[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 18114-18150]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]





                  Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Paul

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

       Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Paul:

       Page 32, after line 3, insert the following (and amend the 
     table of contents accordingly):

                        Subtitle C--Limitations

     SEC. 131. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS AUTHORIZED TO BE 
                   APPROPRIATED BY THIS ACT FOR ANY UNITED STATES 
                   CONTRIBUTION TO THE UNITED NATIONS OR ANY 
                   AFFILIATED AGENCY OF THE UNITED NATIONS.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, none of 
     the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be 
     obligated or expended to pay any United States contribution 
     to the United Nations or any affiliated agency of the United 
     Nations.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) and a Member opposed (Mr. Hyde) each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).

                              {time}  1545

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment takes away the funding from the United 
Nations as well as any affiliated U.N. agency.
  Mr. Chairman, last year we spent $3.25 billion on the U.N. as well as 
the other agencies at the U.N. I do not believe that is money 
worthwhile. It is not a good investment. I do not think the money is 
spent well. The amendment, as I said, defunds the United Nations as 
well as its agencies. We pay 21

[[Page 18115]]

percent of the budget, and on peacekeeping missions we pay over 27 
percent. I think this is essentially wasted money.
  We also lose our sovereignty when we look to the U.N. for guidance. 
When we declared war or when we went to war without declaration of war 
last fall, we had a resolution on the floor which cited the U.N. 23 
different times. I do not believe we should go to war under U.N. 
resolutions, and we have essentially been in Iraq under U.N. resolution 
because in the early 1990s it was under U.N. resolution that we went to 
war. The old-fashioned way of going to war was a declaration of war.
  We went into Korea over 50 years ago under a U.N. resolution. We are 
still in Korea. We still have serious problems in Korea. There is still 
a confrontation that we have with the government of North Korea. I do 
not see where it is to our benefit, I do not see where it is a benefit 
to world peace to rely on the United Nations. Even though we rely on 
the United Nations for authority, when we want the United Nations to go 
along with our policy as our President asked earlier this year, it was 
refused. So in many ways we have a policy that does not make a whole 
lot of sense. We first rely on the United Nations, spend a lot of 
money, then they do not do our bidding.
  It gets to be almost a joke around the world about some of the things 
the U.N. does. When you think about the Commission of Human Rights and 
who is appointed as the chairman of the Commission of Human Rights, 
nobody else other than Libya. And before the war it was actually Iraq 
who was supposed to chair the Disarmament Commission.
  So this I think in many ways reflects the ineptness of the United 
Nations and its inability to pursue any policy that is in our interest. 
So it is for this reason, whether it is rejoining UNESCO and throwing 
more money down another on another useless program, we here are 
spending a lot of money giving up our sovereignty. Much of this money 
should be spent here at home.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos).
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman of the 
committee for yielding me time.
  I rise, Mr. Chairman, in the strongest possible opposition to the 
Paul amendment which would cause great harm to our national interests. 
Mr. Chairman, I do not look upon the United Nations through rose-
colored spectacles. It is obvious that for every criticism my good 
friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), has of the United Nations, 
I could probably cite a half dozen. But the fact remains that many of 
the activities of the United Nations are clearly in the U.S. national 
interest.
  The International Atomic Agency monitors and exposes countries such 
as North Korea and Iran attempting to develop nuclear weapons. The 
World Health Organization works to prevent infectious diseases 
throughout the world, and it was critical recently in putting a stop to 
the spread of SARS. UNESCO, which the President wisely decided to 
rejoin, will provide us an opportunity to make our voice heard in the 
educational, cultural and scientific field of the international 
organization. UNICEF, the United Nations International Children's Fund, 
is providing invaluable assistance across the globe to millions of 
children in desperate need; and the U.N. itself, more often than not, 
is helpful in attaining our own foreign policy objectives.
  The absurdity of the United States, the one remaining superpower, the 
most powerful civilizing force on the face of this planet in the 21st 
century, withdrawing from the United Nations is nothing short of 
absurd; and I strongly urge all of my colleagues to reject 
overwhelmingly this amendment.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, whether you think the U.N. is 
an efficacious organization or you think it is a useless organization, 
whether you think that we are advantaged as a country of being a member 
of the U.N. or you think we ought not be a member of the U.N., you can 
vote for the Paul amendment with confidence that you are doing the 
right thing. Let me explain.
  Both the Department of Defense and the Congressional Research Service 
have documented that we have spent over $19 billion of taxpayers' money 
on legitimate U.N. peacekeeping activities. Now, the U.N. has 
legitimized our claim that this ought to be credited against our dues 
because they have credited $1.8 billion of this against our dues.
  I am going to vote for this amendment. I will vote for any amendment 
that denies funding to the U.N. without any argument whether we ought 
to belong, any argument of whether it is good or bad, but the simple 
argument that, in all fairness, please do an accounting of the monies 
we have spent on legitimate U.N. peacekeeping activities. Please credit 
appropriate amounts of that to our U.N. dues. Then, if there are dues 
left over, we will pay those dues. But until that accounting is done, 
everybody in this Congress, we are in very tough financial times now, 
ought to vote yes for the Paul amendment that will demand that the 
accounting is done; and then we can debate another day whether or not 
we ought to be members of the U.N. or whether or not it is an 
efficacious organization.
  But, for today, the simple fact that we have not been credited for 
almost $17 billion of monies that we have spent on legitimate U.N. 
peacekeeping activities is more than a legitimate right to vote for 
this amendment. Vote for the Paul amendment.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a tempting amendment to the bill, but more 
mature thought says no, it is not all that good of an idea. The fact is 
we still need the U.N. and its agencies to promote peacekeeping efforts 
in some parts of the world, to assist in the global anti-terrorist 
campaign to help rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, to promote nuclear non-
proliferation by rogue states such as Iran and North Korea, and help 
implement our legislation designed to fight against HIV/AIDS.
  Without the World Food Program, there would be more starvation and 
suffering in the world. Without the Food and Agricultural Organization, 
there would be scant support for global food standards. And without the 
International Civil Aviation Organization, there would be no effective 
management of civilian airplane traffic around the world.
  Finally, to the extent that we decide to commit any U.S. troops as 
part of a regional West African peacekeeping force in Liberia, we 
certainly should not be cutting off funding for U.N. peacekeeping when 
we will need those same peacekeepers to relieve our troops, providing 
us with an exit strategy, safeguarding our interests.
  With great respect, I urge the defeat of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Paul) is recognized for 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I once again urge a yes vote on this 
amendment to limit the funding to the United Nations and to all its 
agencies.
  The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) mentioned that there were 
some programs under the United Nations which were sort of ``feel-good'' 
programs, social welfare programs, and I think I would grant that some 
of these programs have had some benefit. That in itself is not enough 
for me to endorse the concept of international welfare through the 
United Nations.
  However, too often I think they leave doing these programs that are 
designed to help people who are truly suffering versus getting involved 
with what we call peacekeeping missions. The United Nations are not 
allowed to declare war. They never go to war, and yet too often we get 
involved in war. That is why they were called peacekeepers in Korea. 
That is why it is a peacekeeping

