[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3501-3506]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 URGING GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE TO ENSURE A DEMOCRATIC, TRANSPARENT, AND 
                         FAIR ELECTION PROCESS

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
agree to the resolution (H. Res. 339) urging the Government of Ukraine 
to ensure a democratic, transparent, and fair election process leading 
up to the March 31, 2002, parliamentary elections, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                              H. Res. 339

       Whereas Ukraine stands at a critical point in its 
     development to a fully democratic society, and the 
     parliamentary elections on March 31, 2002, its third 
     parliamentary elections since becoming independent more than 
     10 years ago, will play a significant role in demonstrating 
     whether Ukraine continues to proceed on the path to democracy 
     or experiences setbacks in its democratic development;
       Whereas the Government of Ukraine can demonstrate its 
     commitment to democracy by conducting a genuinely free and 
     fair parliamentary election process, in which all candidates 
     have access to news outlets in the print, radio, television, 
     and Internet media, and nationally televised debates are 
     held, thus enabling the various political parties and 
     election blocs to compete on a level playing field and the 
     voters to acquire objective information about the candidates;
       Whereas a flawed election process, which contravenes 
     commitments of the Organization for Security and Cooperation 
     in Europe (OSCE) on democracy and the conduct of elections, 
     could potentially slow Ukraine's efforts to integrate into 
     Western institutions;
       Whereas in recent years, incidents of government corruption 
     and harassment of the media have raised concerns about the 
     commitment of the Government of Ukraine to democracy, human 
     rights, and the rule of law;
       Whereas Ukraine, since its independence in 1991, has been 
     one of the largest recipients of United States foreign 
     assistance;
       Whereas $154,000,000 in technical assistance to Ukraine was 
     provided under Public Law 107-115 (the Kenneth M. Ludden 
     Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 
     Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 2002), a $16,000,000 
     reduction in funding from the previous fiscal year due to 
     concerns about continuing setbacks to needed reform and the 
     unresolved deaths of prominent dissidents and journalists, 
     such as the case of Heorhiy Gongadze;
       Whereas Public Law 107-115 requires a report by the 
     Department of State on the progress by the Government of 
     Ukraine in investigating and bringing to justice individuals 
     responsible for the murders of Ukrainian journalists;
       Whereas the Presidential election of 1999, according to the 
     final report of the Office of Democratic Institutions and 
     Human Rights (ODIHR) of OSCE on that election, failed to meet 
     a significant number of OSCE election-related commitments;
       Whereas according to the ODIHR report, during the 1999 
     Presidential election campaign, a heavy proincumbent bias was 
     prevalent among the state-owned media outlets, and members of 
     the media viewed as not in support of the President were 
     subject to harassment by government authorities, while 
     proincumbent campaigning by state administration and public 
     officials was widespread and systematic;
       Whereas the Law on Elections of People's Deputies of 
     Ukraine, signed by President Leonid Kuchma on October 30, 
     2001, which was cited in a report of the ODIHR dated November 
     26, 2001, as making improvements in Ukraine's electoral code 
     and providing safeguards to meet Ukraine's commitments on 
     democratic elections, does not include a role

[[Page 3502]]

     for domestic nongovernmental organizations to monitor 
     elections;
       Whereas according to international media experts, the Law 
     on Elections defines the conduct of an election campaign in 
     an imprecise manner which could lead to arbitrary sanctions 
     against media operating in Ukraine;
       Whereas the Ukrainian Parliament (Verkhovna Rada) on 
     December 13, 2001, rejected a draft Law on Political 
     Advertising and Agitation, which would have limited free 
     speech in the campaign period by giving too many 
     discretionary powers to government bodies, and posed a 
     serious threat to the independent media;
       Whereas the Department of State has dedicated $4,700,000 in 
     support of monitoring and assistance programs for the 2002 
     parliamentary elections;
       Whereas the process for the 2002 parliamentary elections 
     has reportedly been affected by violations by many parties 
     during the period prior to the official start of the election 
     campaign on January 1, 2002; and
       Whereas monthly reports for November and December of 2001 
     released by the Committee on Voters of Ukraine (CVU), an 
     indigenous, nonpartisan, nongovernment organization that was 
     established in 1994 to monitor the conduct of national 
     election campaigns and balloting in Ukraine, cited five major 
     types of violations of political rights and freedoms during 
     the precampaign phase of the parliamentary elections, 
     including--
       (1) use of government position to support particular 
     political groups;
       (2) government pressure on the opposition and on the 
     independent media;
       (3) free goods and services given by many political groups 
     in order to sway voters;
       (4) coercion to join political parties and pressure to 
     contribute to election campaigns; and
       (5) distribution of anonymous and compromising information 
     about political opponents:
        Now, therefore, be it

       Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
       (1) acknowledges the strong relationship between the United 
     States and Ukraine since Ukraine's independence more than 10 
     years ago, while understanding that Ukraine can only become a 
     full partner in Western institutions when it fully embraces 
     democratic principles;
       (2) expresses its support for the efforts of the Ukrainian 
     people to promote democracy, the rule of law, and respect for 
     human rights in Ukraine;
       (3) urges the Government of Ukraine to enforce impartially 
     its newly adopted election law, including provisions calling 
     for--
       (A) the transparency of election procedures;
       (B) access for international election observers;
       (C) multiparty representation on election commissions;
       (D) equal access to the media for all election 
     participants;
       (E) an appeals process for electoral commissions and within 
     the court system; and
       (F) administrative penalties for election violations;
       (4) urges the Government of Ukraine to meet its commitments 
     on democratic elections, as delineated in the 1990 Copenhagen 
     Document of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in 
     Europe (OSCE), with respect to the campaign period and 
     election day, and to address issues identified by the Office 
     of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) of OSCE 
     in its final report on the 1999 Presidential election, such 
     as state interference in the campaign and pressure on the 
     media; and
       (5) calls upon the Government of Ukraine to allow election 
     monitors from the ODIHR, other participating states of OSCE, 
     and private institutions and organizations, both foreign and 
     domestic, access to all aspects of the parliamentary election 
     process according to international practices, including--
       (A) access to political events attended by the public 
     during the campaign period;
       (B) access to observe voting and counting procedures at 
     polling stations and electoral commission meetings on 
     election day, including procedures to release election 
     results on a district-by-district basis as they become 
     available; and
       (C) access to observe postelection tabulation of results 
     and processing of election challenges and complaints.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume, and at the outset, I would like to recognize some 
exemplary students from Hamilton High School West and Vicki Schoeb, 
their dedicated teacher, and thank them for being here to observe the 
workings of the Hill, especially the proceedings of the House. They are 
very much welcomed to this Chamber.
  Mr. Speaker, today the House moves to the timely consideration of H. 
Res. 339, which urges the Government of the Ukraine to ensure a 
democratic, transparent, and fair election process leading up to the 
March 31 parliamentary elections. I would like to thank our majority 
leader, the gentleman from Texas, (Mr. Armey), for his commitment to 
schedule this timely and important resolution this week so that it 
happens before and so that, hopefully, it will have some impact on the 
proceedings.
  I was pleased to be one of the original sponsors of this resolution 
which acknowledges the strong relationship between the United States 
and Ukraine, urges the Ukrainian Government to enforce impartially its 
new election law, and urges the Ukrainian Government to meet its OSCE 
committments on democratic elections. I strongly encourage my 
colleagues to support this measure.
  Mr. Speaker, the Helsinki Commission, which I chair, has a long-
standing record of support for human rights and democratic development 
in Ukraine. Commission staff will be observing the upcoming elections, 
as they have done for virtually every election in Ukraine since 1990. 
The stakes in the Ukrainian elections are high both in terms of the 
outcome and as an indication of the Ukrainian Government's commitment 
towards democratic development and integration into Europe.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to underscore the reason for 
this congressional interest in Ukraine. The clear and simple reason: An 
independent, democratic, and economically stable Ukraine is vital to 
the well being of all Ukrainians to the stability and security of 
Europe; and we want to encourage Ukraine in recognizing its own often-
stated goal of integration into Europe.
  Despite the positive changes that have occurred in the Ukraine since 
independence in 1991, including the economic growth over the last 2 
years, Ukraine is still undergoing a difficult path towards transition. 
The pace of that transition has been distressing, slowed by 
insufficient progress in respect for the rule of law, especially by the 
presence of widespread corruption, which continues to exact a 
considerable toll on the Ukrainian people. They deserve better, Mr. 
Speaker, than what they have gotten.
  Another source of frustration is the still-unresolved case of 
murdered investigative journalist, Heorhiy Gongadze. And let me say one 
thing about him, as well as his widow. Last year, at the OSCE 
parliamentary assembly which I led, to Paris, my colleagues will 
remember that we honored him posthumously for his great work and 
because he paid the ultimate price for his convictions--death.
  The flawed investigations of this case and the case of another 
murdered Ukrainian journalist, Ihor Aleksandrov, call into question 
Ukraine's commitment to the rule of law. And I can assure you, Mr. 
Speaker, that going on into the next weeks and months the Helsinki 
Commission will continue its vigilance. We plan on holding hearings to 
look into this even further, hopefully keeping pressure on the 
Ukrainian Government simply to do the right thing.
  There have also been a number of disturbing cases of violence and 
threats of violence. For example, 78-year-old Iryna Senyk, a former 
political prisoner and poetess, who was campaigning for the pro-reform 
party, our Ukraine bloc, was badly beaten by unknown assailants.

