failure to
register my political party, I was put in jail with several university
students who also challenged the military rule. This House came to our
rescue with a resolution threatening to cut off aid to the country
unless all political prisoners were released. Months later, I was put
in jail again, this time in a cell with 15 men. All of them were
executed a few hours later. Only the intervention of a single soldier
spared me from rape.''
Mr. Chairman, I would hope that my amendment would result in
additional funding to secure women rights and prevent violence against
women.
Securing and protecting women's rights is something the Association
of Female Liberian Lawyers fights for every day. AFELL, an organization
of female lawyers based in Monrovia, is on a mission to educate and
represent women nationwide.
Founded during the first civil war, 1989-1996, AFELL grew in
prominence during the second conflict, which lasted from 1999 to 2003.
In November 2000, with fighting still active, AFELL won a state patent
to prosecute rape cases. Before this, Liberian law only allowed state
lawyers to prosecute criminal cases. The patent represented a major
success for AFELL.
This was the first in a series of victories. AFELL later collaborated
with the government to increase penalties for rape. Resulting
legislation led to more punitive rape laws that call for 10 years to
life imprisonment for rape.
Mr. Chairman, the Republic of Liberia has made great progress in
recent years but still much work remains to be done. Listen again to
the words of President Sirleaf: ``In the campaign months, I traveled to
every corner of our country. I trudged through mud in high boots, where
roads did not exist or had deteriorated past repair. I surveyed ruined
hospitals and collapsed clinics. I held meetings by candlelight,
because there is no electricity anywhere--including the capital--except
from private generators. I was forced to drink water from creeks and
un-sanitized wells all of which made me vulnerable to the diseases from
which so many of our people die daily.''
Mr. Chairman, the women and children of Liberia want what we all
want for those we love. They want to learn. They want to be safe from
violence. They want to be healthy. They want the same chances that men
have. They want to be literate. They want their work recognized. They
want the right to inherit property. They want protection against rape.
They want clean water that won't sicken and kill their children. They
want a hopeful future.
I believe my amendment will help hasten the day when these dreams are
realized.
Mr. Chairman, thank you this opportunity to discuss my amendment to
H.R. 2764. I ask all members to support it. Again, I thank Chairwoman
Lowey for her fine work in bringing this exceptional legislation to the
House.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to accept this amendment.
I thank the gentlewoman again for raising an important issue. I agree
with the intention of the amendment. Liberia certainly has been a
priority for us. And we support the very important work that the
President is doing there. We provided a total of $30 million in the
Development Assistance account, $30 million above the President's
request, and I would be happy to accept the gentlewoman's amendment.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LOWEY. I will yield.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I believe when we focus the great work that
you've done on a particular area, it encourages our newly elected woman
President of Liberia, which we hope and pray for her ultimate success
for her people and for the Continent of Africa. I thank the gentlelady
for accepting the amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank the gentlewoman.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. 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, $322,350,000, to remain available
until expended, of which $20,000,000 should be for famine
prevention and relief.

transition initiatives

For necessary expenses for international disaster
rehabilitation and reconstruction assistance pursuant to
section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$40,000,000, to remain available until expended, to support
transition to democracy and to long-term development of
countries in crisis: Provided, That such support may include
assistance to develop, strengthen, or preserve democratic
institutions and processes, revitalize basic

[[Page H6856]]

infrastructure, and foster the peaceful resolution of
conflict: Provided further, That the United States Agency for
International Development shall submit a report to the
Committees on Appropriations at least 5 days prior to
beginning a new program of assistance.

development credit authority

(including transfer of funds)

For the cost of direct loans and loan guarantees provided
by the United States Agency for International Development, as
authorized by sections 256 and 635 of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, up to $21,000,000 may be derived by transfer
from funds appropriated by this Act to carry out part I of
such Act and under the heading ``Assistance for Eastern
Europe and the Baltic States'': Provided, That such funds
shall be made available only for micro and small enterprise
programs, urban programs, and other programs which further
the purposes of part I of the Act: Provided further, That
such costs, including the cost of modifying such direct and
guaranteed loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided
further, That funds made available by this paragraph may be
used for the cost of modifying any such guaranteed loans
under this Act or prior Acts, and funds used for such costs
shall be subject to the regular notification procedures of
the Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That the
provisions of section 107A(d) (relating to general provisions
applicable to the Development Credit Authority) of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as contained in section 306
of H.R. 1486 as reported by the House Committee on
International Relations on May 9, 1997, shall be applicable
to direct loans and loan guarantees provided under this
heading: Provided further, That these funds are available to
subsidize total loan principal, any portion of which is to be
guaranteed, of up to $700,000,000.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out
credit programs administered by the United States Agency for
International Development, $7,400,000, which may be
transferred to and merged with the appropriation for
Operating Expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development: Provided, That funds made
available under this heading shall remain available until
September 30, 2010.

operating expenses of the united states agency for international
development

(including transfer of funds)

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$625,700,000, of which up to $25,000,000 may remain available
until September 30, 2009: Provided, That none of the funds
appropriated under this heading and under the heading
``Capital Investment Fund'' may be made available to finance
the construction (including architect and engineering
services), purchase, or long-term lease of offices for use by
the United States Agency for International Development,
unless the Administrator has identified such proposed
construction (including architect and engineering services),
purchase, or long-term lease of offices in a report submitted
to the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days prior to
the obligation of these funds for such purposes: Provided
further, That the previous proviso shall not apply where the
total cost of construction (including architect and
engineering services), purchase, or long-term lease of
offices does not exceed $1,000,000: Provided further, That
contracts or agreements entered into with funds appropriated
under this heading may entail commitments for the expenditure
of such funds through fiscal year 2009: Provided further,
That none of the funds in this Act may be used to open or
close an overseas mission of the United States Agency for
International Development without the prior written
notification to the Committees on Appropriations: Provided
further, That the authority of sections 610 and 109 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be exercised by the
Secretary of State to transfer funds appropriated to carry
out chapter 1 of part I of such Act to ``Operating Expenses
of the United States Agency for International Development''
in accordance with the provisions of those sections: Provided
further, That none of the funds appropriated by this Act or
any prior Act making appropriations for foreign operations,
export financing, or related programs may be used by the
United States Agency for International Development for the
rent of buildings and space in buildings in the United States
pursuant to the authority of section 636(a)(1) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961: Provided further, That the previous
proviso shall not apply to any lease, agreement, or other
instrument executed for the purpose of maintaining United
States Agency for International Development continuity of
operations and to the cost of terminating the domestic lease
executed on September 30, 2005.

capital investment fund of the united states agency for international
development

For necessary expenses for overseas construction and
related costs, and for the procurement and enhancement of
information technology and related capital investments,
pursuant to section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, $87,300,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That this amount is in addition to funds otherwise
available for such purposes: Provided further, That funds
appropriated under this heading shall be available for
obligation only pursuant to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations: Provided
further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading,
not to exceed $75,144,500 may be made available for the
purposes of implementing the Capital Security Cost Sharing
Program.

operating expenses of the united states agency for international
development office of inspector general

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$38,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009,
which sum shall be available for the Office of the Inspector
General of the United States Agency for International
Development.

Other Bilateral Economic Assistance

economic support fund

(including transfer of funds)

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
chapter 4 of part II, $2,656,506,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2009: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $415,000,000
shall be available only for Egypt, which sum shall be
provided on a grant basis, and of which sum cash transfer
assistance shall be provided with the understanding that
Egypt will undertake significant economic and political
reforms which are additional to those which were undertaken
in previous fiscal years: Provided further, That with respect
to the provision of assistance for Egypt for democracy and
governance activities, the organizations implementing such
assistance and the specific nature of that assistance shall
not be subject to the prior approval by the Government of
Egypt: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated under
this heading for assistance for Egypt, not less than
$135,000,000 shall be made available for project assistance,
of which not less than $50,000,000 shall be made available
for democracy, human rights and governance programs and not
less than $50,000,000 shall be used for education programs:
Provided further, That $11,000,000 of the funds appropriated
under this heading should be made available for Cyprus to be
used for scholarships, administrative support of the
scholarship program, bicommunal projects, and measures aimed
at reunification of the island and designed to reduce
tensions and promote peace and cooperation between the two
communities on Cyprus: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $263,547,000
should be made available only for assistance for Jordan:
Provided further, That of the funds appropriated under this
heading not more than $63,500,000 may be made available for
assistance for the West Bank and Gaza: Provided further, That
$45,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading
shall be made available for assistance for Lebanon, of which
not less than $10,000,000 should be made available for
scholarships and direct support of American educational
institutions in Lebanon: Provided further, That not more than
$300,000,000 of the funds made available for assistance for
Afghanistan under this heading may be obligated for such
assistance until the Secretary of State certifies to the
Committees on Appropriations that the Government of
Afghanistan at both the national and provincial level is
cooperating fully with United States funded poppy eradication
and interdiction efforts in Afghanistan: Provided further,
That the President may waive the previous proviso if he
determines and reports to the Committees on Appropriations
that to do so is vital to the national security interests of
the United States: Provided further, That such report shall
include an analysis of the steps being taken by the
Government of Afghanistan, at the national and provincial
level, to cooperate fully with United States funded poppy
eradication and interdiction efforts in Afghanistan: Provided
further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading,
not less than $218,500,000 is available only to carry out
programs in Colombia and may be transferred to ``DEVELOPMENT
ASSISTANCE'' to continue programs administered by the United
States Agency for International Development: Provided
further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading
that are available for assistance for the Democratic Republic
of Timor-Leste, up to $1,000,000 may be available for
administrative expenses of the United States Agency for
International Development: Provided further, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds
appropriated under this heading may be made available for
programs and activities for the Central Highlands of Vietnam:
Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading
that are made available for a Middle East Financing Facility,
Middle East Enterprise Fund, or any other similar entity in
the Middle East shall be subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Shays

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

Amendment offered by Mr. Shays:
Page 40, line 26, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $50,000,000) (reduced by $50,000,000)''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, June

[[Page H6857]]

20, 2007, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut.
Mr. SHAYS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and again, Mrs. Lowey,
thank you for a well-drafted bill, but this is an area in which I have
some concern.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment would designate $50 million in Economic
Support Funds for the Community Action Programs, also known as CAP in
Iraq. The CAP program directly engages Iraqis in reconstructing their
own communities while building a nationwide grassroots constituency for
democracy. Typical CAP projects use both U.S. and Iraqi funds and
resources to rebuild schools, repair water and sewage lines, build
health clinics, as well as a host of other infrastructure and
development projects.

{time} 1300

The CAP agencies are Mercy Corps; IRD, International Relief and
Development; CHF International; ACDI/VOCA Counterpart; and in the past,
Save the Children. Since 2003, six of USAID's NGO partners have
implemented this program in all 18 governorates of Iraq. In order to
maintain the security of staff and win the trust of Iraqi communities,
the implementers and USAID have largely run the program under the
radar. As a result, not enough people are aware of the remarkable
success story that CAP represents.
Here are just a few highlights: CAP has successfully managed more
than 6,000 reconstruction and development projects and created more
than 2.7 million days of employment and 34,000 long-term jobs with 43
percent of those jobs going to women, Iraqi women.
A January 2005 audit report from the USAID regional inspector
general, Baghdad, stated: ``Based on tests performed on 89
statistically selected sample projects, the CAP achieved 98 percent of
its intended outputs.''
I am going to read that again: ``Based on tests performed on 89
statistically selected sample projects, the CAP achieved 98 percent of
its intended outputs.''
Communities are contributing between 15 and 25 percent of the value
of each project. That is Iraqis contributing. This contribution is
often in the form of labor, in-kind materials, or other provisions.
In my travels to Iraq, I have seen firsthand how the CAP program
improves the lives of Iraqis and most importantly how it helps us
accomplish our mission of creating a secure environment for the Iraqi
people so democracy can prosper.
It would be a terrible waste to turn our backs on such a great
investment. In fact, this is exactly the time to nurture and build on
the relationships CAP partners have forged with communities.
Furthermore, CAP provides the foundation and the constituency at the
community level that will help ensure the success of other State
Department civil society programs.
The CAP program has enjoyed strong support from the Appropriations
Committee, Republicans and Democrats alike, in the past. An amendment
we offered during last year's supplemental appropriations act to
increase CAP funding by $10 million was accepted by the committee.
The committee noted in its report last year that ``CAP provides a
vehicle for empowering communities, building community cohesion and
providing evidence that the U.S. is committed to improving the lives of
Iraqis.''
We are asking for $50 million to be designated within Economic
Support Funds to ensure the agencies can expand and improve the
valuable projects they've been implementing for the last several years.
Mr. Chairman, I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly rise in opposition to this amendment
because, as I have explained to Mr. Shays, I believe this is a really
critical program. I would love to work with you on it.
This amendment would provide $50 million in funding for Community
Action Programs. There is no funding in this particular bill for Iraqi
operations and reconstruction. As I explained to the gentleman, the
reason there is no funding in this bill is because of the $2.8 billion
in the supplemental and the $2.8 billion requested in September for the
supplemental.
I want to make it very clear that I agree with the gentleman that the
Community Action Program and NGO partnership with USAID does really
good work. In fact, CAP is the only program of its kind to operate
outside the Green Zone in Iraq. I have been a strong supporter of their
efforts. I have met with them repeatedly. I know of their good work.
By working from the community level up and assisting Iraqi moderates
who have eschewed sectarian and insurgent violence, the CAP partners
directly engage Iraqis in reconstructing their own communities. They
create employment. They build nationwide grass-roots constituency for
democracy.
Congress identified CAP as a priority when it appropriated $100
million specifically for CAP in the fiscal year 2006 supplemental.
Additionally, we just provided $95 million for CAP in the 2000
supplemental. I want to make it clear to my good friend from
Connecticut that we put the money in after I met personally with
representatives of CAP.
I understand the important work that they are doing. I have spoken to
the CAP partners. They agreed that they do not need any additional
funding in the regular fiscal year 2008 bill. They tell me they have
enough to continue operations. As difficult as it is there, they are
continuing operations through fiscal year 2008 at the current pace of
operation.
They also noted that they worked very hard to stay under the radar in
Iraq, which is what makes their great achievements possible. I want to
make it clear that they have no interest, from my conversations with
them, they don't want to be the foil in an Iraq funding debate. We have
made it clear.
Mr. Chairman, I want to make it clear once again that the reason we
are not providing additional funding and we cannot provide additional
funding to the CAP in this bill is because of the $2.8 billion in the
supplemental, the $2.8 billion that is being requested. The CAPs have
made it clear they don't need the money now. They are operating under
the radar. If we are providing zero funding for Iraq in this bill, they
don't want to be part of this debate.
This is not a partisan issue. They are doing very important work. It
has nothing to do with any of the other debate on Iraq. It is what is
needed now. There are tremendous needs around the world that we are
trying to fill in this bill.
So, again, with great respect for my good friend, Mr. Shays, we have
worked together on many issues. I appreciate your concerns. I agree
with your concerns, but not in this bill; and I look forward to
continuing to work with you as we move ahead.
I thank the gentleman.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to say to you, there is no money in the
2008 budget, fiscal year 2008 budget. The challenge we have is that
this is the one program, more than any others, that works. It shouldn't
be tied to any benchmarks because implementing this program, expanding
it actually, will make it easier for all those benchmarks to be
realized.
I am not trying to bring more attention to this program. I just think
it needs to be funded and expanded and this is the vehicle to do it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wolf).
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Shays has made a good case, and the Chair has made
a good case for this. Without mentioning the groups, so we don't call
any attention to them, we know the good work that they are doing. Mr.
Shays lived with one of the groups for a period of time. You saw the
schools they were building. So I am just concerned we are getting
wrapped up into process that since nothing is in, we are not going to
put things in.
This is something that would actually work and have success in Iraq
from the civilian side. It would be a

[[Page H6858]]

great boost to have this in. So I strongly support the amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, in closing, just to address my good friend, Mr. Shays,
I agree with everything you said. I agree with all the good work that
the CAPs are doing.
That is why we appropriated $100 million and then another $95
million. But I want to make it clear, at least from my interaction from
the CAPs, and I have had many discussions with the CAPs, they don't
need the money now. They are operating under the radar. They are doing
good work. And with the supplemental in 2008 that is coming up in
September, they don't need the money now. They certainly welcome, if it
is necessary, some additional funding to them.
Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from
Connecticut.

{time} 1315

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, just so the debate is a little more
accurate, and we will see how the vote turns out whether I ask for a
roll call vote or not, would it not be fair to say that they can live
with the money they have, but they would like to have more and they
could use more and do more with it? This is not a trick question, but I
want to make sure for the record we don't make it seem like they have
all that they need and can use well.
If the answer to that first question is yes, my second question would
be, would it be the intent of the gentlewoman from New York to consider
funding this program at an amount that will enable them to do at least
what they are doing now in fiscal year 2008, and possibly more?
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, and again with great
respect to the gentleman from Connecticut, in my discussions with the
CAP, they made it clear that they don't need money now. This is now
June. We just passed a supplemental. In September there will be another
supplemental. They are doing great work, and we both admire their work.
Given the tremendous needs around the world, which I know you
support, be it clean water or HIV-AIDS or peacekeeping, and we can go
on and on, the CAP made it clear to me that they do not need the money
now. Therefore, I must reluctantly oppose this amendment, because I do
not want to take the money from any other urgent needs that exist in
the world today.
Mr. SHAYS. If the gentlewoman will yield further, you are making me
more concerned rather than less by your honesty. Could I ask the
gentlewoman to respond to her intent on how she will be looking to fund
this issue? This is the one program that is in fact working in Iraq. No
one disputes it. We can dispute everything else, but not this. My
interest is what your intentions are in the future as it relates not to
Iraq in general or military forces, but the CAP agency program?
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would like to make it
very clear to my good friend from Connecticut, just as they had $100
million and then an additional $95 million in the last supplemental, I
certainly would intend to fund this outstanding program in the next
supplemental that will be before us in September to continue their
important work.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
The amendment was rejected.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Tierney

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

Amendment offered by Mr. Tierney:
Page 40, line 26, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $75,000,000) (reduced by $75,000,000)''.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday,
June 20, 2007, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney) and a
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, today I rise to ask support for a rather
straightforward budget-neutral amendment that will meaningfully
contribute to our campaign against international terrorism and serve
the long-term national securities interests of the United States.
My amendment would provide an additional $75 million for basic
education programs directly reaching Pakistani children through the
U.S. Agency for International Development or provided through local and
international nongovernmental organizations offering reliable and
effective basic education services. In doing so, the amendment serves
long-term United States national security interests by helping to give
Pakistani children an educational alternative to extremist, jihadi-
teaching madrassas.
I am pleased that the Chair of the Foreign Operations Subcommittee
has agreed to accept this amendment. In their bill and committee
report, the gentlewoman from New York and the rest of the members of
the committee have recognized the importance of basic education
assistance to our country's long-term national security interests. This
amendment would complement and build off of those important efforts,
and I thank the gentlewoman from New York for her willingness to work
with me and accept my amendment.
The 9/11 Commission described a ``generational struggle'' against
international terrorism, stressing the importance that any offensive
efforts ``be accompanied by a preventative strategy.'' They also noted,
``It is hard to overstate the importance of Pakistan in the struggle
against Islamic terrorism'' and urged the United States Government to
support in Pakistan ``a comprehensive effort that extends from military
aid to support for better education.'' Unfortunately, we have not yet
gone far enough in that regard.
In December of 2005, the 9/11 Commission's Public Discourse Project
gave the United States Government a D grade for not doing enough to
support secular education. It noted, ``United States assistance to
Pakistan has not moved sufficiently beyond security assistance to
include significant funding for education efforts.'' And just a few
months ago, our own State Department concluded, ``Pakistan remains a
major source of Islamic extremism.''
This is precisely the time that we should be spending substantially
more on education, where we should be broadening and deepening our
relationship with the Pakistani people with aid that reaches directly
into the Pakistani homes.
This amendment is an important first step in this endeavor by
providing an extra $785 million infusion for basic education directly
to Pakistani children, an extra $75 million that would come on top of
Pakistani education funding already in the bill and what we have
provided for before.
This amendment provides this additional $75 million for basic
education by reprogramming existing funds within the Economic Support
fund account; $50 million of the total $75 million will be drawn from
that part of the Economic Support fund that provides direct budgetary
support for the Pakistani Government.
Over the last several years, the Pakistani Government has been
receiving hundreds of millions of dollars per year in a cash transfer.
This amendment would ensure that $50 million of those funds be
reprogrammed to ensure they reach Pakistani children and not simply be
handed over to the Pakistani Government without direction. The other
$25 million of the $75 million total would come from the nonbudgetary
support component of the Economic Support fund.
All of us hope to support the Pakistani people in their efforts to
achieve a stable, prosperous and free nation. But our national security
interests here are much more acute. Will we be safe over the next 5, 10
or 20 years as thousands of more young people learn jihad at extremist
madrassas instead of learning real-world skills to become productive
citizens in their communities and in our shared world?
When asked about this amendment, former 9/11 Commission Vice Chairman

[[Page H6859]]