[[Page 18116]]

mission when we go to Iraq. But, still, the armies are raised, and 
young men are called off, and people are killed on these peacekeeping 
missions. Therefore, I say that the United Nations has tended to take 
away the responsibilities of this Congress to make these very, very 
important decisions.
  I believe in many ways that by joining the United Nations we have 
allowed our Constitution to be amended merely by U.N. vote. If the U.N. 
votes and says something and we go along with that, we do that by 
majority vote here in the Congress. Where if we look to the 
Constitution for the authorities that we are allowed to do and what we 
are not permitted to do, we look to article I, section 8; and what the 
U.N. is doing is not permissible under the article.

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question 
is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Paul) will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed in House 
Report 108-206.


              Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, and I am the 
designee of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 7 offered by Mr. King of Iowa:
       Page 88, after line 17, insert the following new section 
     (and amend the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 406. LIMITATION ON THE UNITED STATES SHARE OF 
                   ASSESSMENTS FOR UNITED NATIONS REGULAR BUDGET.

       Section 11 of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 
     (22 U.S.C. 287e-3) is amended by striking ``22 percent of the 
     total of all assessed contributions for that budget'' and 
     inserting ``the largest assessed contribution of any other 
     permanent member country of the United Nations Security 
     Council''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  As a cosponsor of H.R. 2303, sponsored by the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Hayworth), I am happy to offer this amendment, which is the first 
step in reforming the United Nations.
  In the run-up to the war with Iraq, France was able to hold U.S. 
policy hostage by virtue of its status as a permanent member of the 
Security Council and the veto power that goes with it, but France was 
not alone. The other permanent Security Council Members, China, Russia, 
United Kingdom, of course, also the United States, they all have a veto 
power; and they regularly obstruct our foreign policy goals and vote 
the opposite of the United States.
  According to the State Department's voting practices in the United 
Nations of 2002, on votes important to U.S. interests, France and the 
U.K. voted with us just 50 percent of the time, Russia 22 percent of 
the time and China, 20 percent.
  Even though the U.S. has no more power on the Security Council than 
any of the other four permanent members, it pays the lion's share of 
the United Nations' budget. The United States pays $341 million a year, 
or 22 percent of the overall budget. China pays just $24 million, even 
though it has the world's second largest economy. Russia pays a paltry 
$19 million, which is less than Canada, Holland, Australia, or 
Switzerland.
  This amendment would limit the U.S. contribution to the regular U.N. 
budget to no more than the highest amount paid by any other member of 
the Security Council. Our veto power should cost us no more than what 
China, France, Russia, or the U.K. pay for theirs.
  This proposal would not affect U.S. payments to the U.N. for 
peacekeeping operations, voluntary programs, or membership 
organizations. It would only affect the U.N. regular budget. Even at 
this reduced amount, the U.S. would still contribute over $1.4 billion 
in various U.N. programs, far more than any other country.
  So aside from simple equity, enactment of this amendment would 
hopefully lead to reconsideration of how U.N. dues are assessed among 
permanent members. China and Russia are now essentially getting a free 
ride at our expense. The solution would be for all permanent members to 
pay equal amounts of the regular budget because of their veto power, 
and I say this amendment is a first step in the direction of reforming 
the United Nations.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona by way of Arizona 
does raise an important issue of how our dues to the U.N. regular 
budget are calculated. I would be glad to hold follow-up briefings and 
a hearing in the committee on our role at the U.N. and how our 
membership should promote our national interests and how our current 
assessment should reflect a fair share of all the other member states 
of the U.N.
  There are, however, serious problems with the way this amendment is 
written insofar as it unilaterally alters our existing financial 
obligations to the United Nations. It will reduce our assessment from 
the current 22 percent to the level of 6.5 percent, thereby generating 
close to $250 million in new arrearages to the U.N. It would reduce our 
share of the funding of the regular budget of the U.N. far below the 
level currently being paid by Japan and Germany and would give those 
countries every reason to reduce their contributions accordingly.
  The amendment mistakenly makes the assumption that the permanent 
members of the U.N. Security Council are assessed their dues on the 
basis of their inclusion in this body. The assessments are made instead 
on the basis of a member state's share of the world gross domestic 
product. In the case of the U.S., however, our share should actually be 
well over 22 percent.
  In short, the amendment would have the same practical effect as that 
of the gentleman from Texas' (Mr. Paul) amendment, undercutting any 
role we would have in the U.N. and eventually leading to our withdrawal 
from the world body. If my colleagues voted against the Paul amendment, 
they should oppose this amendment as well.
  In short, it takes a unilateral approach which could potentially harm 
U.S. interests and objectives around the world. Our contributions to 
the U.N. regular budget and to all other U.N. programs and agencies are 
agreed to by mutual consent of all U.N. members. If the U.S. were to 
unilaterally cut its assessment, we would start building arrears to the 
U.N. again just after completing a 3-year arrearage repayment effort 
under the Helms-Biden legislation where we obtained substantial 
management and administrative reforms in return for the payment of our 
back dues.
  Adoption of this amendment would undercut those ongoing reform 
efforts, and I urge it be defeated.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, might I inquire as to the amount of 
time I have remaining.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) and the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) both have 2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  I appreciate the gentleman from Illinois' remarks with regard to the

[[Page 18117]]