                              {time}  1645

  Such unchecked violence has created an uncertain atmosphere.
  Most of independent Ukraine's elections have met international 
democratic standards for elections. The 1999 presidential elections 
were more problematic, and the OSCE Election Mission Report on these 
elections asserted that they ``failed to meet a significant number of 
the OSCE election-related commitments.''
  Mr. Speaker, it remains an open question as to whether the March 31 
elections will be a step forward for Ukraine. With less than 2 weeks 
until election day, there are some discouraging indications, credible 
reports of

[[Page 3503]]

various violations of the election law, including, one, campaigning by 
officials or use of state resources to support certain blocs or 
candidates; second, the denial of public facilities and services to 
candidates, blocs or parties; three, governmental pressure on certain 
parties, candidates and media outlets; and, four, a pro-government bias 
in the public media, especially the government's main television 
network, UT-1.
  Mr. Speaker, these actions are inconsistent with Ukraine's freely 
undertaken OSCE commitments and undermine its reputation with respect 
to human rights and democracy. A democratic election process is a must 
in solidifying Ukraine's democratic credentials and the confidence of 
its citizens and in its stated desire to integrate with the West.
  During his visit to Ukraine last week, the President of the OSCE 
Parliamentary Assembly, Adrian Severin, expressed concern over the 
mistrust in the election process among certain candidates as well as a 
general skepticism as to whether or not the elections would be truly 
free and fair, and encouraged Ukrainian officials to take quick 
measures to ensure that it is a free and fair election and that the 
outcome is credible.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask that the summary of the most recent Long Term 
Observation Report on the Ukrainian elections prepared by the 
nonpartisan Committee of Voters of Ukraine, be submitted for the 
Record.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.