Lee Hamilton responded, ``Increased U.S. funding for basic education
provided by the Tierney Pakistan Education Assistance Amendment will
send a powerful message that we are committed to a better future for
young Pakistanis and to supporting alternatives to radical Islamic
education. Sending this kind of a message is hugely important to the
future of America's relationship with the people of Pakistan and our
efforts to combat radical Islam.''
It is past time to heed the 9/11 Commission's warning by fighting
terrorism at its source, by stopping the process of extremism before it
can begin, by helping the children of Pakistan to have an alternative
to extreme madrassas. That should be at the core of our long-term
national security strategy, that is what this amendment is all about.
Again I thank the gentlewoman from New York for accepting this
amendment. I look forward to working with her to see that this
additional funding for basic education programs directly reaching
Pakistani children is retained in conference.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to accept this amendment. I thank the gentleman
for his interest in basic education in Pakistan. As the gentleman
knows, I have been a firm believer in basic education for a long time.
The bill includes a total of $750 million for basic education programs.
The gentleman recently went to Pakistan. I had the privilege of going
to Pakistan and visited the earthquake zones, and in fact I had the
privilege of opening a school in the earthquake zone. These beautiful
young girls looked at me and said, can you send us science teachers?
Can you send us computers? We know this experience can be replicated
thousands of times around the world.
So I really do appreciate the gentleman's commitment to basic
education, and I look forward to working with the gentleman and accept
his amendment.
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, if the chairwoman will yield, I want to
again say I was in Pakistan at the same time that you were,
approximately, and you witnessed, as did we, exactly what you are
talking about. This is a great effort, to be able to go in the right
direction, to put in public education as an alternative to the
madrassas.
I thank you for the fine work you have done, and your committee as
well.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza)
for the purpose of a colloquy.
Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentlelady from New
York for her work with me on this.
Mr. Chairman, by way of brief background, there is a strong and
vibrant minority community of Christians in Iraq. Some the oldest
Christians in the world are these various sects: The Assyrian Church of
the East, the Assyrian Church of the East Ancient, the Assyrian
Evangelical, the Syriac Orthodox, the Syriac Catholic, the Coptic
Church, the Armenian Catholic, the Armenian Evangelical, the Armenian
Orthodox, and the Chaldean have their origins in Iraq and other Middle
Eastern countries such as Iran, Turkey and Syria.
Like other ethnic minorities residing in the Middle East, throughout
their history these various sects have been used as pawns by major
powers in the region. Unfortunately, their Christian faith has made
them targets and they frequently have been subjected to harassment and
violence throughout the region.
In particular, the regime of Saddam Hussein was particularly brutal
in their treatment of Christians. Because of their religion and because
the majority of Christians opposed Saddam's regime, many of their
leaders were assassinated and subjected to arbitrary detention.
The war in Iraq exacerbated this situation and further endangers the
faith of this group. It is estimated that as many as 40,000 Iraqi
Christians, 5 percent of the faithful, have left the country since the
war has begun. While Iraqi Christians make up just 3 percent of the
overall population, reports are that Christians make up more than 20
percent of the refugee exodus to Syria, and there are mounting fears
that if Iraq becomes an Islamic theocracy, the exodus will accelerate.
My congressional district, the 18th District of California, happens
to be home to a large Assyrian population. I have heard the horror
stories from some in my district, and I am committed to ensuring that
the interests of the Assyrians and the broader Christian community are
well protected in the new Iraq.
I have taken numerous steps to protect the rights of the minority. In
particular I have written a letter on the subject to Secretary Rice and
have implored her to use all means available to ensure that the rights
of this group are respected.
To further enhance our ability to protect these people, it is my
understanding that there is report language in this bill which urges
that $10 million in the recently enacted supplemental be targeted
towards helping the Christian community in Iraq. I want to work with
the chairwoman and the rest of the members of the committee to ensure
that this money goes for its intended purpose of protecting this
community and does not get diverted to other issues.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from California (Mr.
Cardoza) for bringing this important matter to the attention of the
committee. This type of government-sponsored terrorism was a hallmark
of Saddam Hussein's rule and cannot continue. It was endemic.
Unfortunately, it seems that the practice continues, and I continue to
worry that our assistance may not be benefiting the intended
recipients.
I too am concerned about the plight of the Christian minority, and I
am dedicated to using whatever tools we have available to ensure their
rights are given due consideration.
Furthermore, I want to note for my colleagues that the recent
supplemental included a requirement for a report on the ethnic and
geographic distribution of the United States assistance programs
reaching the Nineveh Plain region, which should give us a clearer
picture of the situation facing Iraqi Christians.
I want to assure my friend that I, and I know my ranking member, who
cares passionately about these issues, will work closely with the
Congressman to ensure that this $10 million does go for its intended
purpose of protecting the Christian minority in Iraq.
Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for her help on
this issue and for her agreement to work towards ensuring that the
money goes to alleviate the suffering of the Christian community in
Iraq. This community has lived in this part of the world for over 1,000
years, and we must do our part to ensure that they live there for 1,000
more.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. Congresswoman Anna Eshoo is
interested in this and a lot of others, and I thank the Chair for
accepting the Kirk amendment in the full committee.
I looked for you yesterday. What I wanted to ask you to do was to
offer an amendment on the floor, and I know the gentlewoman would have
accepted it, of another $100,000, or $1 million, for the Chaldean
Christians, and get a roll call vote on it; because colloquies are
colloquies, but a roll call vote is a roll call vote.
AID has failed to address this issue. We have asked them a number of
times. They tell us that we can't be targeting with regard to certain
ethnic groups, and it has never been a satisfactory answer. So it is
too late now, but it would have been a good thing to do. In fact, this
Congress and this government, we have abandoned the Christians in the
Middle East. We have pretty much walked away and the Christian
community in the Middle East is declining.
So you are on to something, and hopefully you can find a way in
another bill or in the supplemental perhaps to offer to work with the
gentlewoman to have an amendment, and then you offer an added $100,000
or $1 million or whatever you think is appropriate, and then ask for a
roll call vote so the entire Congress is on record, because you are
right on target.

[[Page H6860]]

I want to thank you, and we will work with you and help you in any
way possible. But a roll call vote of 435-0 would send a message to the
AID people that they would have to face and focus on.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to assure my good friend from
California, and, of course, my ranking member, that we together will
make it clear that this is an urgent issue, and the amendment in the
committee validated the urgency of the issue. I know we will continue
to work together to address this.
I thank the gentleman for bringing this up, and, of course, I respect
the interest and passion of my ranking member. We will be following up,
and there will be attention given to this issue.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman. I think that comment
really sends a message. Obviously AID is watching this debate right
now, and for the Chair of the committee to say that, they have actually
gotten the message. So I thank the Chair.
Mr. CARDOZA. If the gentleman would yield briefly, I would say I did
look for the gentleman on the floor yesterday as well, but we must have
missed each other in our search. I thank the gentleman for his comments
in the Rules Committee where I raised this issue initially. I look
forward to working with the gentleman in the future. I will look for
opportunities, together we will look for opportunities, to send a
continuing message that this population is important, not just to the
Middle East, but to this country as well, and it is important for us to
assist and invest in this community.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield to my good friend, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) for an important statement.
Mr. MEEKS of New York. Madam Chairman, I don't have any amendment at
the desk, but I do wish to rise in support of the 2008 State and
Foreign Operations Appropriations Act and to commend the committee,
particularly the chairwoman from New York, for the fine work that has
been done to get the bill to this point.
I want to bring attention to a very important aspect of the bill:
funding for trade capacity building. This bill raises the Federal
appropriation level to $214 million. That is $87 million more than the
administration requested.
Obviously there are many different points of view on trade in this
body, but I think all of us can agree that we must do everything
possible to enable developing countries to facilitate trade with the
world.
Most people think of trade infrastructure projects when they think of
trade capacity. But facilitating trade goes well beyond that. These
funds will help developing countries with labor and environmental law
enforcement and provide technical assistance for better trade access in
remote areas.
Trade capacity assistance is a relatively new tool in the trade
arena, but it has recently played an important role in the
implementation of trade and will continue to play a critical role as we
consider several free trade agreements with developing countries that
are eligible to receive capacity building from our Nation.
I thank the chairwoman for maintaining the commitment to trade
capacity funds in recent agreements, and I hope to work closely with
the committee on follow-up and oversight of trade capacity funds, past
and in the present.
Hopefully, in the near future, we will have the opportunity to
consider this on the floor with countries such as Peru, Panama and
Colombia. All of these nations need trade capacity assistance, but
Colombia is arguably the country with the most intense and persistent
challenges.
I look forward to working closely with the committee and USAID to see
that we dedicate some of the increased funds in this bill to help
Colombia meet critical needs, like assistance for its Fiscalia, the
Office of the Attorney General. The Fiscalia bears the overwhelming
responsibility of continuing the progress towards security and peace in
Colombia, with investigations of murders and kidnappings, particularly
those of labor leaders, and managing the legal process of the
demobilization of paramilitaries and the FARC. The Fiscalia needs as
much support as we can offer it if it is going to expeditiously carry
out the hundreds of investigations and legislative demands that it must
meet as an independent agency of justice.
I hope my colleagues who share my concern over violence in Colombia,
particularly in remote areas populated by African Colombians and
attacks against labor leaders, will support the 2008 Foreign Operations
bill and join me in calling for trade capacity funds specifically
dedicated to those countries who are cooperating with us to make
strides toward a more secure hemisphere.

{time} 1330

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my friend from New York for
bringing attention to these important issues. As you know, the former
Chair of this committee, Mr. Kolbe, has been a leader on trade, and
continues to share with us the importance of trade as we move forward
in this process.
I thank you very much for focusing on his very important legacy. He
was a great partner for me working together on this committee, and I
also appreciate your mentioning Colombia and the fact that we changed
the balance of funding in this bill, putting more resources in the
Fiscalia. When I was there, it was clear to me that they didn't have
enough people to enforce the law to go after the narcotraffickers, so
this was an important area, in addition to increasing funding for
interdiction. Justice, rule of law, interdiction, and funding for the
Afro-Colombians, and we know there has been a tremendous need. Thank
you for your work. I look forward to working together. I know that my
colleagues realize how important these issues are as well.
Mr. MEEKS of New York. I thank the gentlewoman.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I rise to enter into a colloquy about the need for increased funding
for the United States contribution to the Comprehensive Test Ban
Organization with the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).
Mrs. TAUSCHER. If the gentlewoman would yield?
Mrs. LOWEY. I am happy to yield.
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to enter into a colloquy with the
distinguished chairwoman of the Foreign Ops appropriations bill about
the need for increased funding for the United States contribution to
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization called CTBTO.
I had planned to offer an amendment to fund the CTBTO at least to the
administration's request of $18 million for fiscal year 2008; but I
would just like to make a few points for the record.
As you know, the administration's fiscal year 2008 budget request
calls for $18 million for the U.S. contribution to the CTBTO.
Unfortunately, the Foreign Operations appropriations bill would shift
$8 million of the administration's already inadequate request to
another account, leaving only $10 million for U.S. funding for CTBTO
test ban monitoring.
The administration's request already falls well short of what is
necessary to make up for past funding shortfalls that threaten to slow
or stop the construction and operation of the test ban treaty
organization's international monitoring system.
In 2002, the Bush administration unilaterally decided not to support
the U.S. portion, approximately $800,000 per year, of the on-site
inspection component of the CTBTO verification activities. The
administration, which does not support ratification and entry into
force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, argues that because the on-
site inspection will only be available upon the entry into force of the
treaty, the United States should not contribute.
For fiscal year 2006, the Bush administration requested and Congress
approved only $14.4 million for the CTBTO, which was $7 million short
of the $22 million assessed by the organization.
The continuing resolution covering most fiscal year 2007 spending set
U.S. funding for the CTBTO at the fiscal year 2006 level, which was $9
million short of the United States $23.4 million assessment.
Compounding the problem last month, the Bush administration
unilaterally decided to obligate only $10

[[Page H6861]]

million of the $14.4 million appropriated by Congress. As a result, the
U.S. is now in arrears to a total of $28.3 million.
We are the single largest contributor to CTBTO, and our shortfalls
will have a significant impact. The United States failure to pay its
share will directly affect the CTBTO's ability to complete construction
and certify for use the remaining stations in the international
monitoring system, including those in more remote and strategic regions
such as Turkmenistan, which lies just north of Iran.
I am sure that the gentlewoman from New York (Chairman Lowey) shares
my deep concern that the United States is underfunding the CTBTO as the
danger of Iran's nuclear program grows as these fundings continue to
deplete and we are not able to keep up with our obligations.
Unless Congress increases funding for the U.S. contribution, these
shortfalls that have accumulated over the last 7 years will continue to
undermine the effort to complete a global monitoring network and
conduct data analysis designed to detect and deter nuclear weapons test
explosions.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased that my good friend from
California brought this issue to our attention.
I really want to thank you for your work on CTBTO, and I agree with
you that the United States should show leadership and pay our full
share of obligations that it owes to the CTBTO.
The bill tries to draw balance between the various programs funded
within the nonproliferation antiterrorism account, but I understand the
concerns my friend has raised and these are concerns of the committee.
There are many members of the committee who are working very hard on
this issue, and it is my intention to continue to work with you as the
bill moves through the process.
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the chairwoman's attention
to this matter and her distinguished and significant leadership on this
issue, and I look forward to working with her on this as the bill goes
forward and in the conference.
Once again, I appreciate having a colloquy. I think these are very
important issues, especially since I hope we will get to ratify the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and our obligations are significant to
make sure that we have this global monitoring effort.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
(c) The provisions of section 628 of this Act shall apply
to funds appropriated under this heading: Provided, That
notwithstanding any provision of this or any other Act,
including provisions in this subsection regarding the
application of section 628 of this Act, local currencies
generated by, or converted from, funds appropriated by this
Act and by previous appropriations Acts and made available
for the economic revitalization program in Bosnia may be used
in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States to carry out the
provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the
Support for East European Democracy SEED Act of 1989.

international fund for ireland

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$15,000,000, which shall be available for the United States
contribution to the International Fund for Ireland and shall
be made available in accordance with the provisions of the
Anglo-Irish Agreement Support Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-
415): Provided, That such amount shall be expended at the
minimum rate necessary to make timely payment for projects
and activities: Provided further, That funds made available
under this heading shall remain available until September 30,
2009.

assistance for eastern europe and the baltic states

(a) For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Support for East
European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989, $297,332,000, to
remain available until September 30, 2009, which shall be
available, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
assistance and for related programs for Eastern Europe and
the Baltic States.
(b) Funds appropriated under this heading shall be
considered to be economic assistance under the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 for purposes of making available the
administrative authorities contained in that Act for the use
of economic assistance.
(c) The provisions of section 628 of this Act shall apply
to funds appropriated under this heading: Provided, That
notwithstanding any provision of this or any other Act,
including provisions in this subsection regarding the
application of section 628 of this Act, local currencies
generated by, or converted from, funds appropriated by this
Act and by previous appropriations Acts and made available
for the economic revitalization program in Bosnia may be used
in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States to carry out the
provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the
Support for East European Democracy SEED Act of 1989.
(d) The President is authorized to withhold funds
appropriated under this heading made available for economic
revitalization programs in Bosnia and Herzegovina, if he
determines and certifies to the Committees on Appropriations
that the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina has not
complied with article III of annex 1-A of the General
Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina
concerning the withdrawal of foreign forces, and that
intelligence cooperation on training, investigations, and
related activities between state sponsors of terrorism and
terrorist organizations and Bosnian officials has not been
terminated.

assistance for the independent states of the former soviet union

(a) For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
chapters 11 and 12 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 and the FREEDOM Support Act, for assistance for the
Independent States of the former Soviet Union and for related
programs, $397,585,000, to remain available until September
30, 2009: Provided, That the provisions of such chapters
shall apply to funds appropriated by this paragraph: Provided
further, That funds made available for the Southern Caucasus
region may be used, notwithstanding any other provision of
law, for confidence-building measures and other activities in
furtherance of the peaceful resolution of the regional
conflicts, especially those in the vicinity of Abkhazia and
Nagorno-Karabagh: Provided further, That notwithstanding any
other provision of law, funds appropriated under this heading
in this Act or prior Acts making appropriations for foreign
operations, export financing, and related programs, that are
made available pursuant to the provisions of section 807 of
Public Law 102-511 shall be subject to a 6 percent ceiling on
administrative expenses.
(b) Of the funds appropriated under this heading, not less
than $52,200,000 should be made available, in addition to
funds otherwise available for such purposes, for assistance
for child survival, environmental and reproductive health,
and to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and other infectious
diseases, and for related activities.
(c)(1) Of the funds appropriated under this heading that
are allocated for assistance for the Government of the
Russian Federation, 60 percent shall be withheld from
obligation until the President determines and certifies in
writing to the Committees on Appropriations that the
Government of the Russian Federation--
(A) has terminated implementation of arrangements to
provide Iran with technical expertise, training, technology,
or equipment necessary to develop a nuclear reactor, related
nuclear research facilities or programs, or ballistic missile
capability; and
(B) is providing full access to international non-
governmental organizations providing humanitarian relief to
refugees and internally displaced persons in Chechnya.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
(A) assistance to combat infectious diseases, child
survival activities, or assistance for victims of trafficking
in persons; and
(B) activities authorized under title V (Nonproliferation
and Disarmament Programs and Activities) of the FREEDOM
Support Act.
(d) Section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act shall not apply
to--
(1) activities to support democracy or assistance under
title V of the FREEDOM Support Act and section 1424 of Public
Law 104-201 or non-proliferation assistance;
(2) any assistance provided by the Trade and Development
Agency under section 661 of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 (22 U.S.C. 2191 et seq.);
(3) any activity carried out by a member of the United
States and Foreign Commercial Service while acting within his
or her official capacity;
(4) any insurance, reinsurance, guarantee or other
assistance provided by the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation under title IV of chapter 2 of part I of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2191 et seq.);
(5) any financing provided under the Export-Import Bank Act
of 1945; or
(6) humanitarian assistance.

Independent Agencies

inter-american foundation

For necessary expenses to carry out the functions of the
Inter-American Foundation in accordance with the provisions
of section 401 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1969,
$19,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2009.

african development foundation

For necessary expenses to carry out title V of the
International Security and Development Cooperation Act of
1980, Public Law 96-533, $30,000,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2009: Provided, That funds made available
to grantees may be invested pending expenditure for project
purposes when authorized by the Board of Directors of the
Foundation: Provided further, That interest earned shall be
used only for the purposes for which the grant was made:
Provided further, That notwithstanding section 505(a)(2) of
the African Development Foundation Act, (1) in exceptional
circumstances the Board of Directors of the Foundation may
waive the

[[Page H6862]]

$250,000 limitation contained in that section with respect to
a project and (2) a project may exceed the limitation by up
to $10,000 if the increase is due solely to foreign currency
fluctuation: Provided further, That the Foundation shall
provide a report to the Committees on Appropriations after
each time such waiver authority is exercised.

peace corps

(including transfer of funds)

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
Peace Corps Act (75 Stat. 612), including the purchase of not
to exceed five passenger motor vehicles for administrative
purposes for use outside of the United States, $333,500,000,
to remain available until September 30, 2009: Provided, That
none of the funds appropriated under this heading shall be
used to pay for abortions: Provided further, That the
Director may transfer to the Foreign Currency Fluctuations
Account, as authorized by 22 U.S.C. 2515, an amount not to
exceed $2,000,000: Provided further, That funds transferred
pursuant to the previous proviso may not be derived from
amounts made available for Peace Corps overseas operations.

millennium challenge corporation

For necessary expenses for the ``Millennium Challenge
Corporation'', $1,800,000,0000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That of the funds appropriated under this
heading, up to $95,000,000 may be available for
administrative expenses of the Millennium Challenge
Corporation: Provided further, That up to 10 percent of the
funds appropriated under this heading may be made available
to carry out the purposes of section 616 of the Millennium
Challenge Act of 2003 for candidate countries for fiscal year
2008: Provided further, That none of the funds available to
carry out section 616 of such Act may be made available until
the Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium Challenge
Corporation provides a report to the Committees on
Appropriations listing the candidate countries that will be
receiving assistance under section 616 of such Act, the level
of assistance proposed for each such country, a description
of the proposed programs, projects and activities, and the
implementing agency or agencies of the United States
Government: Provided further, That section 605(e)(4) of the
Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 shall apply to funds
appropriated under this heading: Provided further, That funds
appropriated under this heading may be made available for a
Millennium Challenge Compact entered into pursuant to section
609 of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 only if such
Compact obligates, or contains a commitment to obligate
subject to the availability of funds and the mutual agreement
of the parties to the Compact to proceed, the entire amount
of the United States Government funding anticipated for the
duration of the Compact.

Department of State

global hiv/aids initiative

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for the prevention, treatment,
and control of, and research on, HIV/AIDS, including
administrative expenses of the Office of the Global AIDS
Coordinator, $4,450,000,000, to remain available until
expended, of which $300,000,000 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, and shall be expended at the minimum rate
necessary to make timely payment for projects and activities:
Provided further, That funds made available under this
heading and under the heading ``Child Survival and Health
Programs Fund'' shall be made available notwithstanding the
second sentence of section 403(a) of Public Law 108-25:
Provided further, That up to 5 percent of the aggregate
amount of funds made available to the Global Fund in fiscal
year 2008 may be made available to the Office of the United
States Global AIDS Coordinator for technical assistance
related to the activities of the Global Fund.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Pitts

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

Amendment offered by Mr. Pitts:
In the item relating to ``Global HIV/AIDS Initiative'',
strike ``Provided Further, That funds made available under
this heading and under the heading `Child Survival and Health
Programs Fund' shall be made available notwithstanding the
second sentence of section 403(a) of Public Law 108-25:''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, June
20, 2007, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) and a Member
opposed each will control 15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, United Nations program on HIV/AIDS report estimates
that there are 40 million people infected with HIV/AIDS worldwide, and
like everyone else, I am deeply saddened by this reality.
However, I am also filled with hope because recent evidence indicates
that the current prevention strategy is helping to produce behavioral
change that has significantly decreased people's risk of contracting
this deadly disease.
The current HIV/AIDS prevention strategy was carefully crafted in the
PEPFAR authorization bill to reflect a balanced approach, and the good
news is that this balanced approach is working.
The PEPFAR authorization bill, which became law in 2003, included a
provision that required one-third of the 20 percent for prevention
funding, that is approximately 7 percent of the total PEPFAR funds, to
be spent on abstinence and fidelity programs.
Prior to the implementation of this spending directive, the U.S.
promoted an unbalanced condoms-only approach. The U.S. remains the
largest distributor of condoms in the world. But for the first time the
behavior factor is getting real attention under the current program
rules. And the result: falling HIV/AIDS prevalence rates in 7 of the 15
focus countries.
The current prevention strategy is based on the comprehensive ABC
model, first established in Uganda, developed by Uganda. The ABC model
stands for A, abstinence; B, be faithful; C, condoms. A comprehensive,
balanced approach.
After implementation of this model in Uganda, the number of young
males age 15 to 24 reporting premarital sex decreased from 60 percent
in 1989 to 23 percent in 1995. For females, the decline was 53 percent
to 16 percent. The program actually helped change the behavior in women
and men, a fact I hope my colleagues take seriously.
Opponents of this approach claim that behavioral change is
unrealistic. Dr. Edward Green, a researcher at Harvard University, was
an opponent of the ABC model and in particular of abstinence until he
saw what happened in Uganda. He testified before the Energy and
Commerce Committee saying: ``Many of us in the AIDS and public health
communities did not believe that abstinence or delay and faithfulness
were realistic goals. It now seems we were wrong.''
Not only has Uganda seen a society transformed by behavioral change,
we can now add Kenya, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Namibia, Tanzania, and Zambia
to the list of countries that are experiencing a decrease in HIV/AIDS
prevalence rates.
Experts continue to testify to the fact that behavioral change
continues to be the key indicator of HIV/AIDS prevention. Yet for some
reason, some of my colleagues have decided to make a crucial provision
of this successful strategy optional. This crucial provision ensures
that the ``abstinence'' and ``be faithful'' components are incorporated
into the approach. Never mind the fact that PEPFAR is expected to be
reauthorized later this year, and never mind the fact that the
reauthorization might be the more appropriate forum to debate this
critical component that was agreed to.
Some of my colleagues argue that we need a comprehensive approach,
but I remind them that abstinence and fidelity education are
fundamental to the comprehensive ABC approach.
Some of my colleagues argue that we need an approach that saves
lives. I remind them that the ABC model, with the A and the B spending
requirement intact, is continuing to save more and more lives. In
countries that have relied predominantly on condom distribution, HIV/
AIDS prevalence rates have not improved. Meanwhile, countries that
promote behavioral change have seen significant improvement.
Mr. Chairman, a balanced, evidence-based approach is essential if we
are going to effectively fight HIV/AIDS in Africa. The current policy
is the balanced approach. It is the evidence-based approach. It is the
approach that is working. Why change what works?
I urge my colleagues to vote for my amendment and keep abstinence and
fidelity in the AIDS program, and in doing so, to vote for an approach
that is saving lives.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for 15
minutes.