United Nations and some of the implications of any change that we might 
make in how the dues are assessed against the United States, and I 
would point out that our gross domestic product is comparable to that 
of the balance of the Security Council and all the other priority 
members that are there; and even though it is indexed to the gross 
domestic product, it is certainly out of proportion.
  Additionally, these members of the United Nations Security Council 
have exerted far more influence than their economy contributes to the 
world economy or to the United Nations dues or any type of forces that 
we might have out there, and so I would suggest that the United Nations 
has become a Third World class envy debating society where the 
strongest and most powerful countries' foreign policy is dictated by 
countries who wish to undermine the United States. It is entirely 
inappropriate that the United States must contribute an inordinate 
amount to provide a democratic platform to dictators and tyrants, and 
that is a broad fellowship in the approach of the United Nations.
  People tend to believe that because each country has a vote in the 
United Nations, and we set things up in kind of a proportional method 
as far as the dues are concerned in the Security Council, that somehow 
or another we have got a democratic debating society there; but we see 
dictators and tyrants at the United Nations, who give them full voice 
to utter their opinions, their tyrannical opinions, when they would not 
let a single one of their citizens do the same within their own 
country; and this is the flaw in the United Nations that we have lived 
with all of these years.
  We have got to move down the path of reforming the United Nations, 
and this is the first good step to do so.
  U.N. membership, structure, and policy aside, it is preposterous that 
the United States continues to pay for 22 percent of the entire U.N. 
regular budget. That 22 percent is $341 billion; and in fact, the U.N. 
votes against the United States 32 percent of the time on important 
issues. The United States contributes currently $115 million more to 
the regular budget than France, Germany, Russia, and China combined; 
but our veto power should cost no more than what France, Russia, or 
China pays for theirs. China only pays $24 million, even though it is 
the world's second largest economy. The Russians pay $19 million, which 
is less than Canada, Holland, Australia, or Switzerland. It is 
ridiculous to have this position. The United States is funding its 
political opposition.
  I want to make it clear that this amendment would not affect U.S. 
payments to the U.N. for peacekeeping operations, voluntary programs, 
or membership organizations. If this amendment is adopted, the U.S. 
will still contribute more than $1.4 billion to various programs. In 
summary, this amendment would simply limit the U.S. contributions to 
the U.N. regular budget.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment. A ``yes'' 
vote is not a vote against the U.S., but rather a vote to make it more 
accountable.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I might just say that the gentleman is certainly making common sense, 
and the problem is we just cannot do it unilaterally. It might be wise 
for us to constantly review our dues and payments to the U.N., but 
there is a process that is not unilateral in getting them changed.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield such time as I have remaining to 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the distinguished chairman 
of our committee for yielding me the time, and I want to identify my 
views with his and just add a few footnotes.
  The United Nations was founded at the end of the Second World War 
when the United States was economically not only a superpower but had a 
vastly disproportionate share of global gross domestic product. At that 
time, our contribution to the U.N. was 40 percent. It is now 22 
percent; and I think a legitimate case can be made for multilaterally, 
through negotiation, adjusting our contributions to the U.N. as gross 
domestic products of the various countries change. But to take 
unilateral action at this stage, when the United Nations is so badly 
needed, despite all of its flaws, would be a singularly ill-advised 
move; and I strongly urge all of my colleagues to reject this 
amendment.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Hayworth/
King Amendment that would limit what the U.S. pays in U.N. dues to an 
amount no more than the highest amount paid by any other permanent U.N. 
Security Council member.
  Let's put this amendment in perspective. In the run-up to the war 
against Saddam Hussein, we saw all too clearly the real goal of France 
in obstructing and sabotaging U.S. policy--to challenge U.S. global 
leadership and set itself up as the leader of a competing coalition.
  By itself, however, France is incapable of countering or competing 
with the U.S. militarily or economically, and that situation will only 
grow worse as France faces a demographically-driven decline. The key to 
France's strategic ambition is therefore based solely on its permanent 
membership on the UN Security Council, or UNSC, and, most importantly, 
the veto power that goes with it. Without its veto, France would lose 
its chief claim to geopolitical relevance.
  I don't mean to pick on France, Mr. Chairman, but its actions leading 
up to the war with Iraq make it an easy target. The truth is, the 
entire Security Council regularly obstructs our foreign policy goals 
and permanent members--China, France, Russia, and the U.K.--regularly 
vote the opposite of the U.S.
  According to the State Department's Voting Practices in the United 
Nations 2002, on votes important to U.S. interests, France and the U.K. 
voted with us just 50 percent of the time, Russia 22 percent, and China 
20 percent. Overall, the General Assembly voted the U.S. position only 
32 percent of the time on important issues. Areas of specific 
disagreement include the Middle East, nuclear disarmament, certain 
human rights issues, and the International Criminal Court.
  What makes all this even more galling is that even though the U.S. 
has no more power on the Security Council than any of the other four 
permanent members, it pays the lion's share of the U.N. budget. Indeed, 
even though the aggregate GDP of the other permanent members nearly 
equals that of the U.S., the U.S. contributes about $115 million more 
to the U.N. regular budget than those four countries combined.
  What's more, U.N. dues are supposed to be based on ability to pay. 
Yet there are a dozen countries that in 2003 will pay more in dues than 
China's $24 million even though it now has the world's second largest 
economy. The Chinese are clearly getting a lot of bang for their U.N. 
buck. So are the Russians. Their 2003 assessment is a paltry $19 
million, less than Canada, Holland, Australia, and Switzerland.
  The Hayworth/King Amendment would restore some balance to this 
picture. It would limit the U.S. contribution to the regular U.N. 
budget to no more than the highest amount paid by any other permanent 
UNSC member. The rationale is simple. Our veto power should cost us no 
more than what China, France, Russia, or the U.K. pay for theirs.
  The U.S.'s 2003 assessment for the U.N. regular budget is $341 
million. Under this amendment, we would pay no more than France, which 
has been assessed the second-highest amount, or $100 million. This 
proposal would not effect U.S. payments to the U.N. for peacekeeping 
operations, voluntary programs, or membership organizations. It would 
only affect the U.N. regular budget. Even at this reduced amount the 
U.S. would still contribute over $1.4 billion to various U.N. programs, 
far more than any other country.
  Aside from simple equity, enactment of my bill would hopefully lead 
to a reconsideration of how U.N. dues are assessed among permanent 
members. China and Russia are now essentially getting a free ride at 
our expense. The solution would be for all permanent members to pay 
equal amounts of the regular budget because of their veto power. France 
and the U.K. would have to pay a little more, Russia and China a lot 
more, the U.S. a lot less.
  A debate over dues could also prompt a broader discussion on U.N. 
reform. The outrages are not limited to the meltdown over Iraq. Cuba 
began its recent crackdown on dissidents as the U.N.'s Human Rights 
Commission was holding its annual meeting in Geneva. It promptly 
elected Cuba to another three-year term, an act author Carl Hiaasen 
wrote was ``a little like naming a necktie after the

[[Page 18118]]

Boston Strangler.'' The commission is headed by Libya and includes some 
of the worst abusers of human rights in the world, including Vietnam, 
Syria, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe.
  If the U.N. does not reform itself, it risks becoming, in the words 
of Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez, another ``Red Cross.'' 
The U.N. can become relevant again, but whether it does so will 
ultimately rest on the goodwill and magnanimity of the five permanent 
UNSC members who can block any reform with a veto.
  As we have learned, U.N. reform takes time. Ronald Reagan pulled the 
U.S. out of UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and 
Cultural Organization, in 1984. It took 18 years for UNESCO to 
implement sufficient reforms for the U.S. to return. More fundamental 
reform could take even longer.
  By approving this action today we will be sending a message that the 
U.S. is serious about reform at the U.N.
  Support the Hayworth/King Amendment.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. 
King) will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in House 
Report 108-206.


                Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mrs. Tauscher

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

       Amendment No. 8 offered by Mrs. Tauscher:
       Add the following at the end:

     SEC. 1716. MARKETING INFORMATION FOR COMMERCIAL 
                   COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITES.

       (a) In General.--A license shall not be required under 
     section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778) 
     for the transfer of marketing information for the purpose of 
     providing information directly related to the sale of 
     commercial communications satellites and related parts to a 
     member country of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     (NATO) or to Australia, Japan, or New Zealand.
       (b) Marketing Information.--In this section, the term 
     ``marketing information''--
       (1) means data that a seller must provide to a potential 
     customer (including a foreign end user) that will enable the 
     customer to make a purchase decision to award a contract for 
     goods or services, including system description, functional 
     information, price and schedule information, information 
     required for installation, operation, maintenance, and 
     repair; and
       (2) includes that level of data necessary to ensure safe 
     use of the product, but does not include sensitive encryption 
     and source code data, detailed design data, engineering 
     analysis, or manufacturing know-how.
       (c) Exception.--Nothing in this section shall exempt 
     commercial communications satellites from any licensing 
     requirement under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act 
     (22 U.S.C. 2778) for defense items and defense services, 
     except as described in subsection (a).

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, may I claim time in opposition because I am 
reluctantly opposed to the gentlewoman's amendment?
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois may.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering with the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) would provide a small, but vital, fix to the 
cumbersome process that governs the export of commercial communication 
satellites to our closest allies.
  The amendment is identical to language that Senator Enzi offered and 
that was passed as part of the Senate foreign relations bill.
  Under current law, satellite sellers must obtain a license from the 
State Department just to talk to a prospective buyer of a product. When 
a foreign buyer calls and asks for basic information, the company 
cannot immediately answer any questions. The current process means 
American companies have to wait for weeks or months to call back 
potential customers. This is undermining an industry we used to 
dominate at a time when our economy is in a major slump.
  As the COMSAT market continues to shrink, we want to ensure that U.S. 
companies are left standing. This amendment levels the playing field 
between the U.S. satellite industry and its foreign competitors.
  Under exception provided by our amendment, exporters of commercial 
communications satellites would be allowed to provide marketing 
information only to member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization, and Japan, Australia and New Zealand. It would not affect 
any of the licensing requirements for countries like China and would 
keep in place all of the national security statutes put in place by 
Congress.
  The amendment also improves the U.S. export control system. It 
enables the State Department to focus its resources on the transfer of 
truly sensitive data and allows U.S. companies to communicate with our 
allies internationally and friends in a timely and cost-effective 
manner about basic marketing information.
  Our national security is closely linked to our technological 
leadership which guarantees the military advantage we have today, but 
our national security is being undermined by a sick industry that is 
falling behind its competition because of onerous bureaucracies that 
are doing nothing to protect our national security.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Tauscher-Bereuter amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1615

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding me this 
time, and I rise in opposition to this amendment loosening satellite 
export controls.
  I am profoundly concerned, Mr. Chairman, that the language of the 
amendment would result in all satellite marketing information being 
exempted from any licensing requirement at all. Even if unclassified, 
some of the information transferred might well be sensitive. It is also 
possible that companies, without the government review of a license 
requirement, may unintentionally transfer more information than they 
should under the pressure of making a sale. The Departments of State 
and Defense would have no idea whatsoever what information is actually 
being transferred.
  The Congress needs more time and information to consider the full and 
serious ramifications of this change in satellite licensing regime in 
order to ensure that our national security is not compromised. I would 
urge the sponsors of this amendment, for whom I have a great deal of 
respect, to include at a future time a provision making clear that 
companies must first obtain a license to transfer marketing 
information. Short of that, I reluctantly oppose the amendment and ask 
all of my colleagues to vote against it.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the coauthor of this amendment.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time. The gentlewoman has explained adequately the very limited 
number of circumstances under which licensing would not be required. In 
fact, they have to require such licensing now. That is the point of 
this amendment.
  But the U.S. market share in the commercial satellite industry 
generally has fallen from around 75 percent of the market now to 50. As 
U.S. sales have dropped, European commercial satellites have 
dramatically increased. Among the key concerns which commercial 
satellite customers

[[Page 18119]]