                announcement by the speaker pro tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The Chair must remind the 
Member that the rules do not permit references to or introductions of 
persons in the galleries.
  Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 339 and compliment 
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for his cosponsorship of this 
important resolution, for his passionate statement on the floor today, 
and for his work behind the scenes to get this resolution on the floor 
today. It was not easy to do. We were running short on time. This is 
the last week of our session before the Ukrainian parliamentary 
elections on March 31, and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) 
worked with dispatch and effectiveness behind the scenes. I am sure 
that the freedom-loving people of Ukraine are glad that the gentleman 
did, as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Hyde) of the Committee on International Relations and subcommittee 
chair, the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly), for their 
commitment to move this bill forward. There were several bumps in the 
road, but cooperation carried the day. We kept the bill in a strong and 
effective form, and I compliment all on the majority side for bringing 
this resolution forward.
  I certainly compliment the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), 
co-chair with the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Schaffer) of the 
Ukrainian Caucus in the House. The gentlewoman from New York (Ms. 
Slaughter) is the prime sponsor of this important legislation.
  We are all here today to promote this legislation, which urges the 
Government of the Ukraine to ensure a democratic, transparent, and fair 
parliamentary election on March 31. The resolution also urges the 
Government of Ukraine to implement basic tools in order to ensure free 
and fair elections, including a transparency of election procedures, 
access for international election observers, multiparty representation 
on election commissions, and equal access to the media for all election 
candidates.
  Mr. Speaker, this is the third parliamentary election in the Ukraine 
since they gained their independence 10 years ago. It is the most 
critical. This is a big deal in the Ukraine. If they fail to continue 
to move forward with democratic reforms, if this is not a fair and free 
election, it will be a major setback to the cause of democracy in 
Ukraine.
  It is very appropriate for this government, as friendly as we are 
with the people and the Government of Ukraine, to urge that the 
government in Ukraine do everything in its power to ensure the fairness 
and openness of this election process.
  Ukraine has come a long way in the last 10 years. Its economy grew 
more than 6 percent last year. It has voluntarily given up the third 
largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and has consistently sought to 
eliminate its existing stockpile of strategic missiles. There are basic 
political reforms under way in the country, and we have friendly 
relations with the Ukraine and we want those relations to continue to 
be as friendly and supportive as possible.
  But significant challenges remain. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Smith) and others have indicated the challenges that we have. There are 
restrictions on basic democratic freedoms in the country. The nuclear 
plants I mentioned are in desperate need of appropriate clean up. The 
media suffers from blatant government harassment and pressure, and 
government corruption runs rampant.
  There have been a number of activities and accusations involving the 
government that are terribly disturbing. The gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Smith) has talked about the unsolved murder of the brave 
journalist Heorhiy Gongadze in September 2000, and the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and I participated in the Parliamentary Assembly 
of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe held last 
July in Paris in which the OSCE awarded a prize to the widow of Mr. 
Gongadze in honor of his great service and the sacrifice he made in 
support of freedom of the press.
  I, as does the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), remember well 
the passionate speech that Mrs. Gongadze made in Paris a year ago. I am 
happy to tell the gentleman from New Jersey that Mrs. Gongadze visited 
my district this past weekend and spoke again with great passion at the 
Ukrainian Educational and Cultural Center of Greater Philadelphia on a 
panel called to discuss the importance of the Ukrainian elections 
identified as ``Ukraine at a Crossroads''; and her passion for 
democratic reforms remains unabated, as is her desire, as is ours, to 
determine and hold accountable those that murdered her husband.
  The OSCE, through their Office of Democratic Institutions and Human 
Rights, has issued a final report on Ukraine's most recent national 
election, the presidential election of 1999, and indicates that that 
election was marred by violations of Ukrainian election law and failed 
to meet a number of OSCE election commitments. There was state 
interference with the campaign and government pressure on the media.
  This month's election has been reviewed ahead of time. There is a 
group called the Committee of Voters of Ukraine, the leading Ukrainian 
watchdog group on elections; and they have reported numerous violations 
in the run-up to the 2002 parliamentary election. So the challenge is 
still present. This is a very important watershed election in Ukraine. 
They have got to get this right. They cannot slip back and repeat the 
mistakes of the 1999 presidential election. They must continue to move 
forward; and it is very appropriate for this Congress, this House, to 
urge the Government of Ukraine to run as fair and open an election as 
possible.
  Mr. Speaker, Ukraine strives to realize a more robust democracy, and 
it needs our encouragement and support. It has both, and I urge all of 
my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 
all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and 
extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 338, 
the resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New Jersey?
  There was no objection.

[[Page 3504]]


  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel) 
for his comments. The gentleman's statement was right on point.
  I think it is important to underscore the good work that the 
Committee of Voters of Ukraine are actually doing. Between February 23 
and March 10, 225 long-term observers visited 622 cities and 712 
political party branches. They attended 578 events conducted by 
political groups. They are making a Herculean effort to ensure that the 
upcoming elections are free and fair and impartial. They deserve our 
highest support and praise and congratulations for being so committed 
to fair and free elections in Ukraine. The Committee is comprised of 
true patriots of Ukraine. They are brave and resourceful and they 
deserve the full support of every Member of this body.
  Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the summary of the Long Term 
Observation Report of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine.