[[Page H6863]]

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, despite the best efforts of our prevention
programs, the HIV/AIDS pandemic continues to grow. In 2006, 4.3 million
people were infected with the virus; and for every new treatment
patient in 2006, six additional people became infected with HIV. If we
do not slow the pandemic, treatment costs alone in 2010 could be as
high as $11 billion. Unless this trend is reversed, global efforts to
expand treatment will falter and our global effort to address the
pandemic will fail.
That is why it is so critical to maximize the effectiveness of the
$5.062 billion for HIV/AIDS programs provided in this bill and make
sure that our prevention programs work.
A recently released Institute of Medicine report entitled, ``PEPFAR
Implementation,'' stated: ``The earmark has greatly limited the ability
of country teams to develop and implement comprehensive prevention
programs that are well integrated with each other and with testing,
care, and treatment programs.'' These congressionally mandated funding
restrictions are hampering our overall prevention efforts.

{time} 1345

Therefore, and I want to make it very clear to my colleague, the bill
allows the President to provide funding for HIV/AIDS prevention at his
discretion. It does not change the underlying PEPFAR law, nor does it
require that the President change the amount of funding for any
particular prevention programs. In fact, it doesn't require the
President to change the programs at all. The language simply provides
flexibility to design the most effective prevention programs.
Effective HIV/AIDS prevention initiatives must be designed to respond
to the local social and cultural conditions. These efforts should
include all available options, including abstinence programs,
comprehensive prevention programs, condom distribution, and medical
interventions such as male circumcision and mother-to-child prevention
programs to ensure that we use every tool at our disposal to stop this
deadly disease.
We know that the only solution to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS is
expanded and effective prevention programs. Our bill language again
provides the administration with the flexibility to respond to the
ever-changing pandemic in the most effective ways without the
restrictions of arbitrary numerical targets.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the amendment
offered by my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Pitts), and in support of this evidence-based approach to reducing
the spread of HIV and AIDS.
The AIDS epidemic in Africa is a serious problem that demands serious
results. However, I also had the privilege of seeing firsthand the
success of Uganda's ABC program when I traveled to Uganda a couple of
years ago to visit my daughter who's a missionary there and also a
health educator dealing specifically with HIV/AIDS. Also meeting with
who has now become adopted into our family, Mama Nabali, who is a young
woman with three children who has HIV as a result of behavior issues
related specifically to a husband who was unfaithful in many, many
ways.
It has been interesting to note that in Uganda as well as other
countries that are now using the ABC program authorized and pushed by
the First Lady and the President, President Museveni of Uganda, in each
of those cases there is a significant decline in reported numbers of
sexual partners, that's the behavior portion of it, and a significant
decline in the numbers of unmarried youth who are sexually active,
which is the abstinence portion of it.
Authorizing legislation that requires 33 percent of prevention funds
to be spent in abstinence-until-marriage programming is the best way to
address this problem because it's a proven, successful method of
reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS. There is growing evidence that partner
reduction is the single most important factor in reducing HIV/AIDS
prevalence rates.
According to the PEPFAR Third Report to Congress, ``Of the countless
developments taking place in the global fight against the AIDS
pandemic, perhaps the single most important in recent years is the
growing number of nations in which there is clear evidence of declining
HIV prevalence as a result of changes in sexual behavior.''
Furthermore, no country with a generalized epidemic that has relied
on condom prevention alone has reported a decline in HIV/AIDS
prevalence rates. Because studies have shown that the abstinence-until-
marriage method is producing the best results, I urge my colleagues to
consider the merits of the Pitts amendment and support this important
and, need I say, life-changing and lifesaving legislation.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from New Jersey, an expert on Africa and so
many of the issues that are critical, Mr. Payne.
Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much.
I rise to urge my colleagues to oppose the Pitts amendment that would
strike the underlying language that provides flexibility to the
President on designing his HIV/AIDS programs.
In 2003, Congress and the President came together to establish the
Global HIV/AIDS Initiative. Five years ago, the world was optimistic
that we could, with additional funding, start to turn the pandemic
around. As we have heard, success has not been as easy as we would have
hoped, and over 4 million people were newly infected last year. That is
why, in addition to increasing the amount of money we are spending to
combat HIV/AIDS, we must take every effort to ensure that we are
spending money as wisely as possible.
The chairwoman's bill contains language which gives the President
maximum flexibility. There is no empirical data to my knowledge which
supports the abstinence-only earmark in P.L. 108-25, the original
PEPFAR authorizing legislation. The earmark calls for one-third of all
prevention funds to be spent on abstinence-only until marriage. No one
has ever explained the rationale for that figure. The provision of
flexibility to the President to determine how much money to spend on
abstinence-only is way overdue.
I urge my colleagues to vote against the Pitts amendment and to
support the chairperson in this endeavor.
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield to the distinguished
gentleman from Florida, Dr. David Weldon, 2 minutes.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much
time exists on both sides, please.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 8\1/2\ minutes. The
gentlewoman from New York has 9\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Pitts
amendment. I am concerned with the change in the abstinence policy in
the PEPFAR budget to permissive authority for the administration to
give grants to abstinence-based programs. I fear that this is a setback
to the work we are doing overseas with AIDS relief.
The best way to stop AIDS is to encourage people to abstain from
sexual behavior outside of marriage. Last July, southern African AIDS
experts and officials listed, and I'm quoting here, reducing multiple
concurrent partnerships as their number one priority for preventing the
spread of HIV.
I used to treat AIDS patients. I used to practice infectious disease.
The reason AIDS exploded through the gay community in this country in
the late seventies and the early eighties was because of this
phenomenon, having multiple concurrent sexual partners. And the reason
Uganda, and you're going to hear Uganda quoted over and over again, was
successful in lowering their AIDS incidence from 18 percent to 6
percent, and there was very little foreign aid going in the country at
the time they did this, is because they established an education
program.
People are rising on the floor today acting like there is no money
for anything other than abstinence education. This is a very modest
component of the bill. We have a lot of money for prevention. We have
money for mother-to-child prevention. We are simply requiring that a
third of the money go to what I think is the most cost-effective venue
that we could be using.
I would highly encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. I
believe right now under the current

[[Page H6864]]

law, the President has the authority to waive this requirement if the
country team asks for it and as I understand some countries have and
they have waived the authority. I believe that this language that they
changed in PEPFAR is authorizing and this should have been left to the
authorizing debate.
I strongly encourage my colleagues to support the Pitts amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson).
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, the language in the bill
provides the President flexibility, not mandates. The gentleman's
amendment seems to be more interested in bean-counting than saving and
treating those with HIV/AIDS. Is it more important to make sure that 33
cents out of every dollar, according to the gentleman's amendment, go
to abstinence or that we give the President some flexibility if, that
is if, he needs it?
We all know that HIV/AIDS prevention programs must be targeted to the
group that we are seeking to influence and when abstinence programs may
be appropriate for some groups, including the very young. I want to
raise to my colleagues' attention that the underlying language in the
bill that provides flexibility enjoys broad support from groups that
are working on the ground.
I have a letter from the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatrics AIDS Foundation
urging a ``no'' vote on the Pitts amendment.
I have a letter from CARE, one of the world's leading NGOs providing
AIDS care and prevention services, urging a ``no'' vote on the Pitts
amendment.
I have a letter from the General Board of Church and Society of the
United Methodist Church urging a ``no'' vote on the Pitts amendment.
I urge my colleagues and their counsel and to vote ``no'' on the
Pitts amendment.
In fact, Mr. Chairman, I would like to quote the distinguished
ranking Republican member who said this on the floor last night:
``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 here and they're going to be against this bill.
And I hope that we can change some of the things to prevent a veto, but
this bill eventually when it passes, and it will pass, assuming it will
be vetoed, is really about feeding the poor, the hungry, the naked and
the sick. Almost a better title would be the Matthew 25 bill. So it has
the potential to do a lot of good and I hope to work with the
chairwoman to ensure the State Department has what it needs to do these
things.''
Matthew 25 is very clear, Mr. Chairman:
Then the king will say to those on his right, ``Come you who are
blessed by my father, take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for
you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me
something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I
was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed
me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came
after me.''
Then the righteous will answer him, ``Lord, when did we see you
hungry and feed you? Or thirsty and give you something to drink? When
did we see a stranger and invite you in? Or needing clothes and clothe
you? When did we see you sick or in prison or did we go visit you?''
The king will reply, ``I will tell you the truth, whatever you did
for one of the least of these, my brethren, you did it unto me.''
Mr. Chairman, the people need medicine, not self-righteousness.
Reject the Pitts amendment.
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I didn't know I was going to get a biblical
lesson here, but I would just ask the man rhetorically, is abstinence
biblical? Is faithfulness biblical? That's what we're speaking on
behalf of.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska who is a member of
the Africa Subcommittee, Mr. Fortenberry.
Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of the Pitts
amendment. This amendment will save lives. The President's Emergency
Plan for AIDS Relief, commonly known as PEPFAR, is the largest
bilateral foreign assistance program dedicated to mitigating the HIV/
AIDS crisis worldwide. The plan places special emphasis on the 15
countries in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean which account for
approximately 50 percent of the world's HIV infections.
If the U.S. is to remain the world's leader in saving lives from the
devastation of AIDS, it's time to look at the track record and see what
works well. Demographic and health surveys show that HIV/AIDS
prevalence rates in at least 7 of the 15 PEPFAR focus countries is
declining. Countries such as Uganda, Zambia and Senegal have success
stories to showcase and something to teach us. In these nations and
others experiencing declines in the prevalence of HIV/AIDS, it is
through indigenous programming that respects the local cultural milieu
and social norms that figure prominently.
In Uganda, for example, prevalence rates among pregnant women fell
from approximately 20 percent in 1991 to 6 percent in the year 2000.
Between 1991 and 1998, HIV prevalence rates among 15- to 19-year-olds
fell by 75 percent, from approximately 21 percent to 5 percent.
While causal factors behind the prevalence declines are complex and
should not be oversimplified, it is clear that the success stories in
Uganda, Zambia, Senegal and elsewhere all incorporate the same common
denominator, an emphasis on abstinence and fidelity, as critical
elements in successful interventions.

{time} 1400

As it stands, this appropriations bill would potentially reverse the
most significant element of this success by diminishing the emphasis on
abstinence and fidelity. This issue is much too serious to prevent the
outright dismissal of compelling clinical evidence that in-country
programming emphasizing abstinence and fidelity can effectively reduce
the prevalence of HIV and AIDS.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
member of the committee, the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).
Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge my
colleagues to oppose the Pitts amendment.
HIV/AIDS is devastating Africa and other parts of the developing
world. We all share that. We share that knowledge. We can be proud that
the United States is leading the way in addressing the global AIDS
pandemic. We are providing support for millions of people through
treatment, care and prevention programs.
But we need to take a very practical approach, and the bill before us
does that by including the language that gives the President
flexibility to implement prevention programs that fit the country's
current AIDS pandemic.
I thought it was very compelling to hear the story that was just
shared on the floor by my Republican colleague about how a wife had
become infected, not because of her behavior, but because of her
husband's behavior.
I am particularly concerned about the 40 percent of new HIV/AIDS
infections in youth between the ages of 15 and 24. Women and girls make
up 60 percent of all the infections, and 76 percent of the infections
among those are between the ages of 15 and 24. Now, abstinence could be
an option, but we know that marriage is not a protective factor.
Listen carefully to this: over the next 10 years, more than 100
million girls in the developing countries will be married before their
18th birthday, some as young as age 14, mostly to older men, often
against their will. These are forced child brides.
These girls will have a significantly higher rate of HIV infection
than their peers who are sexually active and their unmarried peers.
We should give these young girls the opportunity to protect
themselves, to save their own lives. I believe that we must make sure
that our prevention programs address their needs and provide
alternatives. For these young girls and women, abstinence is just not
an option. They need programs that provide them with full information
to protect themselves. We, in Congress, must do all that we can to stop
child marriage; but, in the meantime, we need to protect these young
women.

[[Page H6865]]

I urge my colleagues to oppose the Pitts amendment.
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), who is ranking member of the
Africa Subcommittee.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of
the Pitts amendment.
As an original cosponsor of the President's $15 billion, 5-year law
to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa, I rise in strong opposition to the
language in the bill that undermines and dismisses the successful HIV/
AIDS prevention spending requirement in the PEPFAR legislation.
Where the epidemic has spread among the general population, the only
successful evidence-based approach to HIV/AIDS prevention is that which
emphasizes abstinence before marriage and faithfulness in
relationships, and, lastly, where necessary, condoms.
The success of the ABC approach depends on the proper balance between
these three elements. The spending requirement is necessary to attain
that balance.
The vast majority of PEPFAR's focus countries have generalized
epidemics; and those that have emphasized A and B, abstinence and being
faithful programming, have experienced significant increases in the
number of youth and adults who are either abstaining or being mutually
faithful, and, at the same time, they have seen significant drops in
those countries, in the percentage of their population infected with
HIV/AIDS.
Examples of countries that have aggressively promoted abstinence and
fidelity at the national level, backed by real resources, and have
experienced decreased HIV rates include Uganda, Senegal, Jamaica,
Thailand, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Dominican Republic and Kenya.
On the other hand, no country with a generalized epidemic that has
relied primarily on condom promotion has reported a decline in HIV
rates. Southern Africa is a tragic example of this.
The Washington Post on March 2 pointed out that ``researchers
increasingly attribute the resilience of HIV in Botswana, and in
Southern Africa generally, to the high incidence of multiple sexual
relationships . . . [Western AIDS experts] brought not just ideas, but
money, and soon billboards in Botswana touted condoms. Schoolchildren
sang about them. Cadres of young women demonstrated how to roll them
out. The anti-AIDS partnership between the . . . Gates Foundation and
drugmaker Merck budgeted $13.5 million for condom promotion, 25 times
the amount dedicated to curbing dangerous sexual behavior. But soaring
rates of condom use,'' The Washington Post went on, ``have not brought
down high HIV rates. Instead, they rose together until both were among
the highest in Africa.''
As indicated in The Washington Post report, those who are considered
AIDS experts in the West, including some of those who directed U.S.
prevention funding prior to PEPFAR, imposed their narrow-minded condom
promotion mentality on Africa.
The PEPFAR coordinator, on the other hand, Ambassador Mark Dybul,
testified last fall that the 33 percent prevention spending requirement
``has helped support PEPFAR's field personnel in appropriately
broadening the range of prevention efforts . . . In addition, the
directive has helped PEPFAR to align itself with the strategies of the
host nations, of which ABC is a key element.''
In a letter to the editor of Lancet, June 2006, the Minister of
Health of Namibia noted that PEPFAR support for AB, abstinence and
faithful, is needed to ensure the balance of the ABC programs that
Namibia seeks. That is because, he goes on to say, other international
donors support only condoms but not abstinence or being faithful
programs.
Finally, let me say that even with the spending requirement, the
United States remains by far the largest condom distributor in the
world.
If our goal here is to save lives by implementing the strongest
evidence-based prevention programs possible, we should be at least
maintaining, and I would suggest increasing, the percentage of funding
directed to abstinence and to being faithful programs. It works, it has
proven that it works, and I support the Pitts amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to my distinguished
friend from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
Mr. SHAYS. I thank the gentlelady for yielding to me.
I oppose the Pitts amendment. I support strongly the attempt by the
subcommittee to give the President flexibility to implement prevention
programs that fit the countries' current AIDS epidemic. I salute the
President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief. I have been to Africa,
Uganda, and Tanzania to see how the program works.
Everyone I spoke with pleaded with us to make sure that there was
more emphasis on not A, B, but on C, condoms. Young children were
asking that this be a factor in their schools. They said sex is going
to happen no matter what you say. No matter what you say about
abstinence or be faithful, it's going to happen. It is particularly
disconcerting to think that someone who has chosen one partner and
loves that partner, not knowing that that partner has been unfaithful,
and, in fact, has AIDS, transmitting that disease to, in most cases, a
young woman.
This makes eminent sense. I would like to think that we could get our
religious beliefs out of this issue, not talking practically, but
talking realistically. If you want to prevent deaths, you need to allow
more condoms.
If you want to save lives, you need to allow more condoms. If you
want to prevent pregnancies, you need to allow more condoms. If you
don't want so much interest on other things like whether there should
be abortion, you need to have condoms.
I weep thinking young kids go to school without teachers and go home
without parents. We need to be doing more in Africa to spend our money
better.
Thank you, Mrs. Lowey, for what you have done to give the President
of these United States the flexibility with his team that puts PEPFAR
into operation.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Pitts amendment.
First of all there is the flexibility; there is ability to waive. I
hope Mr. Pitts will cover that.
Let me read you what Ambassador Mark Dybul said. He said recent data
from Kenya, Zimbabwe and urban Haiti show decline in HIV prevalence. A
new study has concluded that these reductions and prevalence do not
simply represent the natural course of these nations' epidemics, but
can only be explained by changes in sexual behavior. This demonstrates
the power of behavior changes to save lives and the importance of
support for effective behavior change intervention.
If people from my old neighborhood back in southwest Philadelphia
heard this debate that the Congress was debating ``faithful'' in this,
is it a good idea or a bad idea, they would say, what is going on?
As Mr. Pitts said, I would argue too that he is right. I think
Biblical faithfulness is a Biblical principle. Faithfulness is a very
good principle. Does anyone disagree? Now we are debating abstinence?
We are saving lives.
So there is flexibility. So there is a fake argument here. There is
the ability to waive; and what we are doing here, we could talk about
different things, they are underlying agendas. We are talking about
basically are we going to save lives. Are we going to save lives.
I will stipulate that Mark Dybul has forgotten more about this than
this Congress knows. Because of that, I will urge an ``aye'' vote for
the Pitts amendment to save lives.
Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to my friend from
Pennsylvania.
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, there is flexibility in the existing
program. Countries can apply for a waiver. Every country that has
applied has received a waiver. Our friends say that all they want to do
is provide flexibility and more condoms.
Well, for 20 years of fighting AIDS, the bureaucrats who run these
programs tried the same approach over and over again. It never worked.
When Uganda came up with a comprehensive approach that would, they
still opposed it.

[[Page H6866]]

Well, the buck stops here in Congress, and we told them in 2003 to do
what works, and it's working. Without this amendment, this bill will
allow them to go back to the failed policies of the passed. So many on
the other side are saying we need to listen to the other experts on the
ground; we need to follow their advice.
That's true. They even raise this point with the Centers for Disease
Control in a letter signed by several of my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle, including the distinguished subcommittee chairwoman,
Mrs. Lowey. That letter highlighted the report that was written by the
world's leading HIV/AIDS experts, was endorsed by more than 100 leaders
from 36 countries, people like the President of Uganda, people like
Archbishop Desmond Tutu and the HIV/AIDS director of the World Health
Organization, researchers from Johns Hopkins and other leading medical
institutions.
Allow me to quote from what these people, the experts, are saying
about what's working to reduce AIDS prevalence: ``When targeting young
people for those who have not started sexual activity, the first
priority should be to encourage abstinence or delay of sexual onset,
hence emphasizing risk avoidance as the best way to prevent HIV and
other sexually transmitted infections, as well as unwanted
pregnancies.'' Abstinence, behavior change, that is what the experts
are stressing. I agree, the experts know best.
They are saying that a comprehensive approach that includes
behavioral change is crucial to winning the fight against AIDS.
Mr. WOLF. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. PITTS. I would yield.
Mr. WOLF. Would the gentleman be saying Archbishop Desmond Tutu would
be basically supporting your amendment?
Mr. PITTS. That's the quote that I read from the statement he signed.
Mr. WOLF. Nobel Prize winner Bishop Tutu from South Africa supports
the amendment.
Mr. PITTS. That's correct.
Mr. WOLF. I mean, is there a greater expert, from both moral and
understanding than that?
Did the gentleman say there have been waivers granted?
Mr. PITTS. That's correct. Every country that requested waivers has
received one.