cite as a concern when working with U.S. satellite producers is the 
delay frequently associated with licensing requirements. In some cases, 
a simple license to release unclassified information takes up to 60 
days.
  Furthermore, exempting from licensing the sharing of very limited 
type of nonclassified marketing information does in no way jeopardize 
the security interests of the United States. Amazingly, the 
competitiveness of U.S. satellite processors, however, if we damage it 
by continuing this unnecessary licensing, does damage the security 
interest of the United States.
  I was a member of the Cox Commission which generated the concern 
about licensing information. I am very concerned about the transfer of 
classified information or something that would jeopardize our national 
security. This in no way does. There is no good argument why this 
nonclassified marketing information should not be shared, and I urge 
support for this amendment by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. 
Tauscher).
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's yielding 
me this time to speak on this amendment.
  This is an example of why our export control regime is broken and 
badly in need of review. The typical high school teenager's bedroom has 
more computing power than the United States possessed when it developed 
the atomic and hydrogen bombs. Our friends and allies are worthy 
partners to deal with us in the satellite industry. As has been pointed 
out by my two colleagues in favor of this, what we are doing is we are 
forcing people to deal with other entities in Europe and around the 
world, so actually we are undermining the United States' long-term 
security interests, forcing them to other markets while we undermine 
American business.
  I almost never disagree with my chairman and ranking member, but I 
would respectfully suggest that this is an illustration of why we need 
to revise our export control regime. And before and unless we do that, 
adopting this amendment is good for business, it is good for technology 
development, and it is common sense. I urge its adoption.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the learned chairman of the 
Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding me this 
time, and let me just rise to oppose what I think is a very dangerous 
amendment.
  Historically, companies do not have to have a license to transmit 
marketing information to foreign customers. A couple of years ago, when 
we strengthened export controls on satellite exports, foreign customers 
started increasing their demands for what they called technical 
information as part of a marketing pitch. The foreign customers were 
not looking for the kind of information that the public can get. They 
were after proprietary design, integration, and operational information 
that could be used for a variety of purposes, including improvements in 
their own capabilities.
  So while the Tauscher amendment purports to prevent that information 
from being sent abroad, it leaves the definition of marketing 
information up to the prospective foreign customer.
  And let me just say, Mr. Chairman, that this technology, this 
technology of separation of a payload from a booster that puts a 
satellite up is very much akin to the technology that accompanies a 
separation of a MIRV'd nuclear warhead from its booster. This is 
dangerous technology, and I would ask everyone to vote against the 
Tauscher amendment.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
simply remind my colleagues that, first and foremost, this is marketing 
information that is declassified. Second, this is information that 
would only be allowed to be transmitted to NATO allies, Australia, 
Japan, and New Zealand. I think it is very important that we keep the 
controls that we have in place for any kind of technology transfer for 
places like China, Russia, and others, but this is for our own allies.
  While we have watched this business that we dominated at one time 
leave our shores and go to foreign competitors, I think it is very 
important that we keep our strict controls, that we keep the State 
Department involved in the licensing, but in these declassified 
marketing materials that everyone agrees are basically innocent, that 
we should allow them to be disseminated so that we can keep the small 
part of the business that we have left.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  If there is no export license requirement, it is difficult if not 
impossible to prevent information from being retransferred to a third 
country. This is important since our European allies do not always have 
the same policies as we do in satellite cooperation with China and 
other countries. The practical effect would be to deregulate much 
information about satellites and satellite technology. Given the 
importance of space technology to our national security, I am persuaded 
that such a drastic step should be approached with an abundance of 
precaution and entertained, if at all, only after detailed analysis.
  In sum, if this amendment were written to provide the President with 
discretion to not require licensing, that would be one thing. But this 
amendment prohibits the President from controlling information about 
satellites. I think that is a reach too far, and I respectfully, if 
painfully, suggest the gentlewoman's amendment be defeated.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question 
is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. 
Tauscher).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California 
(Mrs. Tauscher) will be postponed.
  Amendment No. 9 having not been offered, it is now in order to 
consider amendment No. 10 printed in House Report number 108-206.


                Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Menendez

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

       Amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Menendez:
       At the end of the bill, add the following new section (and 
     conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. __. ASSISTANCE TO TAMIL NADU.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Several United States businesses invested more than 
     $800,000,000 in capital in the Indian State of Tamil Nadu to 
     build and operate state-of-the-art electric generation 
     facilities to serve local customers.
       (2) For nearly 2 years since these power plants went into 
     service, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board has violated the 
     principle of contract sanctity by consistently refusing to 
     pay the contractually-required price for the electricity 
     produced by these companies.
       (3) The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board now owes these United 
     States companies in excess of $150,000,000 in arrearages 
     despite repeated assurances by the Government of Tamil Nadu 
     that the situation would be resolved.
       (4) All of the projects are in a technical state of default 
     on the principal of their loans and none of the United States 
     companies is making a return on their equity.
       (b) Restriction..--No funds authorized by this Act 
     (including any amendments made by this Act) or authorized 
     under any other provision of law may be used to directly or 
     indirectly support any programs, projects, or activities 
     (other than humanitarian, health, or rule of law programs, 
     projects, or activities) located in or designed to benefit 
     the State of Tamil Nadu, India.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and a Member opposed will each 
control 5 minutes.

[[Page 18120]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  My amendment is premised on an unfortunate situation that has arisen 
in the state of Tamil Nadu, India, involving several American companies 
that are currently attempting to conduct business there.
  In seeking to provide additional electrical generating capacity, 
several years ago the Tamil Nadu government sought to induce foreign 
companies to design and build power plants there. Five American 
companies accepted this proposition and constructed four projects that 
generate approximately 800 megawatts of electricity in Tamil Nadu at a 
combined cost of about $1 billion. Each company entered into a long-
term contract for the purchase of the electricity generated at these 
plants at an agreed-upon price.
  After getting these plants up and running, the Tamil Nadu government 
then began a systematic underpayment of the contract terms, sufficient 
to keep them running but providing no return on the initial investment. 
Technically, the projects are in a state of default; and, as far as we 
know, the Tamil Nadu government owes these American companies 
approximately $150 million under the terms of these contracts.
  Now, India has been a strategic ally and trading partner of the 
United States. Unfortunately, the state of Tamil Nadu has lagged behind 
the rest of that country in terms of maintaining a strong commitment to 
the rule of law and providing for these types of open, transparent 
transactions. So we simply, through our amendment, seek to create an 
opportunity to ensure that, while we will not certainly affect India as 
a country, that the state of Tamil Nadu cannot have the good deal and 
resources of this country if it continues to unjustifiably hold 
American companies hostage in this way.
  We do nothing to affect any foreign assistance that deals with human 
rights or nutrition or any of those things, but we do deal with all 
other issues that are not humanitarian, health-related, or justice 
sector relief initiatives designed to help those citizens of Tamil 
Nadu. So this is a way to stand up for U.S. companies who make 
legitimate investments and do the right thing and at the end of the day 
do not have the transparency and the opportunity to have their 
investments honored in a way in which we want to see throughout the 
world.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MENENDEZ. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding. I strongly 
support his amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, it is outrageous that American businesses entering in 
good faith into commercial transactions in various countries should be 
subjected to provincial governmental abuse. This is not the government 
of India which is refusing to meet its obligation but a constituent 
state of India, Tamil Nadu.
  I think the gentleman is bringing an important matter before us, and 
I urge all of my colleagues to support him.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the 
distinguished ranking member for his comments.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MENENDEZ. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I have some reservations about this 
amendment. This points out a serious problem which is actually ongoing 
with not just India but some other countries as well. However, I am 
willing to accept this amendment and will do so with pleasure.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Reclaiming my time once again, Mr. Chairman, I thank 
the distinguished chairman for his support.
  Hopefully, Mr. Chairman, we will have a resolution and will not have 
to pursue it much further than this. But I appreciate the opportunity 
to at least have these companies have their chance to have an 
opportunity for their investments to be upheld under international law.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the 
amendment and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks.
  This amendment sends a signal to the government of the Indian state 
of Tamil Nadu that it must abide by its contracts with American and 
other foreign investors. Five American energy companies built state-of-
the-art energy plants in Tamil Nadu. These companies negotiated 
contracts with the state government to provide energy at a guaranteed 
minimum rate. However, the government of Tamil Nadu has paid less than 
this guaranteed rate to the tune of over $130 million.
  One of the affected companies, CMS Energy, is based in the 7th 
district of Michigan. CMS built a state-of-the-art energy plant, 
providing jobs and training to the Tamil people. It also provides 
steady energy to support economic development and growth in Tamil Nadu. 
The government of Tamil Nadu's violation of its contract has cost CMS 
over $14 million.
  The amendment affects only the state of Tamil Nadu. It is not anti-
India. It will do nothing to affect other Indian states that respect 
the sanctity of contracts and provide an excellent environment for the 
foreign investment that benefits both India and investors. We should 
not be using our aid to reward governments that do not respect 
contracts.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does any Member claim time in opposition?
  If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).
  The amendment was agreed to.


         Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania

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

       Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania:
       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to provide assistance to the Republic of Moldova 
     unless the President determines and certifies to Congress 
     that the Government of Moldova has met its obligations with 
     respect to investments made by United States citizens in the 
     ``Aroma'' cognac factory located in Moldova.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon).

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment concerns the loss of an investment in 
Moldova by a constituent of mine due to the actions of the Moldovan 
government. I am prepared to withdraw my amendment if the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of the Committee on 
International Relations, will enter into a colloquy with me.
  Mr. Chairman, a long-time constituent of mine invested $2.5 million 
in Moldova for the purpose of purchasing a distillery in that country. 
The Moldovan government gave him a promissory note as security for $76 
million and also produced a signed deed from the Minister of 
Agriculture and the Minister of Privatization together with a legal 
opinion from the dean of their law school stating that these documents 
were legal and binding in Moldova. The property was never sold by the 
government, and my constituent never saw his money again.
  I have taken this matter to the President of Moldova on several 
occasions. Recently, my constituent met with President Voronin in March 
of this year. The President promised this matter would be resolved in 3 
to 4 weeks. It is July now, and the matter has still not been resolved.
  I have visited Moldova twice. I have led delegations. In fact, I 
spoke to their parliament when they convened on a Saturday session. I 
enjoyed meeting and want to work with the government leaders of that 
country. It is not my intention to alienate Moldova by withholding 
foreign aid. However, this type of outright fraud and corruption 
frightens many Americans from investing in Moldova and other former 
Soviet

[[Page 18121]]

states. The Moldovan government must remedy this matter and provide 
assurances to other investors that Moldova is ready to safeguard 
foreign investment.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I agree that foreign investment in countries 
of the former Soviet Union, such as Moldova, can carry significant 
risks for Americans and others. If the governments of these countries 
wish to enhance their economic prospects by encouraging foreign 
investment, then ensuring the security of those investments and 
honoring contractual agreements must be a top priority. I urge the 
government of Moldova to improve the transparency of its actions 
regarding foreign investment and to further develop the rule of law in 
this and other areas.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, as I have stated before, I 
do not want to alienate Moldova. The citizens of Moldova are not at 
fault. They are good people. It is their government that is at fault, 
and I do not think it is fair that its people suffer. Something must be 
done to remedy this matter. I will request to withdraw my amendment 
with assurances from the gentleman from Illinois that we will try to 
remedy this situation.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, by working together, I believe we will be 
able to resolve this matter in a manner that is satisfactory to all 
parties concerned.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the 
Committee on International Relations and the ranking member who do such 
a great job for consideration of all issues. I look forward to working 
with him on this legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). Is there 
objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.


                 Amendments En Bloc Offered by Mr. Hyde

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 2 of House Resolution 
316, I offer amendments en bloc consisting of the following amendments 
printed in House Report 108-206: amendments numbered 12, 13, 14, 15, 
16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 
38, 39, 40 and 42.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendments en 
bloc.
  The text of the amendments en bloc is as follows:

       Amendments en bloc offered by Mr. Hyde, consisting of the 
     following:
       Amendment No. 12 offered by Mr. Manzullo:
       After section 3 of the bill, insert the following new 
     section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 4. SPECIAL RULES FOR APPLYING BUY AMERICAN ACT.