                                Summary

       In October 2001, the Committee of Voters of Ukraine (CVU) 
     began its long-term observation of the 2002 parliamentary 
     election process. CVU is a non-partisan citizens' election 
     monitoring organization with 160 branches throughout the 
     Ukraine. CVU will report regularly until the March 31, 2002 
     elections.
       Between February 23 and March 10, 225 long-term observers 
     visited 622 cities and 712 political party branches, and 
     attended 578 events conducted by political groups. CVU 
     observed the same kinds of violations as in the previous 
     three-week period. Some types of violations decreased in 
     number, while others increased.
       Each time a problem was reported to an observer, the head 
     of the regional CVU organization called the individual making 
     the report to verify it and obtain details. In many cases, 
     witnesses are reluctant to talk about violations, fearing 
     retribution from their employers or others.
       CVU has noticed a few positive developments since its last 
     report. In the past three weeks, voter education programs in 
     the mass media have become more robust. Likewise, election 
     commissioners are receiving practical training from non-
     governmental organizations. Some television stations have 
     also been showing debates between various political leaders.
       Nonetheless, the pre-election period continues to be marked 
     by substantial violations of Ukrainian law. The main types of 
     offenses recorded by CVU during the last week of February and 
     first two weeks of March were:
       Campaigning by state officials or use of state resources to 
     support favored political candidates and groups. The block 
     ``Za Edu'' (For a United Ukraine) was the principal, but not 
     exclusive beneficiary of this support.
       Government pressure on certain political parties, 
     candidates, and media outlets.
       Interference in election campaigns through violence, 
     threats of violence or destruction of campaign materials.
       Illegal campaign practices by candidates offering free 
     goods and services to voters and distributing unregistered 
     campaign materials.
       Executive branch interference in the election process has 
     decreased somewhat since the previous three week period, 
     although it remains a key feature of the electoral 
     environment. As before, the principal beneficiary of this 
     assistance is the bloc ``Za Edu'' and its candidates in 
     single mandate constituencies. Much of this interference 
     takes place openly; in many cases, government officials 
     involve themselves in the electoral process in an apparent 
     attempt to win favor with their superiors. Although CVU has 
     witnessed fewer instances of this kind of violation, this 
     does not necessarily suggest that executive branch officials 
     are behaving more impartially. In many cases, they have 
     simply shifted their attention away from the parliamentary 
     elections to oblast (state) and local races, which are not 
     covered in this report.
       Conversely, legal provisions requiring free and transparent 
     campaigning are being ignored with increasing frequency. 
     Criminal interference in campaigns has gone up; in turn, 
     parties and single-mandate candidates are breaking the 
     election law more often.
       Some candidates, parties, and citizens whose rights have 
     been infringed are beginning to lodge formal complaints with 
     election commissions and the courts. Some commissions have 
     responded by warning parties and candidates accused of 
     campaign violations to respect the law. No state officials 
     has been punished for abuse of office, however. While CVU has 
     uncovered no evidence that state interference in the election 
     has been ordered by senior government authorities, neither 
     have these authorities punished any accused lawbreakers or 
     acted preemptively to ensure neutrality on the part of their 
     subordinates.


                          election commissions

       The country's central and constituency election commissions 
     appear to functioning relatively well. Most are following 
     proper procedure and trying to respond to appeals in a timely 
     manner. Where problems with district commissions do exist, 
     they are more likely to be found in eastern and southern 
     regions of Ukraine.
       The formation of polling-place election commissions (PECs) 
     has not gone smoothly, however. Instead, this process has 
     been marked by confusion and numerous violations of proper 
     procedure. Detailed information on the make-up of the 
     country's roughly 33,000 PECs was supposed to be released by 
     February 27 Article 21.13 of the election law, but this 
     requirement was not observed in most areas. Hence, an 
     analysis of the make-up of the commissions is not possible at 
     this time.
       CVU is concerned that the provisions of Ukraine's election 
     law that provide for multi-partisan representation on 
     election commissions have not been respected in spirit. In 
     many areas, local executive bodies have taken advantage of 
     the weaknesses of political parties to appoint election 
     commissioners who nominally represent a party but who are, in 
     practice, loyal to the local administration alone. CVU has 
     witnessed numerous cases where election commissioners are 
     unaware even of identity of the party they are supposed to 
     represent. Clearly, a good deal of the blame for this problem 
     also lies with the parties, which have been incapable of 
     recruiting trusted members to serve as commissioners in many 
     parts of the country.

  Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments and simply add 
that we take elections for granted in this country. We know how 
important they are, but we assume that they will be fair and open and 
transparent. We need to do everything in our power to encourage the 
same in the emerging democracies in Europe. Those countries, such as 
Ukraine, emerging from the tyranny of the Soviet bloc, for 10 years a 
new independence and freedom has been observed in Ukraine; but this 
election is of critical importance. They have got to get it right. We 
have to help them get it right, and this legislation is dedicated to 
that proposition.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman 
from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel) for championing this very important 
resolution to put our Nation and the Congress on record in highest 
hopes that the elections this year in the Ukraine will ensure a 
democratic, transparent, and fair election process leading up to March 
31. Their parliamentary elections will be held on that date. Of course 
the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Smith), and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel) have traveled 
together to that part of the world and have made such a difference in 
carrying the banner of freedom's institutions into regions of our world 
where heretofore people had not been able to exercise their full 
democratic rights.
  Having just returned from the Ukraine myself and having had the 
really historic opportunity to meet with nearly 300 of their younger 
citizens, and people representing nongovernmental organizations that 
are monitoring the elections and trying to produce information so 
people know what they are voting about, we can see a change, a glacial 
change occurring there for the better. But without question, people of 
that nation must feel free and unintimidated as they go to the polls, 
and they must understand what the various candidates' platforms are; 
and it is safe to say that that kind of transparency and information 
has not been easily available.
  Sometimes it is hard here, but there the systems are just not robust. 
It is not easy to understand how a party slate or individuals on it 
might actually support a certain program, and it is hard to distinguish 
among the major blocs and the people in those blocs. I would add an 
encouraging word for passage of this resolution and a great hope that 
the Government of Ukraine will ensure that the election process is 
open. Let flourish those who are attempting to help people understand 
the issues and understand what those who are running actually will 
champion in

[[Page 3505]]

their own programs once elected to RADA or local office. This kind of 
information should be more broadly available. The Internet should be 
allowed to function so people will share information across regions and 
become more informed about what their vote actually means.
  The task before the Ukrainian people of building a more open and free 
society is enormous. That is true in Russia also and many of the former 
republics of the Soviet Union.