{time} 1415

Mr. WOLF. Every single country. I think the gentleman has made the
case.
I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I submit for the Record the copies of the
letters and the statement.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, January 7, 2005.
Hon. Julie Gerberding,
Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Clifton
Road, Atlanta, GA.
Dear Dr. Gerberding: On November 27, 2004, the Lancet
published a statement entitled ``The Time Has Come for Common
Ground on Preventing Sexual Transmission of HIV.'' Signed by
more than 100 religious, political, health and scientific
leaders from across the developed and developing world, this
statement called for an end to ``polarizing debate'' and
urged the international community ``to unite around an
inclusive evidence-based approach to slow the spread of
sexually transmitted HIV.'' We are writing to ask whether you
support this statement.
The statement describes key elements of successful HIV
prevention. These include:
1. Ensuring prevention activities are grounded in the
science of epidemiology, supported at the local level, and
respectful of human rights;
2. Promoting abstinence among those young people who are
not yet sexually active, encouraging mutual monogamy among
sexually active adults, and helping individuals who engage in
high-risk activities to stop;
3. Encouraging correct and consistent condom use among
individuals who are engaging in high-risk activities and
those who are sexually active with a partner whose HIV status
is unknown;
4. Expanding prevention programs for young people both in
and out of school, supporting parents ``in communicating
their values and expectations about sexual behavior''; and
5. Employing community-based approaches that involve
religious organizations, women's and men's organizations,
care groups, youth organizations, health workers, local
media, and traditional and governmental leadership.
The statement also notes that expanding access to services
for testing, counseling and treatment of HIV/AIDS and other
sexually transmitted infections, preventing mother-to-child
transmission, and enhancing access to family planning
services are all essential in order to achieve the
prevention, care and treatment objectives of the President's
Emergency Plan for AIDS and other global initiatives. It
endorses continuing review of potential interventions such
as microbicides, new antibiotic treatments, and vaccines.
The statement was written by several of the world's leading
HIV experts, and endorsed by more than 100 leaders in the
fight against AIDS from 36 countries across a range of
disciplines. Notable endorsers include: Uganda's President
Yoweri Museveni, Archbishop Desmond Tutu of the Anglican
Church of Southern Africa, UN Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in
Africa Stephen Lewis, and HIV/AIDS Director at the World
Health Organization Jim Kim.
The statement has also been endorsed by representatives
from the World Bank; the Global Fund to Fight AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria; and the heads of HIV/AIDS programs
in several countries including Ethiopia, India, Jamaica, and
Uganda. Leaders and representatives from major faith- and
community-based nongovernmental organizations from the United
States and around the world also back the statement.
Given the broad international and domestic support for the
Lancet statement and the importance of collaboration in AIDS
prevention efforts worldwide, we would like to know whether
you, as a key leader in this administration in combating HIV/
AIDS, support this statement.
We would appreciate a response by January 24, 2005.
Sincerely,
Henry A. Waxman, Ranking Minority Member, Committee on
Government Reform, House of Representatives; Nita M.
Lowey, Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Foreign
Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs,
Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives;
Fortney Pete Stark, Ranking Minority Member,
Subcommittee on Health, Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives; Sherrod Brown, Ranking
Minority Member, Subcommittee on Health, Committee on
Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives; Barbara
Lee, Chair, Global AIDS Initiative, Congressional Black
Caucus, House of Representatives.
Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., Member of Congress; Betty
McCollum, Member of Congress; Howard L. Berman, Member
of Congress; Lois Capps, Member of Congress; Richard J.
Durbin, U.S. Senator.
____

June 18, 2007.
Dear Representative: We are writing on behalf of the United
States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and Catholic
Relief Services (CRS) to express deep concern regarding two
provisions in the State/Foreign Operations appropriations
bill, which the full House may soon debate. First, the bill
would nullify the current 7 percent allocation (one-third of
HIV and AIDS prevention funds) for abstinence-before-marriage
programs in the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief
(PEPFAR). These programs have proven to be very effective in
Africa as part of a larger strategy that focuses on overall
behavior change. We consider it unwise to abandon this
strategy through the Appropriations process and urge you to
support any effort to reverse this provision.
The other fundamental defect is language in Section 622
rescinding the Mexico City Policy, which prevents U.S. family
planning assistance from being channeled through groups that
perform and promote abortion as family planning. On this
issue we urge you to follow the counsel by our Bishops'
Conference offered in a companion letter.
The Catholic Church is deeply committed to U.S. leadership
on the issue of HIV and AIDS prevention and treatment. At
home and around the world, and particularly through the
experience of Catholic Relief Services in 12 of the 15 PEPFAR
focus countries and many others, principally in Africa, the
Church is deeply involved in offering life-saving help to
people threatened by HIV and AIDS. This is not about
ideology; it is about saving lives. In this common effort, we
would urge the following steps to advance the U.S. commitment
to address the spread of HIV and AIDS: Do not abandon the
consensus that underpins U.S. leadership.
PEPFAR, at its heart, is about coming to the aid of some of
our most vulnerable sisters and brothers. PEPFAR legislation
was carefully negotiated and reflects a consensus on how best
to proceed and on what works in HIV and AIDS prevention. By
setting aside the requirement that 33 percent of prevention
funding focus on ``abstinence-before-marriage,'' Congress is
summarily rejecting sound evidence and experience of what
actually works in reducing HIV and AIDS.
Abandoning this approach through the Appropriations
process, rather than through the process of reauthorizing
PEPFAR, is also unwise, premature and counter-productive.
This is an important issue that requires careful
consideration of evidence and experience accumulated over a
period of years. We and others on the front lines look
forward to making our full case about the effectiveness of
abstinence, behavior change, and partner reduction as ways to
help save lives through the regular authorization process of
hearings and deliberation. This is where decisions should be
made in the interest of sound policy and on behalf of the
lives and dignity of those who are most affected by HIV and
AIDS.
USCCB and CRS were major supporters of the PEPFAR
initiative when it was first announced in 2003. Since then,
we have been actively engaged in education and advocacy to
support major new investments in the U.S. commitment to fight
the global pandemic. As we prepare for the reauthorization of

[[Page H6867]]

PEPFAR legislation, attempts to abandon the current approach
will seriously threaten consensus needed to expand U. S.
leadership on this issue. It would be tragic if efforts
to abandon this effective approach put at risk the
consensus and momentum for increased U.S. commitment and
investment in this life-saving initiative.
We strongly urge the Committee to retain designated funding
for prevention of sexually transmitted HIV through abstinence
and fidelity education.
PEPFAR included a 7 percent allocation (one-third of HIV
and AIDS prevention funds) for abstinence-before-marriage
programs. The State/Foreign Operations appropriations bill
abandons this commitment, even though there is a global
shortage of funding available for this critical and effective
method for preventing sexually-transmitted HIV.
Since 2003, CRS has been one of the largest and most
successful partners in PEPFAR. In its extensive experience
and in the documented experience of others, only an approach
to sexually transmitted HIV prevention that has sufficient
funding for a behavior change strategy based on abstinence,
partner reduction, and faithfulness education has yielded
meaningful advances in stopping the spread of HIV. Educating
youth on the risks they may face and providing them with good
``life skills'' so that they can make good, sound decisions,
actually saves lives. Evidence shows that the HIV and AIDS
prevalence rates in at least 7 of the 15 PEPFAR Focus
Countries are declining--and in every such case, there is a
significant decline in the reported numbers of sexual
partners and in the number of unmarried youth aged 15-24 who
are sexually active.
There is no evidence that an increase in the use of condoms
alone, without abstinence and behavior change interventions,
has reduced the rate of AIDS cases. Our experience leads us
to strongly reaffirm the need for designated funding for
abstinence-until-marriage, funding that was virtually non-
existent before PEPFAR. Without funding for such programs,
human lives, particularly in Africa, may be further
threatened. A recent Washington Post article presents
concrete evidence in this regard, affirming that in the case
of Botswana, ``soaring rates of condom use have not brought
down high HIV rates. Instead, they rose together, until both
were among the highest in Africa'' (``Speeding HIV's Deadly
Spread,'' Washington Post, March 2, 2007; p. A1).
Congress has responded to the health needs of the poor
around the world with generosity. We ask that you support any
effort to restore the PEPFAR-mandated allocation for
``abstinence-until-marriage'' funding. In addition, we urge
you to fully fund this important investment in preventing HIV
infections and saving lives, and not let it be side-tracked
into diversionary battles. Now is the time for new
investment, not re-fighting old battles.
With appreciation for your continued support for addressing
the critical health needs of the poor around the world, we
remain,
Sincerely yours,
Thomas G. Wenski,
Bishop of Orlando, Chairman, Committee on International
Policy.
Ken Hackett,
President, Catholic Relief Services.

Mrs. LOWEY. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentlewoman.
Mrs. LOWEY. I would just like to clarify and ask either the ranking
member or the gentleman a question. Number one, I'm puzzled that you
don't trust the President of the United States and give him the
discretion. We're not changing the law. We're just giving the President
the discretion. Now, that's Number one.
Number two, I believe both gentlemen said that waivers can be issued.
Of course waivers can be issued. I believe the gentlemen know that when
a waiver is granted the other countries may make up the difference. So,
for example, if waivers are granted to 50 percent of the countries, I
think of my trip to Arusha, Tanzania. And there was a hut right in the
middle of this community, a Masai village, and there were 15 huts
around it. And the chief of that village went from hut to hut to hut to
hut, spreading HIV/AIDS.
Now, I'd be interested to know how this would work if the waivers are
granted, and many of the other communities around the world have to
make up for that waiver, how would this be done.
And the gentleman, Number three, has also talked about a
comprehensive program. Well, we may agree. I believe in abstinence. I
think it's great. And if it can be implemented in Africa and Asia and
all the other countries that are spreading HIV/AIDS like wildfire, I'm
perfectly in support. But we're talking about comprehensive programs,
including abstinence. And I'm glad the gentleman agrees that this
should be comprehensive programs including abstinence. Would you like
to respond?
Mr. WOLF. I will yield to the gentleman first.
Mr. PITTS. The only thing your amendment would do is remove the A and
the B from the ABC model.
Mrs. LOWEY. No, excuse me. There's confusion in the amendment. My
amendment would give the President the authority, the President of
these United States, with Ambassador Dybul, to make these decisions.
We're not removing anything.
Mr. PITTS. And the President could remove the A and the B, and just
have the C. And when Ambassador Dybul was asked if any of the countries
wanted waivers, they all said no.
Mrs. LOWEY. May I inquire of the Chair how much time is remaining?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman has 30 seconds remaining on her time.
Mrs. LOWEY. I move to strike the last word. And I'm pleased to yield
2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE. Let me thank our chairwoman for yielding and for her
leadership, and just say, as one of the authors of the PEPFAR
legislation, I actually helped write the majority of this legislation.
I can tell you that while I did not agree nor support the 33 percent
earmark, I know for a fact that this does not undo that earmark.
Let me just tell you a couple of things. You probably have heard, and
you know that over the next 10 years, more than 100 million girls in
developing countries will be married before their 18th birthday, and
often against their will.
As currently written, the bill does not change the underlying
abstinence-until-marriage earmark. For me that's unfortunate, but it
doesn't change that. And it does not require the President to make any
changes to current prevention funds. The current language merely
provides the President with the flexibility to plan the most
appropriate and sensitive and required program for countries per their
request.
The fact is, the administration has already waived, you're right,
application of the abstinence earmark for certain countries receiving
assistance under our global AIDS programs. But I want you to remember,
ABC does mean abstinence, be faithful, use condoms.
For many of these young girls, abstinence is not an option. And we
must provide them with what they need to protect themselves. ABC is
ABC.
The Lowey language provides a very practical, commonsense, 1-year
fix, mind you, 1 year. And it gives the President the authority to
program global AIDS funding according to local country needs.
Ultimately, it will be up to the President to determine whether to
exercise this flexibility.
This amendment, Mr. Pitts, it really does render a death sentence to
millions of girls and their children and their babies.
So I urge my colleagues to vote against restricting the ability of
the President to save lives. And that's what this amendment would do.
And so I hope that all of the posturing and all of the ideological
debate today really comes down to the fact that we believe, all of us
believe in ABC: Abstinence, be faithful, use condoms.
And as I said, I helped write this bill. And I was much opposed to
this earmark, but, believe me, I know that this does not remove it.
And so I urge my colleagues to oppose the Pitts amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I'm very pleased to yield 1 minute to the
distinguished gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment, and
I thank the chairwoman of the Foreign Operations Committee for her
leadership in this area.
My life has been devoted to public health, to bettering it. And this
amendment is bad public policy wherever it will affect lives. It
forces, actually, bad public health policy and removes the flexibility
to opt for better allocation of public health services.
PEPFAR is extremely important to our fight against the transmission
of HIV/AIDS and our treatment of the 40 million people living worldwide
with this disease. But as the Institutes of Medicine and GAO have both
reported, country teams have been greatly limited in their ability to
provide effective lifesaving services by the restriction

[[Page H6868]]

that has been placed for the past several years.
I applaud Chairwoman Lowey for lifting this restriction by allowing
PEPFAR funds to be spent where they are actually needed in order to
accomplish the program's goal.
We spent all last week listening to complaints about a lack of
responsible spending. Quite frankly, making the amount of funds
available for proven effective public health programs dependent upon
spending for unproven, ineffective programs is the epitome of
irresponsible spending.
So I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, to support
responsibility.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank the gentlelady. I believe I have 2 minutes, Mr.
Chairman?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman has 30 seconds under the 5-minute rule,
and an additional 30 seconds under her original 15 minutes, a total of
1 minute.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I just want to clarify for my distinguished
ranking member and my colleague from Pennsylvania that what this does
is give the President of the United States of America the authority,
the flexibility.
I believe in ABC, abstinence, be faithful, use condoms. But I want to
make it very clear to my colleagues, when the administration uses the
waiver, then the other countries of the world still have to meet that
one-third percent when it comes to prevention, abstinence. All we're
saying, again, is abstinence, be faithful, use condoms.
We have to prevent unnecessary abortions. We have to save lives. We
have to make sure that we do whatever we can to prevent the spread of
HIV/AIDS.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. PITTS. 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 Pennsylvania will be
postponed.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word for the
purpose of a colloquy with the distinguished former Speaker, Mr.
Hastert.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage in a colloquy with
Chairwoman Lowey and Ranking Member Wolf.
I thank the gentlelady and Ranking Member Wolf for working with me
throughout this process on an important issue that I have worked on for
many years and that's Plan Colombia.
As you know, Colombia is a critical U.S. ally in the region, and it's
in our interest to cultivate this partnership to ensure that Colombia
remains strong.
I sincerely appreciate the chairwoman's efforts to address my
concerns about the overall cuts to the program, particularly given the
constraints of the bill. However, I still have concerns about funding
levels provided for the Colombian aviation programs, as well as some of
the certification requirements contained in the bill.
Alternative livelihood, which the chairwoman is very interested in,
and I am too, and other developmental projects are certainly vital to
our overall effort in Colombia, but they can only be successful in
areas where the Colombian Government maintains territorial control.
That being said, I would like to continue working with the chairwoman
and ranking member to address some of these issues as we move forward
to conference.
Madam Chairman, once again, I thank you and I look forward to working
with you as the process continues.
Mrs. LOWEY. Reclaiming my time, to my friend the former Speaker, I
want to thank you for the collaborative way you have worked with me and
our ranking member, Mr. Wolf. I would like to commend you for your many
years of dedicated and unyielding work on Colombia.
I, as you, have long been deeply concerned about the situation facing
us in the war on drugs. We agree that increasing drug interdiction
efforts is necessary. We also agree that Colombia is a vital partner
and ally of the United States.
I want to say again that I fully recognize the strategic importance
of Colombia. In no way does this bill reduce our steadfast support to
our friends in Colombia.
I've tried, in this bill, working with my good friend, Mr. Wolf, to
strike a more balanced strategy that shifts the aid from the military
and strengthens civilian governments, humanitarian assistance and rural
development.
I continue to believe that we need to attack the underlying and
pervasive poverty that is at the root of the problems in Colombia, as
well as the region. I've attempted to increase the social component in
our assistance to Colombia and begin Colombianization of the the
military package and place a greater emphasis on interdiction rather
than eradication.
This bill also increases funding for judges, prosecutors and rule of
law and creates jobs in the legal economy.
Again, I say to my good friend from Illinois, I greatly appreciate
your advice, the give-and-take you have provided as we drafted this
bill. I want to assure the gentleman that the committee will continue
to pay close attention to his concerns as we work through the next
stages of the process.
Mr. WOLF. Would the gentlelady yield?
Mrs. LOWEY. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. WOLF. I want to join my colleagues in continuing to work on the
important issue. U.S. assistance to Colombia has been directly
responsible for bringing stability to the country. The people of
Colombia couldn't travel freely, but now they can. The security is due
to Plan Colombia. I appreciate the Speaker's hard work over the years
on this issue.
I want to thank Mrs. Lowey, Chairwoman Lowey for really being very
open and taking all the time to kind of work this out.
Mr. HASTERT. If the gentlewoman would continue to yield. I too would
just like to say thank you for your hard work, and I'm honored to
continue to work with you on this issue. Thank you very much.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank the gentleman. And it was a pleasure working with
you, and I look forward to continuing to work together on this
important issue.

Announcement By the Chairman

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will
now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were
postponed, in the following order:
An amendment by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida.
An amendment by Mr. Wolf of Virginia.
An amendment by Mr. Shays of Connecticut.
An amendment by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey.
An amendment by Ms. Foxx of North Carolina.
An amendment by Mr. Pitts of Pennsylvania.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.

{time} 1430

Amendment Offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida

The CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded
vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Lincoln Diaz-Balart) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 254,
noes 170, not voting 13, as follows:

[Roll No. 527]

AYES--254

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Berkley
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bono

[[Page H6869]]

Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Clyburn
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Donnelly
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Engel
English (PA)
Everett
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Graves
Green, Gene
Gutierrez
Hall (TX)
Hare
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Higgins
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson, Sam
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Keller
Kennedy
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren, Zoe
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Meek (FL)
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Rothman
Royce
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Saxton
Schiff
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stearns
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Wu
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOES--170

Ackerman
Allen
Baird
Baldwin
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Boucher
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Capps
Capuano
Carson
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Ellison
Emanuel
Emerson
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Harman
Herseth Sandlin
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pastor
Paul
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Shea-Porter
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Waters
Watson
Watt
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Woolsey
Wynn
Yarmuth

NOT VOTING--13

Abercrombie
Bonner
Cramer
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Fortuno
Granger
Hunter
Ortiz
Pickering
Sanchez, Loretta
Sullivan
Waxman

{time} 1456

Mr. BERMAN and Mr. CONYERS changed their vote from ``aye to ``no.''
Messrs. HIGGINS, CARNEY, MILLER of North Carolina, JEFFERSON,
GUTIERREZ, SCHIFF, MELANCON, RYAN of Ohio, KENNEDY and SPRATT, and Mrs.
JONES of Ohio, Ms. BORDALLO and Ms. GIFFORDS changed their vote from
``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Wolf

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

Recorded Vote

The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 205,
noes 219, not voting 13, as follows:

[Roll No. 528]

AYES--205

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carney
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chandler
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Donnelly
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jindal
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Patrick
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Stupak
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOES--219

Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson
Castor
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duncan
Edwards
Ellison
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel

[[Page H6870]]

Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth

NOT VOTING--13

Abercrombie
Bonner
Cramer
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Diaz-Balart, M.
Fortuno
Hunter
Ortiz
Pickering
Sanchez, Loretta
Sullivan
Waxman

Announcement by the Chairman

The CHAIRMAN. There is 1 minute remaining on this vote.

{time} 1501

Mr. BUYER changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Shays

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

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 529]

AYES--355

Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Blunt
Bono
Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Ferguson
Filner
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Norton
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Watt
Weiner
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (OH)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOES--69

Akin
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boehner
Brady (TX)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Cannon
Cantor
Cleaver
Coble
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Dingell
Drake
Duncan
Everett
Fattah
Feeney
Flake
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Goode
Gutierrez
Hayes
Hensarling
Herger
Hinojosa
Israel
Jordan
King (IA)
Kingston
Lamborn
Linder
Lofgren, Zoe
McCotter
McCrery
Mica
Miller (FL)
Murphy, Patrick
Pence
Pitts
Poe
Putnam
Radanovich
Rehberg
Rogers (AL)
Rohrabacher
Royce
Sali
Sensenbrenner
Shadegg
Shuster
Souder
Tierney
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wu
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--13

Abercrombie
Bonner
Cramer
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Fortuno
Heller
Hunter
Ortiz
Pickering
Sanchez, Loretta
Sullivan
Waxman

Announcement by the Chairman

The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining in the
vote.

{time} 1505

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

Amendment Offered by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey

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

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 530]

AYES--192

Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Berkley
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bono

[[Page H6871]]

Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Donnelly
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Green, Gene
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jindal
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Latham
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Marchant
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Space
Stearns
Tancredo
Taylor
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wu

NOES--232

Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boozman
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
LaHood
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Regula
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--13

Abercrombie
Bonner
Cramer
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Fortuno
Hunter
Ortiz
Pickering
Rangel
Sanchez, Loretta
Sullivan
Waxman

Announcement by the Chairman

The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). One minute remains in this vote.

{time} 1509

Mr. BOUSTANY changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Foxx

The CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded
vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from North Carolina
(Ms. Foxx) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 531]

AYES--137

Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Chabot
Coble
Conaway
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Everett
Feeney
Flake
Forbes
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
King (IA)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCrery
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Poe
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Stearns
Tancredo
Taylor
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)

NOES--287

Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bono
Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Calvert
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Fortenberry
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter

[[Page H6872]]

McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reichert
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--13

Abercrombie
Bachus
Bonner
Cramer
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Fortuno
Hunter
Ortiz
Pickering
Sanchez, Loretta
Sullivan
Waxman

Announcement by the Chairman

The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). One minute remains in this vote.

{time} 1514

Mr. McINTYRE and Mrs. JONES of Ohio changed their vote from ``aye''
to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Pitts

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

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 532]

AYES--200

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Donnelly
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Holden
Hulshof
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jindal
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Stupak
Tancredo
Taylor
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)

NOES--226

Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bordallo
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Ramstad
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--12

Abercrombie
Bonner
Cramer
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Fortuno
Hunter
Ortiz
Pickering
Sanchez, Loretta
Sullivan
Waxman

Announcement by the Chairman

The CHAIRMAN (during the vote). One minute remains in this vote.