       (a) Acquisitions of Articles, Materials, and Supplies.--
     With respect to any acquisition under this Act or any 
     amendment made by this Act of articles, materials, or 
     supplies that are subject to section 2 of the Buy American 
     Act (41 U.S.C. 10a), such section shall be applied to such 
     acquisition by substituting ``at least 65 percent'' for 
     ``substantially all''; or
       (b) Contracts for Construction, Alternation, or Repair.--
     With respect to any contract for the construction, 
     alteration, or repair of any public building or public work 
     entered into under this Act or any amendment made by this Act 
     that is subject to section 3 of the Buy American Act (41 
     U.S.C. 10b), such section shall be applied to such contract 
     by substituting ``at least 65 percent'' for ``substantially 
     all''.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 13 offered by Mr. Crowley:
       Page 111, after line 13, insert the following new section 
     (and amend the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 507. CONTRACTOR REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds that the overriding 
     national security aspects of the international programs of 
     the International Broadcasting Bureau require the assurance 
     of uninterrupted logistic support under all circumstances for 
     the programs. Therefore, it is in the best interests of the 
     United States to provide a preference for United States 
     contractors bidding on these projects.
       (b) Preference for United States Contractors.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in any case where 
     there are two or more qualified bidders on projects of the 
     International Broadcasting Bureau, including design and 
     construction projects and projects with respect to 
     transmitters, antennas, spare parts, and other technical 
     equipment, all the responsive bids of United States persons 
     and qualified United States joint venture persons shall be 
     considered to be reduced by 10 percent.
       (c) Exception.--
       (1) Subsection (b) shall not apply with respect to any 
     project of the International Broadcasting Bureau when--
       (A) precluded by the terms of an international agreement 
     with the host foreign country;
       (B) a foreign bidder can establish that the foreign bidder 
     is a national of a country whose government permits United 
     States contractors and suppliers the opportunity to bid on a 
     competitive and nondiscriminatory basis with its national 
     contractors and suppliers, on procurement and projects 
     related to the construction, modernization, upgrading, or 
     expansion of--
       (i) its national public radio and television sector,
       (ii) its private radio and television sector, to the extent 
     that such procurement or project is, in whole or in part, 
     funded or otherwise under the control of a government agency 
     or authority,
       (C) the Secretary of Commerce certifies (in advance of the 
     award of the contract for that project) to the Board of the 
     International Broadcasting Bureau that the foreign bidder is 
     not receiving any direct subsidy from any government, the 
     effect of which would be to disadvantage the competitive 
     position of United States persons who also bid on the 
     project, or
       (D) the statutes of a host foreign country prohibit the use 
     of United States contractors on such projects within that 
     country.
       (2) An exception under paragraph (1)(D) shall only become 
     effective with respect to a foreign country 30 days after the 
     Secretary of State certifies to the Committee on 
     International Relations and the Committee on Appropriations 
     of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign 
     Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate 
     what specific actions the Secretary has taken to urge the 
     foreign country to permit the use of United States 
     contractors on such projects.
       (d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
       (1) The term ``United States person'' means a person that--
       (A) is incorporated or otherwise legally organized under 
     the laws of the United States, including any State (and any 
     political subdivision thereof) and the District of Columbia;
       (B) has its principal place of business in the United 
     States;
       (C) has been incorporated or otherwise legally organized in 
     the United States for more than 5 years before the issuance 
     date of the Invitation For Bids or the Request For Proposals 
     with respect to a project under subsection (b);
       (D) has proven, as indicated by prior contracting 
     experience, to possess the technical, managerial, and 
     financial capability to successfully complete a project 
     similar in nature and technical complexity to that being 
     contracted for;
       (E)(i) employs United States citizens in at least 80 
     percent of its principal management positions in the United 
     States;
       (ii) employs United States citizens in more than half of 
     its permanent, full-time positions in the United States; and
       (iii) will employ United States citizens in at least 80 
     percent of the supervisory positions on the project site; and
       (F) has the existing technical and financial resources in 
     the United States to perform the contract.
       (2) The term ``qualified United States joint venture 
     person'' means a joint venture in which a United States 
     person or persons own at least 51 percent of the assets of 
     the joint venture.
       (3) The term ``responsive bid'' includes only a bid where 
     the bidder can establish that the United States goods and 
     services content, excluding consulting and management fees, 
     of the bidder's proposal and the resulting contract will not 
     be less than 55 percent of the value of the bidder's proposal 
     and the resulting total contract.
       (e) Effective Date.--The provisions of this section shall 
     apply to any project with respect to which the Request For 
     Proposals (commonly referred to as ``RFP'') or the Invitation 
     For Bids (commonly referred to as ``IFB'') was issued after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 14 offered by Mr. Schiff:
       At the end of title VII (relating to miscellaneous 
     provisions) insert the following:

     SEC. 735. SENSE OF CONGRESS CONCERNING THE TIMELY ISSUANCE OF 
                   VISAS FOR RUSSIAN WEAPONS SCIENTISTS INVOLVED 
                   IN ARMS CONTROL AND NONPROLIFERATION EXCHANGES 
                   WITH THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The United States visa approval system has in the past 
     lacked proper oversight, coordination, and supervision. A 
     more systematic, stringent, and rigorous evaluation system 
     for visa approvals is clearly in the best interests of the 
     United States.

[[Page 18122]]

       (2) Many distinguished scholars, professors, researchers, 
     and foreign associates of United States national academies 
     have been prevented by visa delays from entering the United 
     States for engagements at major conferences, meetings, and 
     teaching invitations at American universities.
       (3) Research collaborators for United States laboratories 
     have also been prevented from entering the United States. 
     Their absence halts projects and compromises United States 
     commitments in long-standing international cooperative 
     agreements aimed at reducing stockpiles of weapons of mass 
     destruction.
       (4) Visa restrictions came within one day of forcing the 
     cancellation of an important meeting in Washington, D.C. of 
     the National Academy of Sciences Committee on United States 
     Russian Cooperation on Nuclear Non-Proliferation.
       (5) Russian weapons scientists involved in nuclear non-
     proliferation cooperative efforts with the United States are 
     critical to American efforts to ensure that nuclear weapons-
     grade materials remain under control and out of the hands of 
     terrorists.
       (6) In a December 2002 statement, the Presidents of the 
     National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of 
     Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine found that a 
     United States approach to visas that welcomes qualified 
     foreign scientists, engineers, health professionals, and 
     students serves national goals in three distinct ways:
       (A) It harnesses international cooperation for 
     counterterrorism.
       (B) It builds stronger allies through scientific and 
     technical cooperation.
       (C) It maintains United States global leadership in science 
     and technology.
       (7) The Presidents of the National Academy of Sciences, the 
     National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of 
     Medicine have found that current United States policy toward 
     granting visas, to foreign scientists is harmful to the 
     United States scientific community and to the longterm well-
     being of the United States. They stated on December 13, 2002, 
     that ``To make our nation safer, it is extremely important 
     that our visa policy not only keep out foreigners who intend 
     to do us harm, but also facilitate the acceptance of those 
     who bring us considerable benefit. Recent efforts by our 
     government to constrain the flow of international visitors in 
     the name of national security are having serious unintended 
     consequences for American science, engineering, and medicine. 
     The long-term security of the United States depends on 
     admitting scholars who benefit our nation. In short, the 
     United States scientific, engineering, and health communities 
     cannot hope to maintain their present position of 
     international leadership if they become isolated from the 
     rest of the world. We view this as an urgent matter, one that 
     must be promptly addressed if the United States is to meet 
     both its national security and economic development goals.''.
       (8) Currently, consular officials send many visa 
     applications back to the United States for sequential 
     security clearances by several agencies, which may lead to 
     long delays in visa processing. Consular officers are subject 
     to criminal penalties if they grant a visa to a person who 
     subsequently commits a terrorist act in the United States. 
     However, there are currently no incentives for consular 
     officers to facilitate scientific exchanges, which may 
     advance the national interest of the United States.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that--
       (1) to the extent possible and consistent with national 
     security objectives, the United States should expedite the 
     processing of granting visas to Russian weapons scientists, 
     especially those participating in bilateral weapon 
     disarmament talks, negotiations, and exchanges, to enable 
     them to participate in cooperative nonproliferation 
     activities with their counterparts in the United States, and
       (2) the Department of State is encouraged to consider 
     streamlining the process of granting visas for such 
     scientists as follows:
       (A) Reinstate a procedure of pre-security clearance for 
     scientists and engineers with the proper credentials.
       (B) Involve the United States scientific and technical 
     community in determining areas of particular security 
     concern.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 15 offered by Ms. Schakowsky:
       Page 78, after line 23, insert the following (and amend the 
     table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 724. ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES FOR EMBASSIES AND 
                   CONSULATES.