                              {time}  1700

  I know that I detected, especially among the young, such a great 
hope, such a feeling that they had the future of the country in their 
hands. They are looking for us to pass this resolution to give a signal 
that our country stands and walks alongside those who are trying to 
build more open and free societies. In fact many young people who are 
21 years of age are running for office in some of the towns, or are 
trying to run for parliament, to try to change the laws in order to 
make property traded freely with a mortgage system. They are fighting 
for laws so loans can be made by a regular bank and have a free credit 
system established. They want an educational system that is available 
to all so students are able to learn critical thinking methods. All of 
these challenges lie ahead of those young leaders.
  And so to the young people in our country, I encourage them to pay 
attention to Ukraine, the most important nation in Central Europe. As 
it goes, so will the nations around it. I rise in very strong support 
of House Resolution 339 and want to thank so very much the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Hoeffel) for bringing this to the attention of the entire world, 
indeed. We respectfully say to the people of Ukraine, vote, vote 
wisely, monitor the elections, help to move your country forward, as I 
know the hearts of your people tell you they want.
  I express my fullest support for this resolution.
  Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, a real leader on 
Ukrainian issues in the House. I compliment her on her remarks.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose H. Res. 339, a bill by the 
United States Congress which seeks to tell a sovereign nation how to 
hold its own elections. It seems the height of arrogance for us to sit 
here and lecture the people and government of Ukraine on what they 
should do and should not do in their own election process. One would 
have thought after our own election debacle in November 2000, that we 
would have learned how counterproductive and hypocritical it is to 
lecture other democratic countries on their electoral processes. How 
would members of this committee--or any American--react if countries 
like Ukraine demanded that our elections here in the United States 
conform to their criteria? So I think we can guess how Ukrainians feel 
about this piece of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, Ukraine has been the recipient of hundreds of millions 
of dollars in foreign aid from the United States. In fiscal year 2002 
alone, Ukraine was provided $154 million. Yet after all this money--
which we were told was to promote democracy--and more then ten years 
after the end of the Soviet Union, we are told in this legislation that 
Ukraine has made little if any progress in establishing a democratic 
political system.
  Far from getting more involved in Ukraine's electoral process, which 
is where this legislation leads us, the United States is already much 
too involved in the Ukrainian elections. The U.S. government has sent 
some $4.7 million dollars to Ukraine for monitoring and assistance 
programs, including to train their electoral commission members and 
domestic monitoring organizations. There have been numerous reports of 
U.S.-funded non-governmental organizations in Ukraine being involved in 
pushing one or another political party. This makes it look like the 
United States is taking sides in the Ukrainian elections.
  The legislation calls for the full access of Organization for 
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) monitors to all aspects of 
the parliamentary elections, but that organization has time and time 
again, from Slovakia to Russia and elsewhere, shown itself to be 
unreliable and politically biased. Yet the United States continues to 
fund and participate in OSCE activities. As British writer John 
Laughland observed this week in the Guardian newspaper, ``Western 
election monitoring has become the political equivalent of an Arthur 
Andersen audit. This supposedly technical process is now so corrupted 
by political bias that it would be better to abandon it. Only then will 
countries be able to elect their leaders freely.'' Mr. Speaker, I think 
this is advice we would be wise to heed.
  Other aspects of this bill are likewise troubling. This bill seeks, 
from thousands of miles away and without any of the facts, to demand 
that the Ukrainian government solve crimes within Ukraine that have 
absolutely nothing to do with the United States. No one knows what 
happened to journalist Heorhiy Gongadze or any of the alleged murdered 
Ukrainian journalists, yet by adding it into this ill-advised piece of 
legislation we are sitting here suggesting that the government has 
something to do with the alleged murders. This meddling into the 
Ukrainian judicial system is inappropriate and counter-productive.
  Mr. Speaker, we are legislators in the United States Congress. We are 
not in Ukraine. We have no right to interfere in the internal affairs 
of that country and no business telling them how to conduct their 
elections. A far better policy toward Ukraine would be to eliminate any 
U.S.-government imposed barrier to free trade between Americans and 
Ukrainians.
  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, since regaining its independence in 1991, 
Ukraine's democracy has made significant progress but has not been 
without its difficult periods. Nowhere has the integrity of the 
country's political system been more challenged than in its electoral 
process.
  On March 31, Ukraine will hold its third election for parliament. 
This election will be a critical test of the strength of Ukraine's 
evolving democracy and its new election laws.
  Given the importance of a strong and stable Ukraine in the region, 
the importance of our relations with Ukraine and our keen interest in 
Ukraine's continued emergence as a responsible, democratic member of 
the international community, we are naturally interested in the 
electoral process as well as progress the country has made in the areas 
of human rights, rule of law, freedom of expression and the strength of 
its democratic institutions.
  In this context, the United States Congress, through H. Res. 339, 
expresses its interest in, and concerns for, a genuinely free and fair 
parliamentary election process which enables all the various political 
parties and election blocs to compete on a level playing field; allows 
the voters to acquire objective information about the political 
candidates; and expects all parties to the election to observe their 
own laws.
  Historically, since 1991, elections in Ukraine have been marred by 
problems such as intimidation of journalists and opposition candidates; 
denial of access to the media; unbalanced news coverage; abuse of power 
and political position by government officials; and the illegal use of 
public funds. Today, we have received reports from Ukraine that the 
current election period has been beset by similar allegations of 
individuals or groups illegally trying to influence the outcome of the 
elections.
  This is not to say that the overall electoral process is seriously 
flawed. The Ukraine parliament has passed a positive new election law. 
What H. Res. 339 does say, however, is that the reported abuses of the 
election law have to be stopped, that the government has the 
responsibility to enforce its election law fairly, and that every 
effort must be taken to ensure that a free, fair and transparent 
election take place on March 31.
  This resolution we are considering today does represent a genuine 
concern that the reported activities of some could cast a negative 
cloud over these elections and the entire democratic process in 
Ukraine.
  The authors of this Resolution are to be congratulated for bringing 
these problems to our attention, and we hope the resolution is seen in 
a positive and constructive way inside Ukraine.
  By addressing these concerns, Ukraine can only be better off and its 
democracy made stronger
  I urge passage of this resolution and reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be joined by my colleagues, 
Representatives Joseph Hoeffel and Christopher Smith, in offering this 
important resolution. H. Res. 339 urges the Government of Ukraine to 
ensure a democratic, transparent, and fair election process leading up 
to its March 31 parliamentary elections.
  Just over 10 years after gaining its independence from the Soviet 
bloc, Ukraine stands at a crossroads. On Sunday, March 31, Ukraine will 
hold its third parliamentary elections since becoming independent. It 
is widely believed that the outcome of the parliamentary elections will 
determine whether Ukraine continues to pursue democratic reforms, or 
experiences further political turmoil.