{time} 1518

Mr. ALTMIRE changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Lynch).
Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairwoman, and I rise for the
purpose of engaging in a colloquy with the gentlewoman from New York.
First of all, Madam Chairman, I would like to thank you for your
efforts to increase funding for nonproliferation, anti-terrorism,
demining and related programs.
My amendment would have targeted a specific increase for the
counterterrorism program within the nonproliferation, anti-terrorism,
demining and related programs account. This vital program was only
funded at the President's request of $6 million, which is actually a
reduction from the $7.4 million in last year's budget.
I appreciate the good work done by the chairwoman and by the
committee in meeting the President's request. I understand that. But
the President has not done a sufficient job in the area of
counterterrorism, and there has been actually a reduction in this area.
As the cochair of the Task Force on Terrorism and Proliferation
Financing,

[[Page H6873]]

I have joined many of my colleagues, including the Chair, in meetings
and hearings facing the challenges that we confront in the United
States Government in battling terrorist financing.
Since the attacks on 9/11 Congress and this committee have taken
significant steps towards utilizing investigation and data collection
regarding terrorist financing as a viable intelligence tool for
disrupting the financing of terrorist activities. Nevertheless,
terrorists' proven ability to move money through innovative means
necessitates continued progress in this critical counterterrorism area.
Al Qaeda's strength, for example, rests in its ability to continually
adapt to U.S. tactics, and thus it requires greater innovation and
greater resources in order to develop new strategies to counter those
efforts.
In April, I had an opportunity to organize a trip to the Middle East
where we met with high-ranking banking officials to discuss the issue
of anti-terrorism financing in Jordan, in Afghanistan, in Iraq and in
Istanbul, Turkey. I believe that through international financial
pressure, we can effect real change in the policies of other countries
towards these terrorist groups.
In the parts of the world where financial restrictions would have the
greatest impact, unfortunately, U.S. influence is at its lowest. On the
other hand, however, I know from our own experience that these
countries do want to participate in the global economy. Thus, we have
seen that these countries are more likely to adopt transparency in
their finance laws for the purpose of gaining legitimacy in the eyes of
global investors rather than simply responding to U.S. pressure. By
allocating more resources to induce anti-money-laundering compliance
and transparency, we can make significant gains in tracking terrorists
and cutting off their funding.
While we made some progress, considerable work remains to be done in
regulating, for instance, the hawala system, which is an informal
transfer system used extensively in the Middle East, because anytime
you have a lack of transparency and a lack of accountability regarding
the movement of funds, there is a great likelihood that terrorists and
criminals can harness the system for their own gain.
By closing off legitimate financial markets for terrorists, we force
them to change tactics that are less secure and oftentimes easier to
track. A perfect example is the example of December 14 and the arrest
of Palestinian Prime Minister Haniyeh at the border crossing into Gaza
from Egypt carrying an estimated $30 million in cash in suitcases for
the Palestinian Authority and for Hamas. The reason that Hamas has to
operate that way is because financial markets were not available to
them. Instances like these highlight the importance and indeed the
benefit of focusing on counterterrorism financing efforts.
In essence, I am greatly concerned that the President is not doing
enough and that by meeting the President's request, we here are not
doing enough to stop the financing of terrorist operations.
Mr. Chairman, I would yield back to the gentlewoman from New York for
a response.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman. I
agree that the counterterrorism financing program is a vital tool in
assisting foreign countries' efforts to identify, freeze and prevent
the use of financial institutions, businesses and charitable
organizations as conduits for money to terrorist organizations,
including giving countries an investigative ability to follow the money
trail and arrest terrorists preemptively.
I support the work of the Department of State, the Department of
Justice and the Department of Treasury in assisting countries who are
at risk to terrorist financing. However, overall budgetary constraints
did not provide sufficient opportunity for us to increase the requested
funding level at this time.
However, I want to assure you, this is a priority of this committee.
This is a priority of this Congress. In fact, I have been a member for
years of this same task force, the same committee of which you are
cochair, I believe, and I look forward to working with you as the bill
moves through this Congress to conference to see if we can bolster
those funds.
I really do thank you for bringing this issue to our attention.
Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairwoman for the courtesy that
has been extended to me, and I also look forward to working together on
this very important issue.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

international narcotics control and law enforcement

For necessary expenses to carry out section 481 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $568,475,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2010: Provided, That during
fiscal year 2008, the Department of State may also use the
authority of section 608 of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, without regard to its restrictions, to receive excess
property from an agency of the United States Government for
the purpose of providing it to a foreign country under
chapter 8 of part I of that Act subject to the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations:
Provided further, That the Secretary of State shall provide
to the Committees on Appropriations not later than 45 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act and prior to the
initial obligation of funds appropriated under this heading,
a report on the proposed uses of all funds under this heading
on a country-by-country basis for each proposed program,
project, or activity: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $15,000,000
shall be made available for training programs and activities
of the International Law Enforcement Academies: Provided
further, That none of the funds provided under this heading
for counter narcotics activities in Afghanistan shall be made
available for eradication programs through the spraying of
herbicides: Provided further, That $12,000,000 of the funds
appropriated under this heading shall be made available for
demand reduction and drug awareness programs: Provided
further, That not less than $8,000,000 shall be made
available for programs to combat transnational crime and
criminal youth gangs: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not more than $38,000,000
may be available for administrative expenses.

andean counterdrug initiative

For necessary expenses to carry out section 481 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to support counterdrug
activities in the Andean region of South America,
$312,460,000, to remain available until September 30, 2010:
Provided, That the Secretary of State, in consultation with
the Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development, shall provide to the Committees on
Appropriations not later than 45 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act and prior to the initial obligation of
funds appropriated under this heading, a report on the
proposed uses of all funds under this heading on a country-
by-country basis for each proposed program, project, or
activity: Provided further, That section 482(b) of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 shall not apply to funds
appropriated under this heading: Provided further, That
assistance provided with funds appropriated under this
heading that is made available notwithstanding section 482(b)
of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 shall be made available
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That of the
funds available under this heading for assistance for the
Colombian National Police Support for Eradication program,
not less than $5,000,000 shall be made available for program
assistance to protect biodiversity, indigenous reserves and
Afro-Colombian lands subject to spraying in Colombia:
Provided further, That of the funds available for the
Colombian national police support for eradication program for
the procurement of chemicals for aerial coca and poppy
fumigation programs, exclusive of funds made available
pursuant to the previous proviso, not more than 10 percent of
such funds may be made available for such fumigation programs
unless the Secretary of State certifies to the Committees on
Appropriations that (A) the herbicide is being used in
accordance with label requirements of the Environmental
Protection Agency for comparable use in the United States and
with Colombian laws; (B) the aerial fumigation program does
not pose unreasonable risks or adverse effects to humans or
the environment including endemic species; (C) the social
dislocation and changes in vegetative cover caused by the
geographic shifts in coca and poppy cultivation resulting
from the aerial spraying program have been thoroughly
assessed on a regional level, and effective measures are
being taken to minimize adverse impacts; (D) all
certification reports on the aerial eradication program are
being made available to the public in a timely manner in both
English and Spanish; (E) complaints of harm to health or
licit crops caused by such spraying are being thoroughly
evaluated and fair compensation is being provided in a timely
manner for meritorious claims; (F) all claims, evaluations,
and compensation reports will be disclosed biannually to the
public in both English and Spanish; (G) a minimum of 15
percent of sprayed fields will be subject to independent and
randomly selected off-target damage assessments; (H) programs
are being implemented by the United States Agency for
International Development, the

[[Page H6874]]

Government of Colombia, or other organizations, in
consultation and coordination with local communities and
existing local development initiatives, to provide
alternative sources of income in municipalities where
security permits for small-acreage growers whose illicit
crops are targeted for fumigation; (I) programs to provide
food security to affected families are operative in areas
where security does not permit alternative development
programs: Provided further, That funds may not be used for
aerial fumigation in Colombia's national parks or reserves
unless the Secretary of State determines that there are no
effective alternatives to reduce drug cultivation in these
areas and that the spraying is conducted in accordance with
current Colombian laws: Provided further, That of funds
provided for interdiction under this heading, not less than
10 percent of airtime allocated for aerial assets, (both
fixed and rotary wing aircraft), shall be used annually for
major drug interdiction operations, including assaults on
large drug processing labs and high value narcotics related
targets: Provided further, That no United States Armed Forces
personnel or United States civilian contractor employed by
the United States shall participate in any combat operation
in connection with assistance made available by funds
provided in this Act for Colombia: Provided further, That
funds appropriated under this heading that are made available
for assistance for the Bolivian military may be made
available for such purposes only if the Secretary of State
certifies that the Bolivian military is respecting human
rights, and civilian judicial authorities are investigating
and prosecuting, with the military's cooperation, military
personnel who have been implicated in gross violations of
human rights: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not more than $17,000,000
may be available for administrative expenses of the
Department of State, and not more than $7,800,000 may be
available, in addition to amounts otherwise available for
such purposes, for administrative expenses of the United
States Agency for International Development.

migration and refugee assistance

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary to
enable the Secretary of State to provide, as authorized by
law, a contribution to the International Committee of the Red
Cross, assistance to refugees, including contributions to the
International Organization for Migration and the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and other activities
to meet refugee and migration needs; salaries and expenses of
personnel and dependents as authorized by the Foreign Service
Act of 1980; allowances as authorized by sections 5921
through 5925 of title 5, United States Code; purchase and
hire of passenger motor vehicles; and services as authorized
by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, $829,900,000,
to remain available until expended: Provided, That not more
than $22,500,000 may be available for administrative
expenses: Provided further, That not less than $40,000,000 of
the funds made available under this heading shall be made
available for refugees from the former Soviet Union and
Eastern Europe and other refugees resettling in Israel.

united states emergency refugee and migration assistance fund

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 2(c) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of
1962, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601(c)), $45,000,000, to remain
available until expended.

nonproliferation, anti-terrorism, demining and related programs

For necessary expenses for nonproliferation, anti-
terrorism, demining and related programs and activities,
$467,000,000, to carry out the provisions of chapter 8 of
part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for anti-
terrorism assistance, chapter 9 of part II of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, section 504 of the FREEDOM Support
Act, section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act or the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 for demining activities, the clearance
of unexploded ordnance, the destruction of small arms, and
related activities, notwithstanding any other provision of
law, including activities implemented through nongovernmental
and international organizations, and section 301 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for a voluntary contribution
to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and for a
United States contribution to the Comprehensive Nuclear Test
Ban Treaty Preparatory Commission: Provided, That of this
amount not to exceed $38,000,000, to remain available until
expended, may be made available for the Nonproliferation and
Disarmament Fund, notwithstanding any other provision of law,
to promote bilateral and multilateral activities relating to
nonproliferation and disarmament: Provided further, That such
funds may also be used for such countries other than the
Independent States of the former Soviet Union and
international organizations when it is in the national
security interest of the United States to do so: Provided
further, That funds appropriated under this heading may be
made available for the International Atomic Energy Agency
only if the Secretary of State determines (and so reports to
the Congress) that Israel is not being denied its right to
participate or being otherwise discriminated against in any
of the activities of that Agency: Provided further, That of
the funds made available for demining and related activities,
not to exceed $700,000, in addition to funds otherwise
available for such purposes, may be used for administrative
expenses related to the operation and management of the
demining program: Provided further, That funds appropriated
under this heading that are available for ``Anti-terrorism
Assistance'' and ``Export Control and Border Security'' shall
remain available until September 30, 2009.

Department of the Treasury

international affairs technical assistance

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 129 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$18,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2010,
which shall be available notwithstanding any other provision
of law that restricts assistance to foreign countries.

debt restructuring

For the cost, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, of modifying loans and loan
guarantees, as the President may determine, for which funds
have been appropriated or otherwise made available for
programs within the International Affairs Budget Function
150, including the cost of selling, reducing, or canceling
amounts owed to the United States as a result of concessional
loans made to eligible countries, pursuant to parts IV and V
of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, of modifying
concessional credit agreements with least developed
countries, as authorized under section 411 of the
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, as
amended, of concessional loans, guarantees and credit
agreements, as authorized under section 572 of the Foreign
Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461), and of
canceling amounts owed, as a result of loans or guarantees
made pursuant to the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, by
countries that are eligible for debt reduction pursuant to
title V of H.R. 3425 as enacted into law by section
1000(a)(5) of Public Law 106-113, $200,300,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2010: Provided, That not less
than $20,000,000 of the funds appropriated under this heading
shall be made available to carry out the provisions of part V
of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961: Provided further, That
amounts paid to the HIPC Trust Fund may be used only to fund
debt reduction under the enhanced HIPC initiative by--
(1) the Inter-American Development Bank;
(2) the African Development Fund;
(3) the African Development Bank; and
(4) the Central American Bank for Economic Integration:

Provided further, That funds may not be paid to the HIPC
Trust Fund for the benefit of any country if the Secretary of
State has credible evidence that the government of such
country is engaged in a consistent pattern of gross
violations of internationally recognized human rights or in
military or civil conflict that undermines its ability to
develop and implement measures to alleviate poverty and to
devote adequate human and financial resources to that end:
Provided further, That on the basis of final appropriations,
the Secretary of the Treasury shall consult with the
Committees on Appropriations concerning which countries and
international financial institutions are expected to benefit
from a United States contribution to the HIPC Trust Fund
during the fiscal year: Provided further, That the Secretary
of the Treasury shall inform the Committees on Appropriations
not less than 15 days in advance of the signature of an
agreement by the United States to make payments to the HIPC
Trust Fund of amounts for such countries and institutions:
Provided further, That the Secretary of the Treasury may
disburse funds designated for debt reduction through the HIPC
Trust Fund only for the benefit of countries that--
(1) have committed, for a period of 24 months, not to
accept new market-rate loans from the international financial
institution receiving debt repayment as a result of such
disbursement, other than loans made by such institutions to
export-oriented commercial projects that generate foreign
exchange which are generally referred to as ``enclave''
loans; and
(2) have documented and demonstrated their commitment to
redirect their budgetary resources from international debt
repayments to programs to alleviate poverty and promote
economic growth that are additional to or expand upon those
previously available for such purposes:

Provided further, That any limitation of subsection (e) of
section 411 of the Agricultural Trade Development and
Assistance Act of 1954 shall not apply to funds appropriated
under this heading: Provided further, That none of the funds
made available under this heading in this or any other
appropriations Act shall be made available for Sudan or Burma
unless the Secretary of the Treasury determines and notifies
the Committees on Appropriations that a democratically
elected government has taken office.

TITLE IV--MILITARY ASSISTANCE

Funds Appropriated to the President

international military education and training

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 541 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$85,076,000, of which up to $3,000,000 may remain available
until expended: Provided, That funds under this heading shall
not be available for Equatorial Guinea: Provided further,
That funds appropriated under this heading that are made

[[Page H6875]]

available for assistance for Guatemala, other than for
expanded international military education and training, shall
be available only for the Guatemalan Air Force, Navy and Army
Corps of Engineers: Provided further, That assistance
provided under this heading for the Guatemalan Army Corps of
Engineers is only available for training to improve disaster
response capabilities and to participate in international
peacekeeping operations: Provided further, That funds
appropriated under this heading that are made available for
assistance for the Guatemalan military, other than for
expanded international military education and training, may
be made available only if the Secretary of State certifies
that the Guatemalan Air Force, Navy and Army Corps of
Engineers are respecting human rights, and civilian judicial
authorities are investigating and prosecuting, with the
military's cooperation, military personnel who have been
implicated in gross violations of human rights: Provided
further, That funds appropriated under this heading for
military education and training for Libya and Angola may only
be made available for expanded international military
education and training: Provided further, That the civilian
personnel for whom military education and training may be
provided under this heading may include civilians who are not
members of a government whose participation would contribute
to improved civil-military relations, civilian control of the
military, or respect for human rights: Provided further, That
funds made available in the previous proviso and funds made
available for Haiti, Libya, Angola, the Democratic Republic
of the Congo, Guatemala, and Nigeria may only be provided
through the regular notification procedures of the Committees
on Appropriations and any such notification shall include a
detailed description of the proposed activities: Provided
further, That the Secretary of State shall submit to the
Committees on Appropriations, no later than 60 days after
enactment of this Act, a report addressing how the Western
Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation IMET program
for fiscal year 2008 contributes to the promotion of human
rights, respect for civilian authority and the rule of law,
the establishment of legitimate judicial mechanisms for the
military, and achieving the goal of right sizing military
forces.

foreign military financing program

For expenses necessary for grants to enable the President
to carry out the provisions of section 23 of the Arms Export
Control Act, $4,509,236,000: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, not less than $2,400,000,000
shall be available for grants only for Israel, and not less
than $1,300,000,000 shall be made available for grants only
for Egypt: Provided further, That the funds appropriated by
this paragraph for Israel shall be disbursed within 30 days
of the enactment of this Act: Provided further, That to the
extent that the Government of Israel requests that funds be
used for such purposes, grants made available for Israel by
this paragraph shall, as agreed by Israel and the United
States, be available for advanced weapons systems, of which
not less than $631,200,000 shall be available for the
procurement in Israel of defense articles and defense
services, including research and development: Provided
further, That of the funds appropriated by this paragraph,
$200,000,000 shall be made available for assistance for
Jordan: Provided further, That funds appropriated or
otherwise made available by this paragraph shall be
nonrepayable notwithstanding any requirement in section 23 of
the Arms Export Control Act: Provided further, That funds
made available under this paragraph shall be obligated upon
apportionment in accordance with paragraph (5)(C) of title
31, United States Code, section 1501(a): Provided further,
That $5,000,000 of the funds provided under this heading
shall remain available until expended and shall not be
subject to the sixth proviso of this paragraph: Provided
further, That none of the funds appropriated pursuant to the
previous proviso shall be made available except pursuant to
the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.
None of the funds made available under this heading shall
be available to finance the procurement of defense articles,
defense services, or design and construction services that
are not sold by the United States Government under the Arms
Export Control Act unless the foreign country proposing to
make such procurements has first signed an agreement with the
United States Government specifying the conditions under
which such procurements may be financed with such funds:
Provided, That all country and funding level increases in
allocations shall be submitted through the regular
notification procedures of section 615 of this Act: Provided
further, That none of the funds appropriated under this
heading shall be available for assistance for Sudan: Provided
further, That none of the funds appropriated under this
heading shall be available for assistance for the Guatemalan
Army: Provided further, That funds appropriated under this
heading that are made available for assistance for the
Guatemalan military may be made available only if the
Secretary of State certifies that (1) the Guatemalan Air
Force, Navy and Army Corps of Engineers are respecting human
rights; (2) civilian judicial authorities are investigating
and prosecuting, with the military's cooperation, military
personnel who have been implicated in gross violations of
human rights; and (3) the Guatemalan Congress has adopted and
the President has signed the International Commission Against
Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG): Provided further, That none of
the funds appropriated under this heading may be made
available for assistance for Haiti and Guatemala except
pursuant to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That funds
made available under this heading may be used,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for demining, the
clearance of unexploded ordnance, and related activities, and
may include activities implemented through nongovernmental
and international organizations: Provided further, That only
those countries for which assistance was justified for the
``Foreign Military Sales Financing Program'' in the fiscal
year 1989 congressional presentation for security assistance
programs may utilize funds made available under this heading
for procurement of defense articles, defense services or
design and construction services that are not sold by the
United States Government under the Arms Export Control Act:
Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading
shall be expended at the minimum rate necessary to make
timely payment for defense articles and services: Provided
further, That not more than $41,900,000 of the funds
appropriated under this heading may be obligated for
necessary expenses, including the purchase of passenger motor
vehicles for replacement only for use outside of the United
States, for the general costs of administering military
assistance and sales: Provided further, That not more than
$395,000,000 of funds realized pursuant to section
21(e)(1)(A) of the Arms Export Control Act may be obligated
for expenses incurred by the Department of Defense during
fiscal year 2008 pursuant to section 43(b) of the Arms Export
Control Act, except that this limitation may be exceeded only
through the regular notification procedures of the Committees
on Appropriations: Provided further, That foreign military
financing program funds estimated to be outlayed for Egypt
during fiscal year 2008 shall be transferred to an interest
bearing account for Egypt in the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York within 30 days of enactment of this Act.

peacekeeping operations

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 551 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
$293,200,000: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated
under this heading shall be obligated or expended except as
provided through the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations.

{time} 1530

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver) for the
purpose of a colloquy.
Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank first of all Chairwoman Lowey and
Ranking Member Wolf for their good work in bringing this good bill to
the floor. But I rise today particularly to commend Chairwoman Lowey,
Ranking Member Wolf, and the subcommittee for their efforts to relieve
the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. By providing over $200 million for
peacekeeping and humanitarian aid to Darfur, this bill will provide
desperately needed support for the 2.5 million people driven from
Darfur or displaced within Darfur by the Sudanese's deliberate actions.
Yet even as I acknowledge the significant resources that have been
included in this bill, I cannot contain my outrage and frustration that
the genocide in Darfur continues. Hundreds of villages and small towns
have been razed, burned to the ground, and obliterated, the men killed,
the women systematically raped, children slaughtered as if they were
vermin, survivors fleeing for their lives into the squalor of refugee
camps.
A common tactic of this horror has been to stuff the villages' water
wells with the bodies of the dead so there will be no water for people
who try to return to their ancestral homes.
Just last week, Sudanese President Omar Bashir agreed, yet again, to
the deployment of a joint United Nations-African Union peacekeeping
force in Darfur. This proposal calls for 20,000 African Union
peacekeepers to be led and paid for by the United Nations. President
Bashir has apparently offered his unconditional acceptance to the plan.
But do we have any reason to believe that this latest agreement is
anything but one more delaying tactic? After all, President Bashir
already agreed to a joint U.N.-A.U. peacekeeping force in November only
to renege a couple of months later. Each time the international
community moves even timidly towards imposing punitive measures against
Sudan, President Bashir briefly acquiesces and then promptly resumes
his unconscionable obstruction of peacekeeping efforts. How are

[[Page H6876]]

we to know if this latest concession is any different?
Just last week, activists representing 36 organizations addressed a
letter to the U.N. Security General, Ban Ki-moon, decrying the
escalating attacks in Darfur and documenting the flight of aid
organizations from the region. The conference on Darfur to occur next
week in Paris will provide one more opportunity for the United States,
France and other nations to join together in outlining tough
consequences for Sudanese failure to accept prompt deployment of the
twice-agreed-upon U.N.-A.U. peacekeeping force.
We know that the Sudanese Government responds to international
pressure, but it must be fierce and sustained if it is to finally end
the vicious and senseless slaughter of the people of Darfur.
I would like to ask simply five questions, Mr. Chairman. How many
times in this Congress have we and will we congratulate ourselves for
passing virtually unanimously powerless resolutions condemning the
Bashir regime's actions in Darfur?
Second, Will President Bush build on the study provision in the
House-passed Armed Services authorization for fiscal year 2008 to
develop a robust base in Chad for the deployment of peacekeeping forces
and for the delivery of food and services to the millions of refugees?
Or three, Is this administration so committed to other dealings with
Sudan that all of President Bush's statements about the genocide in
Darfur are just words?
Four, Why should America participate in the 2008 Olympic Games in
China when China repeatedly obstructs U.N. action on Darfur?
Finally, When will America's 4-year demonstrated impotence be
perceived as complicity in the horror of Darfur?
It is time to stop the shilly-shallying, stop the attacks on
civilians, and bring peace to Darfur. Today as we again provide funding
for humanitarian assistance, let us remember that our lack of more
effective action will be judged harshly by future generations who will
wonder why we didn't act decisively to stop the genocide in Darfur.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank the gentleman and I appreciate your constancy and
your passion on this issue. I know you are aware that our committee put
in over $100 million above the President's request to assist the
financing of the African Union mission. And I do hope that at some
point in the near future we can talk with equal passion about what is
being done to address this disaster.
I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. OLVER. I understand and applaud you and the ranking member for
that $100 million above the President's request. That is very
commendable, but the atrocity and the genocide continue.
Mrs. LOWEY. Absolutely. I thank you very, very much.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

TITLE V--MULTILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

Funds Appropriated to the President

international financial institutions

global environment facility

For the United States contribution for the Global
Environment Facility, $106,763,000 to the International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development as trustee for the Global
Environment Facility (GEF), by the Secretary of the Treasury,
to remain available until expended.

contribution to the international development association

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

contribution to the enterprise for the americas multilateral investment
fund

For payment to the Enterprise for the Americas Multilateral
Investment Fund by the Secretary of the Treasury, for the
United States contribution to the fund, $25,000,000, to
remain available until expended.

contribution to the asian development fund

For the United States contribution by the Secretary of the
Treasury to the increase in resources of the Asian
Development Fund, as authorized by the Asian Development Bank
Act, as amended, $115,306,000, to remain available until
expended.

contribution to the african development bank

For payment to the African Development Bank by the
Secretary of the Treasury, $2,037,000, for the United States
paid-in share of the increase in capital stock, to remain
available until expended.

limitation on callable capital subscriptions

The United States Governor of the African Development Bank
may subscribe without fiscal year limitation for the callable
capital portion of the United States share of such capital
stock in an amount not to exceed $31,919,000.

contribution to the african development fund

For the United States contribution by the Secretary of the
Treasury to the increase in resources of the African
Development Fund, $135,684,000, to remain available until
expended.

contribution to the international fund for agricultural development

For the United States contribution by the Secretary of the
Treasury to increase the resources of the International Fund
for Agricultural Development, $18,072,000, to remain
available until expended.

international organizations and programs

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 301 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and of
section 2 of the United Nations Environment Program
Participation Act of 1973, $333,400,000: Provided, That
section 307(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act shall not apply
to contributions to the United Nations Democracy Fund.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Ros-Lehtinen

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

Amendment offered by Ms. Ros-Lehtinen:
Page 72, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(increased by $20,000,000) (reduced by
$20,000,000)''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, June
20, 2007, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I want to begin by thanking Chairman Lowey, Mr. Wolf, Mr. Obey, and
Mr. Lewis for their great cooperation and working with me to find an
acceptable compromise on the important issues in this amendment. I am
grateful for their agreement to support the amendment text before us
today.
This amendment serves two basic purposes. First, it seeks to restore
funding for two initiatives: it restores funding for the U.N. Democracy
Fund at the administration's requested $14 million level, which had
been zeroed out in the committee report.
The Democracy Fund, an initiative proposed by President Bush in 2004,
increases cooperation between democratic countries and supports new and
transitional democracies. It has been successful in making grants to
programs in more than 100 countries around the world to support civil
education, voter registration, access to information, and democratic
dialogue.
In recent weeks, I have been working with the chairman of Foreign
Affairs, Chairman Lantos, and his staff to ensure that a $14 million
authorization for the Democracy Fund stays intact in preconference
meetings with the Senate on H.R. 1 and H.R. 982, the Advanced Democracy
Act.
I am glad that this amendment provides us with another opportunity to
continue our bipartisan support for this critical work. The amendment
also would restore $6 million out of the $10 million requested by the
administration for the U.N. Innovation and Entrepreneurship Initiative.
This initiative, modeled on the Democracy Fund, is designed as a
voluntarily funded, freestanding trust that will make technical
assistance grants to promote positive environments for business and
innovation around the world.
Second, in addition to restoring those deleted funds, this amendment
will strike $20 million from the proposed U.S. contributions to the
U.N. Development Program. The past 6 months have brought a series of
very serious revelations and questions about the UNDP activities in
North Korea, Mr. Chairman, a rogue regime under sanctions by the U.N.
Security Council.
While we appreciate the fact that the program has been terminated in
North Korea, there has not been sufficient investigation and
cooperation from UNDP in answering questions that bear on the
fundamental issues that are of national security interest to the United
States.

[[Page H6877]]

The $20 million cut proposed in my amendment will send a clear signal
about our demands and expectations for greater transparency and
accountability from the United Nations Development Program while also
continuing to make a substantial contribution to UNDP's core programs.
Again I thank my colleagues for their bipartisan support for this
important amendment.
Mrs. LOWEY. Would the gentlelady yield?
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I yield to the chairwoman.
Mrs. LOWEY. I understand the intent of this amendment, and we have
worked to craft an amendment we both can accept.
As you know, I believe that the United Nations Development Program is
a key partner in our efforts to address global poverty. Their programs
work to spread democracy, to address global HIV/AIDS, to improve the
environment, and to respond to natural disasters and crises. All of
these programs are critically important and they are working.
Because of their broad mandate, they often work under very difficult
circumstances, and it is their work in North Korea that has led to the
recent allegations of inadequate controls on funds to North Korea.
These are serious concerns and need to be addressed.
However, I want to point out to my colleagues that UNDP has reacted
swiftly to these concerns by suspending its program and closing the
office in North Korea. In addition, UNDP is working with its executive
board to put new accountability and transparency measures in place.
In light of congressional concerns that have been raised on both
sides of the aisle, I worked with the gentlelady to negotiate this
agreement which reduces UNDP resources in order to provide support to
the U.N. Democracy Fund and the U.N. Entrepreneurship Fund. I
appreciate the gentlewoman's interest in this issue and accept her
amendment.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairwoman of the
subcommittee, and I want to express my support for the bill and express
my appreciation specifically for the significant increases in funding
for global health issues, peacekeeping, and trade capacity building,
especially in Colombia. And I know that the chairlady shares the
frustration that was articulated by the preceding speaker, Mr. Olver,
on Darfur. We wish we could do far more than we are able to on the
horrific situation in Darfur.

{time} 1545

But I also want to express my support for the work of an
international nongovernmental organization, the International
Commission on Missing Persons, otherwise known as the ICMP. The ICMP is
an organization whose work in Bosnia, Iraq, Vietnam and the tsunami-
affected areas has brought relief to thousands of families with missing
relatives resulting from armed conflict and natural disaster. This
commission, which was established in 1996 from the Dayton Peace
Accords, has received U.S. Government support in the past and is widely
acclaimed throughout the international community. But is in desperate
need of funds in Iraq today.
I would strongly urge the committee to consider this organization for
possible congressional support in this year's conference or in future
appropriations.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank the gentleman for his passion. I know you're
concerned with so many issues in this bill. I appreciate your comments
and I look forward to continue working together.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I thank the gentlelady for her support.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the bill,
through page 95, line 9, be considered as read, printed in the Record,
and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman
from New York?
There was no objection.
The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:

TITLE VI--GENERAL PROVISIONS

compensation for united states executive directors to international
financial institutions

Sec. 601. (a) No funds appropriated by this Act may be made
as payment to any international financial institution while
the United States Executive Director to such institution is
compensated by the institution at a rate which, together with
whatever compensation such Director receives from the United
States, is in excess of the rate provided for an individual
occupying a position at level IV of the Executive Schedule
under section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, or while
any alternate United States Director to such institution is
compensated by the institution at a rate in excess of the
rate provided for an individual occupying a position at level
V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of title 5,
United States Code.
(b) For purposes of this section ``international financial
institutions'' are: the International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development, the Inter-American Development Bank, the
Asian Development Bank, the Asian Development Fund, the
African Development Bank, the African Development Fund, the
International Monetary Fund, the North American Development
Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development.

restrictions on voluntary contributions to united nations agencies

Sec. 602. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be
made available to pay any voluntary contribution of the
United States to the United Nations if the United Nations
implements or imposes any taxation on any United States
persons.

limitation on residence expenses

Sec. 603. Of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to title III of this Act, not to exceed $100,500
shall be for official residence expenses of the United States
Agency for International Development during the current
fiscal year: Provided, That appropriate steps shall be taken
to assure that, to the maximum extent possible, United
States-owned foreign currencies are utilized in lieu of
dollars.

unobligated balances report

Sec. 604. Any Department or Agency to which funds are
appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act shall
provide to the Committees on Appropriations a quarterly
accounting of cumulative balances by program, project, and
activity of the funds received by such Department or Agency
in this fiscal year or any previous fiscal year that remain
unobligated and unexpended.

limitation on representational allowances

Sec. 605. Of the funds appropriated or made available
pursuant to titles II through V of this Act, not to exceed
$250,000 shall be available for representation and
entertainment allowances, of which not to exceed $2,500 shall
be available for entertainment allowances, for the United
States Agency for International Development during the
current fiscal year: Provided, That no such entertainment
funds may be used for the purposes listed in section 647 of
this Act: Provided further, That appropriate steps shall be
taken to assure that, to the maximum extent possible, United
States-owned foreign currencies are utilized in lieu of
dollars: Provided further, That of the funds made available
by this Act for general costs of administering military
assistance and sales under the heading ``Foreign Military
Financing Program'', not to exceed $4,000 shall be available
for entertainment expenses and not to exceed $130,000 shall
be available for representation allowances: Provided further,
That of the funds made available by this Act under the
heading ``International Military Education and Training'',
not to exceed $55,000 shall be available for entertainment
allowances: Provided further, That of the funds made
available by this Act for the Inter-American Foundation, not
to exceed $2,000 shall be available for entertainment and
representation allowances: Provided further, That of the
funds made available by this Act for the Peace Corps, not to
exceed a total of $4,000 shall be available for entertainment
expenses: Provided further, That of the funds made available
by this Act under the heading ``Trade and Development
Agency'', not to exceed $4,000 shall be available for
representation and entertainment allowances: Provided
further, That of the funds made available by this Act under
the heading ``Millennium Challenge Corporation'', not to
exceed $115,000 shall be available for representation and
entertainment allowances.

prohibition on taxation of united states assistance

Sec. 606. (a) Prohibition on Taxation.--None of the funds
appropriated under titles II through V of this Act may be
made available to provide assistance for a foreign country
under a new bilateral agreement governing the terms and
conditions under which such assistance is to be provided
unless such agreement includes a provision stating that
assistance provided by the United States shall be exempt from
taxation, or reimbursed, by the foreign government, and the
Secretary of State shall expeditiously seek to negotiate
amendments to existing bilateral agreements, as necessary, to
conform with this requirement.

[[Page H6878]]

(b) Reimbursement of Foreign Taxes.--An amount equivalent
to 200 percent of the total taxes assessed during fiscal year
2008 on funds appropriated by this Act by a foreign
government or entity against commodities financed under
United States assistance programs for which funds are
appropriated by this Act, either directly or through
grantees, contractors and subcontractors shall be withheld
from obligation from funds appropriated for assistance for
fiscal year 2009 and allocated for the central government of
such country and for the West Bank and Gaza Program to the
extent that the Secretary of State certifies and reports in
writing to the Committees on Appropriations that such taxes
have not been reimbursed to the Government of the United
States.
(c) De Minimis Exception.--Foreign taxes of a de minimis
nature shall not be subject to the provisions of subsection
(b).
(d) Reprogramming of Funds.--Funds withheld from obligation
for each country or entity pursuant to subsection (b) shall
be reprogrammed for assistance to countries which do not
assess taxes on United States assistance or which have an
effective arrangement that is providing substantial
reimbursement of such taxes.
(e) Determinations.--
(1) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any
country or entity the Secretary of State determines--
(A) does not assess taxes on United States assistance or
which has an effective arrangement that is providing
substantial reimbursement of such taxes; or
(B) the foreign policy interests of the United States
outweigh the policy of this section to ensure that United
States assistance is not subject to taxation.
(2) The Secretary of State shall consult with the
Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days prior to
exercising the authority of this subsection with regard to
any country or entity.
(f) Implementation.--The Secretary of State shall issue
rules, regulations, or policy guidance, as appropriate, to
implement the prohibition against the taxation of assistance
contained in this section.
(g) Definitions.--As used in this section--
(1) the terms ``taxes'' and ``taxation'' refer to value
added taxes and customs duties imposed on commodities
financed with United States assistance for programs for which
funds are appropriated by this Act; and
(2) the term ``bilateral agreement'' refers to a framework
bilateral agreement between the Government of the United
States and the government of the country receiving assistance
that describes the privileges and immunities applicable to
United States foreign assistance for such country generally,
or an individual agreement between the Government of the
United States and such government that describes, among other
things, the treatment for tax purposes that will be accorded
the United States assistance provided under that agreement.

prohibition against direct funding for certain countries

Sec. 607. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended
to finance directly any assistance or reparations to Cuba,
Libya, North Korea, Iran, or Syria: Provided, That for
purposes of this section, the prohibition on obligations or
expenditures shall include direct loans, credits, insurance
and guarantees of the Export-Import Bank or its agents:
Provided further, That for purposes of this section, the
prohibition shall not include activities of the Overseas
Private Investment Corporation in Libya: Provided further,
That the prohibition shall not include direct loans, credits,
insurance and guarantees made available by the Export-Import
Bank or its agents for or in Libya: Provided further, That
the prohibition shall not apply to funds made available under
the heading ``INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION AND TRAINING''
for Libya.

military coups

Sec. 608. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available pursuant to titles II through V of this Act shall
be obligated or expended to finance directly any assistance
to the government of any country whose duly elected head of
government is deposed by military coup or decree: Provided,
That assistance may be resumed to such government if the
President determines and certifies to the Committees on
Appropriations that subsequent to the termination of
assistance a democratically elected government has taken
office: Provided further, That the provisions of this section
shall not apply to assistance to promote democratic elections
or public participation in democratic processes: Provided
further, That funds made available pursuant to the previous
provisos shall be subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

transfer authority

Sec. 609. (a) Department of State and Broadcasting Board of
Governors.--Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made
available for the current fiscal year for the Department of
State under title I of this Act may be transferred between
such appropriations, but no such appropriation, except as
otherwise specifically provided, shall be increased by more
than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That not to
exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made available for the
current fiscal year for the Broadcasting Board of Governors
under title I of this Act may be transferred between such
appropriations, but no such appropriation, except as
otherwise specifically provided, shall be increased by more
than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided further, That
any transfer pursuant to this section shall be treated as a
reprogramming of funds under section 615 (a) and (b) of this
Act and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure
except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that
section.
(b) Export Financing Transfer Authorities.--Not to exceed 5
percent of any appropriation other than for administrative
expenses made available for fiscal year 2008, for programs
under title II of this Act may be transferred between such
appropriations for use for any of the purposes, programs, and
activities for which the funds in such receiving account may
be used, but no such appropriation, except as otherwise
specifically provided, shall be increased by more than 25
percent by any such transfer: Provided, That the exercise of
such authority shall be subject to the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.
(c)(1) Limitation on Transfers Between Agencies.--None of
the funds made available under titles II through V of this
Act may be transferred to any department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United States Government, except
pursuant to a transfer made by, or transfer authority
provided in, this Act or any other appropriation Act.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), in addition to transfers
made by, or authorized elsewhere in, this Act, funds
appropriated by this Act to carry out the purposes of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be allocated or
transferred to agencies of the United States Government
pursuant to the provisions of sections 109, 610, and 632 of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
(d) Transfers Between Accounts.--None of the funds made
available under titles II through V of this Act may be
obligated under an appropriation account to which they were
not appropriated, except for transfers specifically provided
for in this Act, unless the President, not less than 5 days
prior to the exercise of any authority contained in the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to transfer funds, consults
with and provides a written policy justification to the
Committees on Appropriations.
(e) Audit of Inter-Agency Transfers.--Any agreement for the
transfer or allocation of funds appropriated by this Act, or
prior Acts, entered into between the United States Agency for
International Development and another agency of the United
States Government under the authority of section 632(a) of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 or any comparable
provision of law, shall expressly provide that the Office of
the Inspector General for the agency receiving the transfer
or allocation of such funds shall perform periodic program
and financial audits of the use of such funds: Provided, That
funds transferred under such authority may be made available
for the cost of such audits.

commercial leasing of defense articles

Sec. 610. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations, the authority of section 23(a)
of the Arms Export Control Act may be used to provide
financing to Israel, Egypt and NATO and major non-NATO allies
for the procurement by leasing (including leasing with an
option to purchase) of defense articles from United States
commercial suppliers, not including Major Defense Equipment
(other than helicopters and other types of aircraft having
possible civilian application), if the President determines
that there are compelling foreign policy or national security
reasons for those defense articles being provided by
commercial lease rather than by government-to-government sale
under such Act.

availability of funds

Sec. 611. (a) No part of any appropriation contained in
this Act shall remain available for obligation after the
expiration of the current fiscal year unless expressly so
provided in this Act.
(b) Funds appropriated for the purposes of chapters 1, 8,
11, and 12 of part I, section 667, chapters 4, 5, 6, 8, and 9
of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, section 23
of the Arms Export Control Act, and funds provided under the
heading ``ASSISTANCE FOR EASTERN EUROPE AND THE BALTIC
STATES'', shall remain available for an additional four years
from the date on which the availability of such funds would
otherwise have expired, if such funds are initially obligated
before the expiration of their respective periods of
availability contained in this Act: Provided, That,
notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, any funds
made available for the purposes of chapter 1 of part I and
chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
which are allocated or obligated for cash disbursements in
order to address balance of payments or economic policy
reform objectives, shall remain available until expended.

limitation on assistance to countries in default

Sec. 612. No part of any appropriation provided under
titles II through V in this Act shall be used to furnish
assistance to the government of any country which is in
default during a period in excess of one calendar year in
payment to the United States of principal or interest on any
loan made to the government of such country by the United
States pursuant to a program for which funds are appropriated
under this Act unless the President determines, following

[[Page H6879]]

consultations with the Committees on Appropriations, that
assistance to such country is in the national interest of the
United States.

commerce and trade

Sec. 613. (a) None of the funds appropriated or made
available pursuant to titles II through V of this Act for
direct assistance and none of the funds otherwise made
available to the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private
Investment Corporation shall be obligated or expended to
finance any loan, any assistance or any other financial
commitments for establishing or expanding production of any
commodity for export by any country other than the United
States, if the commodity is likely to be in surplus on world
markets at the time the resulting productive capacity is
expected to become operative and if the assistance will cause
substantial injury to United States producers of the same,
similar, or competing commodity: Provided, That such
prohibition shall not apply to the Export-Import Bank if in
the judgment of its Board of Directors the benefits to
industry and employment in the United States are likely to
outweigh the injury to United States producers of the same,
similar, or competing commodity, and the Chairman of the
Board so notifies the Committees on Appropriations.
(b) None of the funds appropriated by this or any other Act
to carry out chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 shall be available for any testing or breeding
feasibility study, variety improvement or introduction,
consultancy, publication, conference, or training in
connection with the growth or production in a foreign country
of an agricultural commodity for export which would compete
with a similar commodity grown or produced in the United
States: Provided, That this subsection shall not prohibit--
(1) activities designed to increase food security in
developing countries where such activities will not have a
significant impact on the export of agricultural commodities
of the United States; or
(2) research activities intended primarily to benefit
American producers.

surplus commodities

Sec. 614. The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the
United States Executive Directors of the International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development, the International
Development Association, the International Finance
Corporation, the Inter-American Development Bank, the
International Monetary Fund, the Asian Development Bank, the
Inter-American Investment Corporation, the North American
Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, the African Development Bank, and the African
Development Fund to use the voice and vote of the United
States to oppose any assistance by these institutions, using
funds appropriated or made available pursuant to titles II
through V of this Act, for the production or extraction of
any commodity or mineral for export, if it is in surplus on
world markets and if the assistance will cause substantial
injury to United States producers of the same, similar, or
competing commodity.

reprogramming notification requirements

Sec. 615. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act,
or in prior appropriations Acts to the agencies and
departments funded by this Act that remain available for
obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 2008, or provided
from any accounts in the Treasury of the United States
derived by the collection of fees or of currency reflows or
other offsetting collections, or made available by transfer,
to the agencies and departments funded by this Act, shall be
available for obligation or expenditure through a
reprogramming of funds that: (1) creates new programs; (2)
eliminates a program, project, or activity; (3) increases
funds or personnel by any means for any project or activity
for which funds have been denied or restricted; (4) relocates
an office or employees; (5) closes or opens a mission or
post; (6) reorganizes or renames offices; (7) reorganizes
programs or activities; or (8) contracts out or privatizes
any functions or activities presently performed by Federal
employees; unless the Committees on Appropriations are
notified 15 days in advance of such reprogramming of funds.
(b) For the purposes of providing the executive branch with
the necessary administrative flexibility, none of the funds
provided under title I of this Act, or provided under
previous appropriations Acts to the agencies or department
funded under title I of this Act that remain available for
obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 2008, or provided
from any accounts in the Treasury of the United States
derived by the collection of fees available to the agencies
or department funded by title I of this Act, shall be
available for obligation or expenditure for activities,
programs, or projects through a reprogramming of funds in
excess of $750,000 or ten percent, whichever is less, that:
(1) augments existing programs, projects, or activities; (2)
reduces by 10 percent funding for any existing program,
project, or activity, or numbers of personnel by ten percent
as approved by Congress; or (3) results from any general
savings, including savings from a reduction in personnel,
which would result in a change in existing programs,
activities, or projects as approved by Congress; unless the
Committees on Appropriations are notified 15 days in advance
of such reprogramming of funds.
(c) For the purposes of providing the executive branch with
the necessary administrative flexibility, none of the funds
made available in this Act for the headings ``CHILD SURVIVAL
AND HEALTH PROGRAMS FUND'', ``DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE'',
``INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND PROGRAMS'', ``TRADE AND
DEVELOPMENT AGENCY'', ``INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT'', ``ANDEAN COUNTERDRUG INITIATIVE'',
``ASSISTANCE FOR EASTERN EUROPE AND THE BALTIC STATES'',
``ASSISTANCE FOR THE INDEPENDENT STATES OF THE FORMER SOVIET
UNION'', ``ECONOMIC SUPPORT FUND'', ``GLOBAL HIV/AIDS
INITIATIVE'', ``PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS'', ``CAPITAL
INVESTMENT FUND'', ``OPERATING EXPENSES OF THE UNITED STATES
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT'', ``OPERATING EXPENSES
OF THE UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL'', ``NONPROLIFERATION, ANTI-
TERRORISM, DEMINING AND RELATED PROGRAMS'', ``MILLENNIUM
CHALLENGE CORPORATION'' (by country only), ``FOREIGN MILITARY
FINANCING PROGRAM'', ``INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION AND
TRAINING'', ``PEACE CORPS'', and ``MIGRATION AND REFUGEE
ASSISTANCE'', shall be available for obligation for
activities, programs, projects, type of materiel assistance,
countries, or other operations not justified or in excess of
the amount justified to the Committees on Appropriations for
obligation under any of these specific headings unless the
Committees on Appropriations are notified 15 days in advance:
Provided, That the President shall not enter into any
commitment of funds appropriated for the purposes of section
23 of the Arms Export Control Act for the provision of major
defense equipment, other than conventional ammunition, or
other major defense items defined to be aircraft, ships,
missiles, or combat vehicles, not previously justified to
Congress or 20 percent in excess of the quantities justified
to Congress unless the Committees on Appropriations are
notified 15 days in advance of such commitment: Provided
further, That this paragraph shall not apply to any
reprogramming for an activity, program, or project for which
funds are appropriated under title III or title IV, of this
Act of less than 10 percent of the amount previously
justified to the Congress for obligation for such activity,
program, or project for the current fiscal year.
(d) The requirements of this section or any similar
provision of this Act or any other Act, including any prior
Act requiring notification in accordance with the regular
notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations,
may be waived if failure to do so would pose a substantial
risk to human health or welfare: Provided, That in case of
any such waiver, notification to the Congress, or the
appropriate Congressional committees, shall be provided as
early as practicable, but in no event later than 3 days after
taking the action to which such notification requirement was
applicable, in the context of the circumstances necessitating
such waiver: Provided further, That any notification provided
pursuant to such a waiver shall contain an explanation of the
emergency circumstances.

limitation on availability of funds for international organizations and
programs

Sec. 616. Subject to the regular notification procedures of
the Committees on Appropriations, funds appropriated under
titles II through V of this Act or any previously enacted Act
making appropriations for foreign operations, export
financing, and related programs, which are returned or not
made available for organizations and programs because of the
implementation of section 307(a) of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961, shall remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2009.

independent states of the former soviet union

Sec. 617. (a) None of the funds appropriated under the
heading ``ASSISTANCE FOR THE INDEPENDENT STATES OF THE FORMER
SOVIET UNION'' shall be made available for assistance for a
government of an Independent State of the former Soviet Union
if that government directs any action in violation of the
territorial integrity or national sovereignty of any other
Independent State of the former Soviet Union, such as those
violations included in the Helsinki Final Act: Provided, That
such funds may be made available without regard to the
restriction in this subsection if the President determines
that to do so is in the national security interest of the
United States.
(b) None of the funds appropriated under the heading
``ASSISTANCE FOR THE INDEPENDENT STATES OF THE FORMER SOVIET
UNION'' shall be made available for any state to enhance its
military capability: Provided, That this restriction does not
apply to demilitarization, demining or nonproliferation
programs.
(c) Funds appropriated under the heading ``ASSISTANCE FOR
THE INDEPENDENT STATES OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION'' for the
Russian Federation, Armenia, and Uzbekistan shall be subject
to the regular notification procedures of the Committees on
Appropriations.
(d) Funds made available in this Act for assistance for the
Independent States of the former Soviet Union shall be
subject to the provisions of section 117 (relating to
environment and natural resources) of the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961.