[[Page 3506]]

  As a founding member and Co-chair of the Congressional Ukrainian 
Caucus, I have watched the growth of this new nation with keen 
interest. Their path to democratization has not been easy. More 
troubling, however, has been a series of scandals involving government 
corruption over the past 2 years. In April 2001, I was troubled to 
learn about the Ukrainian Parliament's vote to remove reform-minded 
Prime Minister Viktor Yushchenko. This change in government came in the 
midst of the ongoing political turmoil resulting from allegations over 
the involvement of President Leonid Kuchma in the case of murdered 
journalist Heorhiy Gongadze. Meanwhile, reports of government 
corruption and harassment of the media have raised concerns about the 
Ukrainian government's commitment to democratic principles. I have 
spoken out for a more democratic Ukraine and expressed my continued 
concern about the lack of progress in the Gongadze case and recent 
political instability.
  According to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe 
Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights' final report on 
Ukraine's most recent national election, the presidential election of 
1999 was marred by violations of Ukrainian election law and failed to 
meet a significant number of OSCE election commitments. There is now 
concern that the 2002 parliamentary elections will be compromised by 
similar violations. Recent reports on the 2002 parliamentary elections 
released by the Committee on Voters of Ukraine (CVU), a leading 
Ukrainian watchdog group on elections, have cited numerous violations 
in the campaign process.
  The intent of this resolution is to make the Government of Ukraine 
aware that the U.S. Congress is monitoring the conduct of the 
parliamentary election process closely, and will not just be focusing 
on Election Day results. My resolution urges the Government of Ukraine 
to enforce impartially the new election law signed by President Kuchma 
in October. The resolution also urges the Government of Ukraine to meet 
its commitments on democratic elections and address issues identified 
by the OSCE in its final report on the 1999 elections, such as state 
interference in the campaign and pressure on the media. Finally, the 
resolution calls upon the Government of Ukraine to allow both domestic 
and international election monitors access to the parliamentary 
election process.
  It is my hope that this resolution will send a clear message to the 
Government of Ukraine that the U.S. Congress will not simply rubber 
stamp funding requests for Ukraine without also considering the serious 
issues involved in Ukraine's democratic development. In particular, the 
conduct of the 2002 parliamentary elections will have a major impact on 
funding considerations when Members of Congress are again confronted 
with the task of blancing their support for the U.S.-Ukrainian 
relationship with Ukraine's progress in making democratic reforms.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for H. Res. 339, and I encourage the 
Government of Ukraine to conduct a democratic, transparent, and fair 
parliamentary election process on March 31.
  Mr. HOEFFEL. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) that the House 
suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H.Res. 339, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________