[[Page H6880]]

(e) In issuing new task orders, entering into contracts, or
making grants, with funds appropriated by this Act or prior
appropriations Acts under the heading ``ASSISTANCE FOR THE
INDEPENDENT STATES OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION'' and under
comparable headings in prior appropriations Acts, for
projects or activities that have as one of their primary
purposes the fostering of private sector development, the
Coordinator for United States Assistance to Europe and
Eurasia and the implementing agency shall encourage the
participation of and give significant weight to contractors
and grantees who propose investing a significant amount of
their own resources (including volunteer services and in-kind
contributions) in such projects and activities.

prohibition on funding for abortions and involuntary sterilization

Sec. 618. None of the funds made available to carry out
part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may
be used to pay for the performance of abortions as a method
of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to
practice abortions. None of the funds made available to carry
out part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended,
may be used to pay for the performance of involuntary
sterilization as a method of family planning or to coerce or
provide any financial incentive to any person to undergo
sterilizations. None of the funds made available to carry out
part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may
be used to pay for any biomedical research which relates in
whole or in part, to methods of, or the performance of,
abortions or involuntary sterilization as a means of family
planning. None of the funds made available to carry out part
I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, may be
obligated or expended for any country or organization if the
President certifies that the use of these funds by any such
country or organization would violate any of the above
provisions related to abortions and involuntary
sterilizations.

STATEMENT

Sec. 619. (a) Funds provided in this Act for the following
accounts shall be made available for programs and countries
in the amounts contained in the respective tables included in
the report accompanying this Act:
``ECONOMIC SUPPORT FUND'';
``ASSISTANCE FOR EASTERN EUROPE AND THE BALTIC STATES'';
``ASSISTANCE FOR THE INDEPENDENT STATES OF THE FORMER
SOVIET UNION'';
``ANDEAN COUNTERDRUG INITIATIVE'';
``NONPROLIFERATION, ANTI-TERRORISM, DEMINING AND RELATED
PROGRAMS'';
``FOREIGN MILITARY FINANCING PROGRAM''; and
``INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND PROGRAMS''.
(b) Any proposed increases or decreases to the amounts
contained in such tables in the accompanying report shall be
subject to the regular notification procedures of the
Committees on Appropriations and section 634A of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961.

special notification requirements

Sec. 620. None of the funds appropriated under titles II
through V of this Act shall be obligated or expended for
assistance for Liberia, Serbia, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Pakistan, or
Cambodia except as provided through the regular notification
procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Moore of Wisconsin

Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment offered by Ms. Moore of Wisconsin:
In section 620 of the bill (relating to special
notification requirements), strike ``Liberia,''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, June
20, 2007, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) and a Member
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wisconsin.
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My amendment would repeal a section of U.S. law that requires a
report to Congress 15 days before any U.S. assistance can be obligated
for Liberia. The obligating agency, whether State or USAID, would be
required to submit this paperwork in addition to information they may
have already provided in their annual budget documents.
I should note that the only other countries that are currently
subjected to this requirement are Sudan, Zimbabwe, Serbia, Pakistan and
Cambodia.
Mr. Chairman, as you and many of my colleagues know, for over 20
years, the people of Liberia have been subjected to the ravages of
poverty, conflict, coups, and corruption. As one observer put it,
``seldom has a country sunk as far as Liberia did under the leadership
of Charles Taylor and his predecessors.'' I do think I need to recount
the number of casualties from wars, including the last civil war which
only a few years ago with the assistance of U.S. leadership, which
killed a quarter of a million of the country's 3 million people and
displaced most of the rest.
In 2005, the people of the Republic of Liberia had the opportunity to
go to the polls, some lining up for many hours, and open a new chapter
in that country's tortuous history. When it was all said and done,
Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf was elected President, becoming the first female
president of any African country. In recognition of this historic
election and the tremendous opportunity presented by these elections,
last March, the House welcomed President Johnson-Sirleaf on her visit
to the U.S. during which she addressed Congress, the U.N. Security
Council, and met with President Bush.
In the year and a half since then, President Johnson-Sirleaf has been
busy trying to rebuild the nation's education and health system,
devastated by years of war, oversee the deactivation and reintegration
of the old security forces and ex-combatants, and accommodate the
return of thousands who fled the country during the wars.
Today, I am offering a very small and simple amendment which I
believe would help make a difference in helping President Johnson-
Sirleaf succeed in the monumental task--and it is monumental--that lays
before her.
My amendment would repeal a section of U.S. law that requires a
report to Congress 15 days before any U.S. assistance can be obligated
for Liberia for any purpose. The obligating agency (whether State or
USAID) must submit paperwork for all obligated funds in addition to any
information they may have already provided to Congress about these
projects in the annual budget documents. I should note the only other
countries that are currently subjected to this requirement are Sudan,
Zimbabwe, Serbia, Pakistan, and Cambodia.
According to State Department and USAID officials, such requirements
impose reporting, program review, and other requirements that, in some
cases, substantially slow the disbursement of reconstruction assistance
to Liberia. This requirement was placed on Liberia funds beginning in
the early 1990's and were put in place to give Congress the ability to
exercise additional oversight when the ruthless and corrupt Charles
Taylor and his predecessors ran Liberia and when U.S. assistance was
relatively small. From 1996-2003, U.S. assistance ranged from $3 to $6
million.
As you know, in light of the recent elections and optimism about the
future of Liberia, Congress in the last few years has significantly
increased U.S. assistance to Liberia. However, some have expressed
concerns, including President Johnson Sirleaf, that the current laws
notification requirements are delaying the receipt of these funds for
important projects to help rebuild Liberia as it emerges from conflict.
According to the State Department, these delays can be as long as 4 to
6 weeks and dependent on the Appropriations Committee being available
to receive them--such as in the middle of the August recess. Given
Liberia's 6-month rainy season (May to October) when much work cannot
be done on many projects, these delays could push projects on the
ground much farther behind schedule in reality.
My amendment would prevent U.S. assistance from Liberia from being
subjected to these additional reporting requirements in FY 2008. The
State Department supports removing Liberia, noting that it will speed
up the obligation of U.S. funds to this important country. The State
Department notes, as do I, that these reporting requirements have
outlived their usefulness with respect to Liberia. In the past, when we
were dealing with the regime of Charles Taylor, they were absolutely
useful and necessary.
Today, as Congress continues to express its support to President
Johnson-Sirleaf and the people of Liberia, including $100 million more
in aid in the bill before the House, let us support efforts to speed
up--and likewise remove obstacles that would hinder--the establishment
in Liberia of social and economic conditions that foster reintegration,
economic growth, and rebuilding of infrastructure--including access to
basic education and health services.
In these crucial but surprisingly fast moving first few months of
President Sirleaf Johnson's administration, it is critical that we not
only support her with words of encouragement, but remove bureaucratic
obstacles that help prevent needed aid from being timely delivered to
implement reforms and show that a democratically elected government can
meet the people's needs.
Removal of Liberia would not set a new precedent. Over the years. the
following countries have been under and then removed from this
reporting requirement: Somalia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Haiti,
Colombia, Panama, Peru, Nicaragua, Jordan, and Uganda, just to name a
few. It can hardly be argued that Congress exercises less oversight

[[Page H6881]]

over assistance to those countries now than it did when they were
subject to the obligation reporting requirement. Additionally, the FY
2006 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill that was passed by the
House removed Liberia from this provision.
Why would we want to delay development assistance such as education
funds to a country where more than half of the people today cannot read
or write? Where male life expectancy at birth is slightly under 38
years and for females, slightly under 42 years. Infant mortality: 157
infants per 1,000 live births die before there first birthday.
I certainly appreciate the need for Congress to retain and exercise
oversight over these funds to ensure that they are being properly used,
just as we do with the other nations receiving under this bill. Indeed,
most of the countries receiving funding in this bill are not subjected
to this reporting requirement. Once removed from these requires, the
same regular Congressional Notification process would apply to Liberia
that applies to all other countries.
Let me be clear. Removing this requirement does not mean that Liberia
is somehow a perfect country without problems or challenges. In fact,
removing this requirement would recognize those challenges and serve to
remove one more obstacle to ensure that this country and its new
leaders have every opportunity to succeed.
As President Sirleaf-Johnson said in her address before Congress last
March: ``They (the Liberian people) are counting on me and my
administration to create the conditions that will guarantee the
realization of their dreams. We must not betray their trust. All the
children I meet, when I ask what they want most, say, ``I want to
learn.'' ``I want to go to school.'' ``I want an education.'' We must
not betray their trust.
I know that the gentlewoman from New York, the chairperson of the
subcommittee, Ms. Lowey has been keenly aware of this issue. I
certainly appreciate the efforts made by her, her staff, and Members of
the Committee as they put together this very important bill and note
the Committee's appropriate role in oversight and ensuring that funds
are properly spent.
I would like to yield to the distinguished gentleman from North
Carolina, Mr. David Price, for 2 minutes.
(Mr. PRICE of North Carolina asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of
Representative Moore's amendment striking the requirement of
congressional notification for foreign assistance to Liberia.
I joined Ms. Moore on a recent delegation to Liberia under the
auspices of the House Democracy Assistance Commission, which has an
ongoing partnership with the Liberian Congress. We are working to
support the new democratic government in Liberia, under the leadership
of President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, a government that is attempting to
lift Liberia from the wreckage of its recent history of civil war and
dictatorship.
We met with President Sirleaf, and she told us that the window of
opportunity for this democratic government to demonstrate progress is
brief. Liberia is facing enormous challenges: intractable poverty, an
unemployment rate of 85 percent, crumbling infrastructure, and a public
health crisis. The Liberian government simply must find a way to
deliver significant advances if it is to convince its citizens that
democracy is a viable option.
Our foreign assistance is critical to helping President Sirleaf show
rapid progress. It is supporting the development of the economy, the
strengthening of the government, the provision of basic services like
electricity, and the reintegration of civil war combatants into
productive roles in society.
But the biggest hindrance to our assistance efforts in Liberia is an
outdated notification requirement that sets up a series of bureaucratic
hurdles, delaying the delivery of our aid, often by several months.
With time so critical in accomplishing progress, we cannot afford these
delays. I urge my colleagues to support Representative Moore's well-
designed and well-considered amendment to eliminate this outdated
requirement and to give Liberia the chance it deserves to succeed.
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Thank you so much, sir.
I just want to acknowledge that this administration has done a great
deal for Liberia. Certainly Chairwoman Lowey has been exceptional.
Liberia is a huge priority for her. I noted that my colleague, Ms.
Sheila Jackson-Lee, earlier, Mr. Chairman, added money to this bill,
and as my colleague, Mr. Price, has said, this will make or break, I
think, this administration that we are all so hopeful of the beautiful
democracy that is budding in Liberia. This would be a precedent-setting
form of assistance that will cost us no extra money.
Thank you so much.
I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. I
agree with the intention of this amendment and thank my friend for
raising this very important issue. As you know, the subcommittee agrees
with you that Liberia should be a priority. We support the efforts
currently under way by President Johnson Sirleaf to move her country
out of poverty. We provided a total of $40 million in the fiscal year
2007 supplemental and in this bill we provide a total of $106.5 million
for Liberia.
We look forward to continuing to work with the gentlewoman and others
in Congress to support Liberia. I appreciate the gentlewoman's interest
in this issue and would be happy to accept this amendment.
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Thank you so much.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

definition of program, project, and activity

Sec. 621. For the purpose of titles II through V of this
Act ``program, project, and activity'' shall be defined at
the appropriations Act account level and shall include all
appropriations and authorizations Acts funding directives,
ceilings, and limitations with the exception that for the
following accounts: ``ECONOMIC SUPPORT FUND'' and ``FOREIGN
MILITARY FINANCING PROGRAM'', ``program, project, and
activity'' shall also be considered to include country,
regional, and central program level funding within each such
account; for the development assistance accounts of the
United States Agency for International Development ``program,
project, and activity'' shall also be considered to include
central, country, regional, and program level funding, either
as:
(1) justified to the Congress; or
(2) allocated by the executive branch in accordance with a
report, to be provided to the Committees on Appropriations
within 30 days of the enactment of this Act, as required by
section 653(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

child survival and health activities

Sec. 622. Up to $13,500,000 of the funds made available by
this Act in title III for assistance under the heading
``CHILD SURVIVAL AND HEALTH PROGRAMS FUND'' account, may be
used to reimburse United States Government agencies, agencies
of State governments, institutions of higher learning, and
private and voluntary organizations for the full cost of
individuals (including for the personal services of such
individuals) detailed or assigned to, or contracted by, as
the case may be, the United States Agency for International
Development for the purpose of carrying out activities under
that heading: Provided, That up to $3,500,000 of the funds
made available by this Act for assistance under the heading
``DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE'' may be used to reimburse such
agencies, institutions, and organizations for such costs of
such individuals carrying out other development assistance
activities: Provided further, That funds appropriated by
titles III and IV of this Act that are made available for
assistance for child survival activities or disease programs
including activities relating to research on, and the
prevention, treatment and control of, HIV/AIDS may be made
available notwithstanding any other provision of law except
for the provisions under the heading ``CHILD SURVIVAL AND
HEALTH PROGRAMS FUND'' and the United States Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (117
Stat. 711; 22 U.S.C. 7601 et seq.), as amended: Provided
further, That of the funds appropriated under title III and
IV of this Act, not less than $441,000,000 shall be made
available for family planning/reproductive health: Provided
further, That, in order to prevent unintended pregnancies,
abortions, and the transmission of sexually transmitted
infections, including HIV/AIDS, no contract or grant which
includes funding for the provision of contraceptives in
developing countries, shall be denied to any nongovernmental
organization solely on the basis of the policy contained in
the President's March 28, 2001, Memorandum to the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development with respect to providing contraceptives in
developing countries, or any comparable administration policy
regarding the provision of contraceptives.

[[Page H6882]]

Amendment Offered by Mrs. Lowey

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment offered by Mrs. Lowey:
Page 97, beginning on line 10, strike ``: Provided
further,'' and all that follows through line 21 and insert
the following: ``: Provided further, That, in order to
prevent unintended pregnancies, abortions, and the
transmission of sexually transmitted infections, including
HIV/AIDS, no contract or grant for the exclusive purpose of
providing donated contraceptives in developing countries
shall be denied to any nongovernmental organization solely on
the basis of the policy contained in the President's March
28, 2001, Memorandum to the Administrator of the United
States Agency for International Development with respect to
providing contraceptives in developing countries, or any
comparable administration policy regarding the provision of
contraceptives.''.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, June
20, 2007, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) each will control 22\1/2\ minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, under current law, the global gag rule,
also known as the Mexico City policy, prohibits foreign nongovernmental
organizations, NGOs, from receiving any U.S. assistance unless they
agree not to use their own funds to perform or refer patients for
abortion or to even advocate the legalization of abortion. This policy
applies even when abortion is illegal in a country or when NGOs promote
the legalization of abortion for cases of rape and incest.
The bill before us keeps the global gag rule intact with one
important exception. It would allow for the provision of
contraceptives, not direct funding, the provision of contraceptives to
foreign NGOs to help reduce abortion, unintended pregnancy and the
spread of HIV/AIDS.
Let me repeat that. The intent of the bill is to provide
international NGOs U.S.-donated contraceptives, not funds for millions
of men and women who desperately need them. The provision provides
absolutely no assistance for abortion. It is strictly prohibited in 10
other sections of this bill.
While I have made clear my intent to allow only for the provision of
donated contraceptives, some of my colleagues have brought to my
attention concerns that the language as currently written could be
interpreted more broadly than intended. Therefore, to make it
absolutely clear to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who may
have concerns about the language, I am offering this amendment to my
own bill to clarify the existing language by narrowing the provision in
question by replacing it with the following language beginning on page
97, line 10 of the bill:
``That, in order to prevent unintended pregnancies, abortions, and
the transmission of sexually transmitted infections, including HIV/
AIDS, no contract or grant award exclusively for the purpose of
providing donated contraceptives in developing countries shall be
denied to any nongovernmental organization solely on the basis of the
policy contained in the President's March 28, 2001 Memorandum to the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development
with respect to providing contraceptives in developing countries, or
any comparable administration policy regarding the provision of
contraceptives.''
This amendment, which replaces the current provision in the bill with
the one I just read, can leave no doubt in any reasonable individual's
mind that the provision will provide contraceptives. It will not
provide funding to foreign NGOs. In fact, this amendment would advance
the Bush administration's stated goal of the Mexico City policy ``to
make abortion more rare'' and protect women and children.
Filling the unmet need for contraceptives could prevent 52 million
unwanted pregnancies, an estimated 29 million abortions, 142,000
pregnancy-related deaths, and 505,000 children from losing their
mothers in just 1 year. These are statistics. How much more evidence do
my colleagues need to be convinced that contraception reduces abortion,
saves lives? It is simply not enough to say that you support family
planning as long as the current restrictions remain in law, denying
millions of the poorest men and women around the world access to
contraceptives.
In my judgment, support for my amendment represents a good-faith
effort to find common ground on this issue. I really do hope that we
can all agree that voting against family planning and the provision of
contraceptives, which my colleague from New Jersey will ask you to do
in a later amendment, and against the opportunity to provide more than
200 million men and women in developing countries with access to
contraceptives is the most extreme vote any of us can take.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the Lowey amendment because
it does not address the underlying problem. Whether we support pro-
abortion organizations through cash donations or items of cash value,
the result is the same. The amendment before us today attempts to
undermine the Mexico City policy. The Mexico City policy exists to draw
a bright line between U.S. family planning policy and abortion.
However, it appears that there are some out there who wish to blur this
line. Mr. Chairman, a blurred line is what leads to coercive abortions
and forced sterilizations.
The Mexico City policy is critical for several reasons. First, money
is fungible. Every U.S. tax dollar or commodity that goes to an
abortion provider frees up funds to pay for more abortions and more
pro-abortion lobbying. Secondly, our population grantees are seen as
representatives of the United States in the countries in which we
operate. When organizations prominently associated with United States
family planning programs perform and promote abortions, people in these
countries logically associate these activities with the United States.
It is important to note that this policy does not in any way reduce
funds for family planning. As this chart shows, before Smith-Stupak,
there are $441 million for international family planning, including
contraceptive commodities. After Smith-Stupak, there will still be $441
million for international family planning, including contraceptive
commodities. It simply requires that any foreign nongovernmental
organizations that receive taxpayer dollars agree not to perform or
actively promote abortions.

{time} 1600

I urge my colleagues to oppose the Lowey amendment, support the
Smith-Stupak amendment to restore the Mexico City policy and to protect
the taxpayers' rights to neither directly nor indirectly fund abortion.
Mrs. LOWEY. It is such a pleasure for me to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to
the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I thank the gentlelady.
I just want to make a comment. The money will not change; there is
not going be an increase or a decrease with regard to the amendment.
This is about where the money is going to go, and there are 20
countries at least where we are not able to get contraceptives to women
and men in these countries who need it. This is not about increase or
decrease. This is about getting the money to where it needs to be.
The gentleman before me stated, how can we support coercive
abortions. There are many prolife Republicans and prolife Democrats who
voted for trade with China, to increase investment in China. We all
don't have to rehash what China does with their pro- abortion policy.
So the coercive argument needs to at least be consistent.
I just want to share with my friends, I am a prolife Democrat, but I
believe that this will reduce the number of

[[Page H6883]]

abortions around the world. This is the only way to do it.
The example I want to share with my colleagues is Ghana, where
abortion is illegal. The oldest and the largest family planning
organization in Ghana previously provided a third of the contraceptives
in the nation with no abortion services. It has received no U.S.
assistance for family planning, which has decreased access to
contraceptives by 56 percent.
This has led to an increase of almost 500 abortions in Ghana because
we were not providing prevention. The abortion debate in the 21st
century needs to be about prevention. That is exactly what this bill
does, this amendment does, and what Ms. Lowey is trying to do.
I also want to share with our colleagues, because we seem to get
mixed information, prevention and family planning does reduce the
number of abortions. We have many countries where we have implemented
this, and it has worked.
In the last two decades, in the last two decades, there have been
significant declines in abortion rates in a number of countries like
Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Chile, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia,
Romania, Russia and Turkey. In Russia the abortion rate declined by 61
percent between 1988 and 2001 because of an increase of 74 percent of
preventive and contraceptive use.
We know prevention works. If you want to reduce abortion, we need to
provide the prevention. Mrs. Lowey just went to great lengths to say we
are just shipping the product. This is not money; this is not funds. We
are going to ship the product, and then those organizations will be
able to take the money they save and buy more contraceptives, not
provide abortion, especially in these countries where abortion is
already illegal.
I want to support the amendment from the Chair.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, the Lowey amendment reiterates the unambiguous
intention of the underlying language in the bill that Mr. Stupak and I
will seek to strike later on, that, if enacted, provides in-kind U.S.
taxpayer assistance to pro-abortion organizations around the world.
That's what's happening here, nothing more and nothing less.
Prolife Members, especially some of my colleagues on the other side
of the aisle, know and fully understand that in-kind contributions are
of no less value than money. In-kind or cash, it is a distinction
without a difference.
The intended recipients of the Lowey amendment are precisely those
pro- abortion organizations that have refused to divest themselves of
abortion and agree to the Mexico City provisions. The Mexico City
policy, separates family planning from abortion. The Mexico City policy
helps to ensure that foreign nongovernment organizations that want U.S.
grants, be they in the form of cash or in-kind commodities
contraceptives, only engage themselves in family planning, as
advertised.
It stands to reason, if we support pro-abortion organizations, unborn
children and their mothers, and the laws that today protect them, will
be put into jeopardy; and the violence of abortion will increase and
not be diminished.
Let me just note that neither the Mexico City policy, nor the
amendment that Mr. Stupak and I will offer today, reduces family
planning by so much as a penny. It simply strikes the language in the
bill that carves out an exception to the Mexico City policy for who?
The pro-abortion organizations.
As a matter of fact, since the restoration of the Mexico City policy,
several countries, including Ethiopia, DR Congo, Nigeria, Uganda,
Haiti, Pakistan, have gotten huge increases in contraceptives and
family planning assistance. Ethiopia, for example, went from $4.9
million to $19.5 million in 2007 under the Mexico City policy, almost a
300 percent increase.
Congo went from $1 million to $9 million. Pakistan for 1.4 to 16.5.
U.S. funding to Nigeria and Uganda doubled while Haiti tripled. USAID
has made it clear that it targets what its analysts say is unmet need.
Even Ghana has seen its average annual contraception shipment rise,
from $1.5 million in calendar years 1998-2001 to $2.3 million for
calendar years 2002-2003.
Under the Mexico City policy, the U.S. has remained the largest donor
nation by far to international family planning. We just insist and
direct that those funds are used in a way and go to the groups that are
about family planning and are not double hatted, trying to enable
abortionists and abortion lobbyists overseas.
I would point out, as Mrs. Lowey stated earlier when she talked about
lobbying, the Mexico City policy, I have a copy for anybody to read,
makes it very clear that when it comes to lobbying, we are only talking
about lobbying for abortion as a method for birth control. Exempted
explicitly, unlike what she said earlier, are rape, incest and life-of-
the-mother provision.
I hope she will correct the record. It is clearly false.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.
Mr. LANGEVIN. I thank the gentlelady for yielding for the purpose of
engaging in a colloquy with Chairwoman Lowey and the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Cuellar).
Madam Chairman, thank you for engaging in this discussion to clarify
the language related to international family planning and abortion
restrictions in the bill. I understand that you have included a
provision in the underlying bill that makes certain exemptions for
contraceptives from the Mexico City policy.
I further understand that the intent of this provision is to allow
international nongovernmental organizations, otherwise known as NGOs,
to receive U.S.-donated contraceptives for distribution to the poorest
men and women in the poorest regions of the world.
As the chairwoman knows, I do not support providing direct funding to
international NGOs that do not adhere to the Mexico City policy. I have
concerns that the language, as it is currently drafted, could be
interpreted more broadly than intended and could be construed to permit
not only the provision of contraceptives, but also the provision of
funding directly to organizations that perform or advocate for
abortions.
I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you for yielding. I would like to associate myself
with the gentleman's remarks and his concerns that the language could,
in fact, be interpreted to have a broader application, not only
allowing for the provision of contraceptives.
Would the chairwoman explain her provision and clarify her
legislative intent?
Mrs. LOWEY. Will the gentleman from Texas yield?
Mr. CUELLAR. I yield to the chairwoman.
Mrs. LOWEY. I do thank my two friends and colleagues for their work
on this important issue and for this opportunity to clarify the intent
of the provision. I want to be very clear. The intent of this provision
is only to allow for the donation of the contraceptives and not to
provide funding.
While I disagree with broader interpretations of this language, I
wanted to offer an amendment to clarify this provision. My amendment is
crystal clear. It would only allow NGOs to receive U.S.-donated
contraceptives, not funds, for distribution to millions of men and
women across the globe in desperate need of these products.
I hope that our discussion and my clarifying amendment that I intend
to offer will alleviate any concerns that you or other Members have
about the intent behind this provision.
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chairwoman, does your amendment do anything to
alter or weaken the 15 provisions currently in the underlying bill that
bans U.S. funding for abortions abroad or places restrictions on the
use of family-planning funds?
Mrs. LOWEY. Absolutely not. My amendment would not alter or weaken
these long-standing provisions which I chose to retain in the fiscal
year 2008 bill, 15 different provisions that were offered by various
Members of Congress. Every provision is still in this bill that
prohibits the use of U.S. tax dollars for abortion or restricts family
planning.
Mr. CUELLAR. I thank the chairwoman for clarification and her
legislative intent that her amendment would only allow donated
contraceptives to be provided to international

[[Page H6884]]

NGOs and that no funds, no funds in this bill, will be used to provide
or advocate for abortions overseas.
I also would like to be clear that I support your decision to retain
the long-standing provisions in the bill to prohibit U.S. funds from
being used to provide or advocate for abortions overseas and place
reasonable restrictions on the use of family planning funds.
Mr. LANGEVIN. I thank the gentleman. I would like to thank the
chairwoman for her comments and her willingness to offer this
clarifying amendment and to make it absolutely clear that the bill
would only allow for the provision of contraceptives and not for direct
funding.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, the question here is who really gets the money. That's
the question. I think that it hasn't been addressed adequately.
I want to say at the outset, I support, I, Frank Wolf, support family
planning, period.
A May 22 Washington Post article described a recent crackdown on
Chinese families that have violated China's one-child policy. The
article stated that Chinese birth control bureaucrats showed up in a
half-dozen towns in Guangxi Province carrying sledgehammers and
electric cattle prods to destroy the homes and businesses of those who
had failed to pay their fines under China's coercive one-child policy.
The article described family-planning officials as ransacking
businesses owned by parents of more than one child. Those who protested
were bloodied in the struggle, and villages reported people being
killed in the violence.
Now, I heard that on NPR too. It was brutal. So that's really what we
are talking about, because the United States-Mexico City policy
prevents funding from going to international organizations that promote
abortion as a means of family planning, including in China.
Two prime examples of these organizations are the International
Planned Parenthood Federation and Marie Stopes International, both of
which are closely tied to the Chinese one-child policy. They are, in
essence, the ones that will get this. They never, ever speak out.
In fact, China was the second country to become ``officially
recognized as a qualified member of the International Planned
Parenthood Federation.'' On its Web site, International Planned
Parenthood Foundation recently touted, saluted, just said it was a
great thing, China's effort to exploit, its exploitation policy,
family-planning policy regime worldwide.
I don't want to get off too far on this, but this is a country
getting aid for these groups that are poisoning your toothpaste,
poisoning your pets, and, if you read the article the other day,
painting Thomas the Tank Engine trains with lead paint that most people
here, their children and grandchildren have. This country is the
country.
We restrict UNFPA funds to China expressly because China is coercive
and this is a coercive government. This is a government that single-
handedly could be stopping the genocide in Darfur today.

{time} 1615

Organizations that will receive funds under the new family planning
language in this bill will be able to help China continue these
unconscionable, and, I would say, immoral activities.
I support family planning, but I can't support, will not support
giving family planning taxpayer funds to these kind of organizations
that not only never speak out, but actually participate.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WOLF. I'd be glad to yield.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I offer a unanimous consent
request to give the gentleman an additional minute.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman still controls time.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I'd like to offer a unanimous consent
request to yield the gentleman an additional minute on both sides, and
if the gentleman will accept my UC, to yield a minute.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has 14 minutes remaining on his time. He
yielded himself 3 minutes. That has expired.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I asked a unanimous consent request to yield
both sides an additional minute in the debate.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. If the gentleman would be so kind as to
yield.
Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Would the gentleman please share with the
committee the specific provision in Ms. Lowey's amendment that says
funds are being used for this purpose, the specific provision.
Mr. WOLF. These groups that I just referenced, and Mr. Jackson, if
you could have heard the NPR, I will get you the text of the NPR story.
In fact, I will get it and I will insert it in the Record.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. If the gentleman would continue to yield.
I'm asking specifically about the language in the statute that the
gentlelady is advancing in her amendment. Could you show us the
specific language in the statute, the recommended statute?
Mr. WOLF. Yes. These groups, under this provision would be allowed to
get the support that are now active doing this in China.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LOWEY. I just would like to respond quickly, before I recognize
Mr. Kirk, to my good friend, Mr. Wolf. As Mr. Wolf knows, no money is
going to China. China has no participation in this debate at all. It's
very clear. In fact, not only did we not address UNFPA in this bill, we
strengthened the prohibition so that not a dime would be spent in
China. So I just wanted to clarify that China has nothing to do with
this debate on contraceptives.
I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Kirk).
Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I want to rise and maybe remove some of the
partisan tension as a Republican Member in support of this amendment
that otherwise, without action, the global gag rule would cut off
critical providers of family planning assistance.
In this Congress the issue of illegal immigration is at the top of
our agenda. And women in developing countries consistently report that
they would like to have two to three children rather than five to
seven.
As population pressures rise, so does the move to enter the United
States, legally or illegally. To reduce the illegal immigration
pressure on our borders, we need short-term solutions like border
enforcement, and long-term solutions like backing voluntary family
planning to help women in developing counties have the smaller family
that they want.
The global gag rule has been used to cut off the International
Planned Parenthood Federation because it used less than 1 percent of
its own privately raised funds for abortion-related services. And when
we cut off IPPF, we might have another provider of family planning
assistance to the women of Mexico for example, like the UNFPA, but we
cut them off too.
Mr. Chairman, I would argue that the American people would strongly
agree with the principle that if Mexican women wanted to have fewer
children, then we should help them.
Voluntary family planning would boost child survival rates. It would
also lower the rate of growth of Mexico's population. A slower rate of
growth of Mexico's population would improve the economy of Mexico. It
would also reduce the environmental pressure on Mexico's ecosystem. But
a slower rate of growth would also reduce the long-term illegal
immigration pressure on America's borders.
We should adopt this bipartisan amendment. We should help women in
developing countries have the smaller families that they want. We
should also adopt policies which reduce the population pressure on our
own borders with a policy that supports the rights of women and lowers
the pressure on our environment.
I commend the Chair for offering this amendment.

[[Page H6885]]

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I
want to say that I, Doctor, Representative Phil Gingrey as a pro-life
OB-GYN, in the interest of full disclosure, I want to say that I'm very
supportive of family planning, but not family planning that includes
definition of abortion as part of family planning.
In the Lowey amendment, which I'm opposed to, I'm not questioning her
integrity or intent in what she says in explanation, but I think it's a
very confusing amendment. And when we just heard the two Democratic
Members engaging in a colloquy with the chairwoman, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Cuellar) and the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin),
as they said that they were very much in favor of the Mexico City
policy and wanted to make sure that no money would be spent, and I
think the chairlady tried to explain that.
But then just a second ago, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Jackson), stood up to ask our ranking member if there was anything in
the Lowey amendment that spoke to the issue of funding.
But I would say to the gentleman, Mr. Chairman, and my colleagues,
funding versus commodity. If you tell me that you're going to give me
$75, that's funding, I guess. If you're going to say, no, I'm not going
to give you $75, I'm going to give you a tank of gas, it's the same
value.
And I think as the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) was
explaining earlier with his poster, that you ultimately take money away
from the countries that need it. And we don't want to do that.
If you really want to make sure that we don't export abortion to
another country, then we're going to have an amendment coming up
momentarily, the Stupak-Chris Smith amendment, that strikes the
language and restores the Mexico City policy.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GINGREY. I'll be glad to yield to my friend from Ohio.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I'd just like some clarification. You said this
money is going to come from countries that need it, and it's going to
go to other countries. Are you suggesting that those other countries do
not need this kind of contraceptives and the preventative care?
Mr. GINGREY. Reclaiming my time, I will quote USAID on this, Mr.
Ryan. Twenty countries that currently do not receive USAID family
planning would not receive donations under this amendment because the
countries in question that you're talking about, have comparatively low
need for family planning. And furthermore, they lack USAID presence
necessary to monitor compliance with other statutory provisions.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GINGREY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. USAID has done, I think, a remarkable job in
focusing on unmet needs, not just in the area of family planning, but
child survival, microcredit lending and a whole host of other very
important interventions that help poor people.
It's all about prioritization. I showed you earlier one country after
another that has had a doubling and a tripling of their money and
commodities and contraceptives since the Mexico City policy was
reinstated in 2001. It's all about prioritization.
Let me also say, because Ghana was mentioned earlier today, just
because Planned Parenthood of Ghana is so obsessed with abortion
promotion that it won't sign the policy, other NGOs and other providers
have stepped into the breach and provide family planning and abortions
to the people of Ghana.
Mrs. LOWEY. I'm very pleased to yield 2 minutes to my good friend, a
distinguished Member of this Congress from New York, Mr. Joseph
Crowley.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment
offered by my good friend from New York, Ms. Lowey, the chair of the
Subcommittee on the State Foreign Operations Committee.
And I think we have to make something really clear, perfectly clear;
that in this bill, in this bill there are 10 provisions, 10 provisions
that specifically outlaw or prohibit the use of U.S. funds in foreign
assistance for abortion or the promotion of abortion. We have it right
here on these charts. Ten provisions, in total, that prohibit the
spending of any U.S. funds on the promotion of abortion or abortion.
This amendment and this legislation is not about abortion. It is
about prevention. And there's an opportunity here for our colleagues to
support prevention. Here we have the gentlelady from New York, what
she's trying to do is prevent 52 million unplanned pregnancies each
year, 29 million abortions each year, 1.4 million infant deaths each
year, 142,000 pregnancy-related deaths each year, and over a half a
million children from losing their mothers each year. That's what this
amendment is about. That's what the gentlelady is trying to accomplish.
The other side of the aisle is saying that they're for family
planning. Well, here is your opportunity to demonstrate that. Here is
your opportunity to show, not only the Congress, but the United States
and the world, and especially the developing world, that you are for
family planning and helping to extend not only life, but the quality of
life in many of these countries.
I think we ought to be applauding what the gentlelady from New York
is trying to do today, as opposed to trying to derail that. If you are
for family planning, here is your opportunity. If you're for prevention
of transmittable sexual diseases here is your opportunity to stand up.
Stand up for family planning and support the gentlelady from New York
in her motion, in her amendment and the underlying bill as well.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Burton).
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I've always supported the right-
to-life position. And I've listened to this debate with great interest.
Money is fungible. Tens of millions of dollars are going to go to
NGOs. And these NGOs can take money that they already have and use it
for abortions, because they'll have money that they can use for the
family planning that they're talking about tonight. They'll be able to
free up money to do what we don't want them to do.
Intent is one thing Mrs. Lowey's talking about. What happens is quite
sometimes another.
The American taxpayers who are for abortion, and who are pro-life,
don't want their tax dollars used for abortion, across the spectrum.
They just don't want it to happen.
No tax dollars can be or should be used for abortion. I've had town
meetings, and people who are pro-choice have come up to me and said
they don't want their tax dollars used for it. They're pro-choice, but
they want people to do it with their own dollars.
I'd just like to say to my colleague, money is fungible, and this
will be tax dollars used for abortion.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Ryan).
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Just to clarify the record, Mr. Chairman, this is
not money. This is a product that will be shipped. And the other side
keeps distorting the debate. This is about the product going over
there.
You can't say you're for family planning and then we provide some of
the contraceptives to ship over, and then they vote against it.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I would also suggest before I yield to the
gentleman, Mr. Levin, that these provisions, the charts disappeared. If
you would like to refresh your memory, there are 15 provisions that I
left in this bill that make it absolutely clear that no U.S. dollars
may go for abortion.
I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, over 25 years ago I was assistant
administrator of AID, running the population program. This issue of
fungibility came up. We were assiduously implementing the Hyde
amendment. So we tried through accounting mechanisms to address the
fungibility issue.
So then it was said that's not enough. So then Mexico City was
proposed and implemented.
This is not a repeal of the Mexico City policy. Whatever one thinks
of it, it is not.

[[Page H6886]]

{time} 1630

This isn't about abortion, and it really isn't about fungibility.
Mr. Wolf, if you take your position far enough, we should give no
military assistance to any country that has a policy on family planning
that you don't like because in that sense it is fungible. But that
carries it beyond a rule of reason. And what this proposal does is to
apply a rule of reason, as has been said, to contraceptives provided in
kind to people who need these contraceptives. That is the long and the
short of this. And, essentially, you are the ones who are blurring the
issue, not us. And if you take your logic to the extreme, you will tie
this appropriation process for numerous countries into knots. This is
trying to untie a knot, if you want to put it that way, only in the
sense of providing products in kind to people who need them. And if you
say you are for family planning and you vote otherwise, you are voting
against family planning.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to Mr. Burton to respond
to something that was said.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say to my
colleagues I understand what you have been saying. You are going to
give product to them. But when you give them product, that frees up
money that they have for abortions. So you are indirectly going to be
funding abortions. That is what I said. And the American taxpayers
don't want their money in any way to be used, indirectly or directly,
for abortions.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio
(Mrs. Schmidt).
Mrs. SCHMIDT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Lowey
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, the Mexico City policy was first promulgated in 1984
and renewed by the current administration in 2001. This policy simply
requires that, as a condition for receipt of U.S. family-planning aid,
whether commodities or cash, foreign nongovernmental and international
organizations certify that they neither perform nor actively promote
abortion as a method of family planning. This is a sound policy, and we
should not undermine it in any way.
The Lowey amendment is an attempt to blur this line by diverting
contraceptive commodities from organizations that do not promote or
provide abortion to those that do.
Abortion is a tragic loss of life not only to the child but to the
mother. We know from the affidavits that were produced from the
Gonzales v. Carhart case, 180 post-abortive women, what they had to
say. Let me give you an example of one:
``How has abortion affected you?''
``My life is worthless to me. There is nothing in it. Shame, guilt,
and regret is hard to live with. I am 50 years old now.''
Mr. Chairman, the Mexico City policy at issue here establishes a
bright line between noncontroversial family planning activities and
abortion. We should not blur this line with the Lowey amendment in any
way.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, how much time does each side have?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia has 8\1/4\ minutes, and the
gentlewoman from New York has 4 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, what we should be doing here is
eliminating the gag rule. But that is not what we are doing. All that
this amendment does is to allow family-planning organizations to
receive free donations of contraceptives and condoms.
Now, instead, the opposition wants to prohibit even this, even though
you suggest that you are for family planning. You would never do this
to the women of America because they have control over their lives. But
the women of the Third World don't have control over their lives, and
you know that.
What is going to happen without access to contraceptives is that 52
million unwanted pregnancies will occur, and there will be almost 30
million abortions as a result. Where is the sense in that?
We have got to find a way for women to control their lives in the
Third World. The fact is a vast majority of women in the Third World
don't have any control over when the sex act is performed. That is not
their choice. Most of them are married and most of them are in faithful
relationships irregardless of their husband's conduct. They are
overwhelmed by the number of children they have to provide for. But you
want to deny them the ability to control the number of children in
their family?
Not to pass this amendment is punitive. This is punishing of those
women. It is wrong. It is immoral, in fact. This moderate amendment
certainly should be passed by this Congress in the 21st century.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry
about the remaining time on both sides.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Illinois may inquire.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Specifically, Mr. Chairman, under my
unanimous consent request, an additional minute was given to their side
and an additional minute to our side, and I wanted to make sure that
the additional minute has been calculated in the remaining time.
The CHAIRMAN. The additional time has been added. The time remaining
is 8\1/4\ minutes for the gentleman from Virginia and 2\3/4\ minutes
for the gentlewoman from New York.
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I thank the Chairman.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, before I recognize the gentlewoman from
Oklahoma (Ms. Fallin), I would say to my friend, my very good friend, I
would increase the funding for family planning. I would gladly increase
it. So I think the question is how much money would be good if we could
actually increase it with that.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Ms.
Fallin).
Ms. FALLIN. Mr. Chairman, I am listening to this debate today, and it
seems to me that the question is not if there is money going to family
planning. I understand there is $441 million already allocated, U.S.
money, that goes to foreign countries for family planning. But the
question is whom is the money going to and do the organizations that
receive the money for family planning promote abortion as a method of
family planning. And that is what this whole debate is on our side.
And the way I see it, if we supplement the budgets of other
organizations in foreign countries who use abortion as family planning
by giving them contraceptives, which we already do, by the way, $441
million worth of family-planning help, then we are supplementing their
budgets so that they can have freed-up money to continue down the route
of doing abortions for family planning. So it is just kind of logical
that that is what we are doing here by changing this policy. And that
is why I support the Smith-Stupak amendment.
And the gentlewoman has been kind to say that she wants to work in
good faith and find common ground, and she has said it is her goal to
get contraceptives to other countries. So if that is our goal and our
goal is not to help other countries with abortions for family planning,
then let's accept this amendment, the Smith-Stupak amendment, and let's
pass it and let's show that the United States will not be in the
business of exporting abortions to foreign countries.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to Marilyn Musgrave of
Colorado.
Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Mr. Chairman, as we are debating this, I think that
one thing we have to be mindful of is every Member of Congress knows
what an in-kind contribution is. And I would just like to say that we
know that we have to account for in-kind contributions and we have to
consider this in the Lowey amendment.
I oppose this because I really feel that we need to protect the
international family planning integrity. We know what the Mexico City
policy was put in effect to do. We know that people in this country do
not want their taxpayer dollars used to provide for abortion as a means
of family planning.
Another thing that has not been brought into this debate is this
amendment really is a poison pill. I think that it undermines the
Mexico City

[[Page H6887]]

policy, and I think that it could possibly subject this bill to a veto.
And I think we need to be very mindful of that as we engage in this
debate.
And we need to be mindful that this amendment doesn't increase USAID
funding for contraceptives. It simply diverts contraceptive commodities
from organizations that do not promote or provide abortions as a method
of family planning.
So I rise in opposition to the Lowey amendment. I understand the
intention. But, again, we all know what an in-kind contribution does,
and we know what it does to the budgets of those organizations that
promote abortion as a method of family planning.
The Smith-Stupak amendment is the only amendment that removes the
poison pill, restores the Mexico City policy, and allows the USAID to
continue to direct the U.S. family-planning resources to organizations
that are not engaged in pro-abortion activities.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Sires).
Mr. SIRES. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Lowey amendment.
This amendment would clarify existing language in the Foreign
Operations bill that would only, and I repeat, only allow for NGOs to
receive U.S.-donated contraceptives. This amendment makes it clear that
only contraceptives will be donated and made available to millions of
men and women around the world. Not funding.
By increasing global contraceptive supplies, this will help many
women and men overseas plan their families, protect against sexually
transmitted diseases, and minimize at-risk pregnancies.
Mr. Chairman, since the administration reinstated this policy in
2001, 20 nations have stopped receiving U.S. shipments of
contraceptives. Women and children in these countries often suffer from
high maternal and child mortality rates because of a lack of adequate
health care and access to family planning. I believe we must give hope
to these women and families by providing them with the contraceptives
they need to make their own decisions regarding their families. And I
also think it is essential to provide individuals with the tools they
need to protect themselves against the spread of HIV/AIDS.
I rise in support, and I urge all the Members to support this
amendment.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Pence).
(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. PENCE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise in opposition to the Lowey amendment, although I do want to
express my appreciation to Chairman Lowey for preserving, as she
indicated, the 15 different restrictions that are in this bill on the
use of American taxpayer dollars overseas to directly fund abortion.
But I want to say respectfully to my colleagues on the other side of
the aisle, come on. Legislation that disallows contributions to fund
abortions in family-planning organizations around the globe ought to
also disallow in-kind contributions to those same organizations.
Money is fungible. We know that. Organizations that receive
commodities can take the resources that they would have used to
purchase those commodities and use it to promote abortion. We all know.
We are adults in this room. We all know that we are seeing here a
concerted, sincere, and I would like to say respectfully creative
legislative effort to undermine a policy known as the Mexico City
policy that I think my colleagues on the other side of the aisle know
is broadly supported by the American people.
Whatever the view is on abortion in this country, the American people
don't want to see their taxpayer dollars used to fund abortions at home
or abroad. They don't want to see their taxpayer dollars used through
the foreign aid program to fund organizations that promote abortion as
a means of family planning. And the possibility of making tens of
millions, if not hundreds of millions, of dollars available to
organizations that promote abortion around the globe, making it
available in the form of commodities is still making resources
available to organizations that promote abortion.