       (a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that the Secretary of State should provide such resources, 
     personnel, and training at each United States Embassy and 
     consulate as are adequate to carry out the duties and 
     responsibilities of such posts and to meet the needs of those 
     seeking services at such posts. In particular, given Public 
     Notice 4393 (Federal Register, July 7, 2003) which restricts 
     the number of waivers that can be granted for interviews of 
     nonimmigrant visas, the Secretary of State should provide 
     sufficient resources, particularly in countries that are 
     allies of the United States, to ensure that staff can process 
     visa applications, including conducting personal interviews, 
     in a manner that is timely, while complying with all the 
     application requirements, including security concerns.
       (b) Report to Congress.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State 
     shall submit a report concerning the allocation of resources 
     for embassies and consulates to the appropriate congressional 
     committees.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 16 offered by Mr. Gallegly:
       At the end of title VII (relating to miscellaneous 
     provisions) insert the following:

     SEC. 736. DESIGNATION OF FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS.

       (a) Period of Designation.--Section 219(a)(4) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189(a)(4)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) by striking ``Subject to paragraphs (5) and (6), a'' 
     and inserting ``A''; and
       (B) by striking ``for a period of 2 years beginning on the 
     effective date of the designation under paragraph (2)(B)'' 
     and inserting ``until revoked under paragraph (5) or (6) or 
     set aside pursuant to subsection (c)'';
       (2) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) Review of designation upon petition.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall review the 
     designation of a foreign terrorist organization under the 
     procedures set forth in clauses (iii) and (iv) if the 
     designated organization files a petition for revocation 
     within the petition period described in clause (ii).
       ``(ii) Petition period.--For purposes of clause (i)--

       ``(I) if the designated organization has not previously 
     filed a petition for revocation under this subparagraph, the 
     petition period begins 2 years after the date on which the 
     designation was made; or
       ``(II) if the designated organization has previously filed 
     a petition for revocation under this subparagraph, the 
     petition period begins 2 years after the date of the 
     determination made under clause (iv) on that petition.

       ``(iii) Procedures.--Any foreign terrorist organization 
     that submits a petition for revocation under this 
     subparagraph must provide evidence in that petition that the 
     relevant circumstances described in paragraph (1) have 
     changed in such a manner as to warrant revocation with 
     respect to the organization.
       ``(iv) Determination.--

       ``(I) In general.--Not later than 180 days after receiving 
     a petition for revocation submitted under this subparagraph, 
     the Secretary shall make a determination as to such 
     revocation.
       ``(II) Classified information.--The Secretary may consider 
     classified information in making a determination in response 
     to a petition for revocation. Classified information shall 
     not be subject to disclosure for such time as it remains 
     classified, except that such information may be disclosed to 
     a court ex parte and in camera for purposes of judicial 
     review under subsection (c).
       ``(III) Publication of determination.--A determination made 
     by the Secretary under this clause shall be published in the 
     Federal Register.
       ``(IV) Procedures.--Any revocation by the Secretary shall 
     be made in accordance with paragraph (6).''; and

       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) Other review of designation.--
       ``(i) In general.--If in a 4-year period no review has 
     taken place under subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall 
     review the designation of the foreign terrorist organization 
     in order to determine whether such designation should be 
     revoked pursuant to paragraph (6).
       ``(ii) Procedures.--If a review does not take place 
     pursuant to subparagraph (B) in response to a petition for 
     revocation that is filed in accordance with that 
     subparagraph, then the review shall be conducted pursuant to 
     procedures established by the Secretary. The results of such 
     review and the applicable procedures shall not be reviewable 
     in any court.
       ``(iii) Publication of results of review.--The Secretary 
     shall publish any determination made pursuant to this 
     subparagraph in the Federal Register.''.
       (b) Aliases.--Section 219 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections 
     (c) and (d), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
     subsection (b):
       ``(b) Amendments to a Designation.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may amend a designation 
     under this subsection if the Secretary finds that the 
     organization has changed its name, adopted a new alias, 
     dissolved and then reconstituted itself under a different 
     name or names, or merged with another organization.
       ``(2) Procedure.--Amendments made to a designation in 
     accordance with paragraph (1) shall be effective upon 
     publication in the Federal Register. Subparagraphs (B) and 
     (C)

[[Page 18123]]

     of subsection (a)(2) shall apply to an amended designation 
     upon such publication. Paragraphs (2)(A)(i), (4), (5), (6), 
     (7), and (8) of subsection (a) shall also apply to an amended 
     designation.
       ``(3) Administrative record.--The administrative record 
     shall be corrected to include the amendments as well as any 
     additional relevant information that supports those 
     amendments.
       ``(4) Classified information.--The Secretary may consider 
     classified information in amending a designation in 
     accordance with this subsection. Classified information shall 
     not be subject to disclosure for such time as it remains 
     classified, except that such information may be disclosed to 
     a court ex parte and in camera for purposes of judicial 
     review under subsection (c).''.
       (c) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--Section 219 of 
     the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking ``subsection (b)'' and 
     inserting ``subsection (c)'';
       (B) in paragraph (6)(A)--
       (i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``or a 
     redesignation made under paragraph (4)(B)'' and inserting 
     ``at any time, and shall revoke a designation upon completion 
     of a review conducted pursuant to subparagraphs (B) and (C) 
     of paragraph (4)''; and
       (ii) in clause (i), by striking ``or redesignation'';
       (C) in paragraph (7), by striking ``, or the revocation of 
     a redesignation under paragraph (6),''; and
       (D) in paragraph (8)--
       (i) by striking ``, or if a redesignation under this 
     subsection has become effective under paragraph (4)(B),''; 
     and
       (ii) by striking ``or redesignation''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), as so redesignated--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``of the designation in 
     the Federal Register,'' and all that follows through ``review 
     of the designation'' and inserting ``in the Federal Register 
     of a designation, an amended designation, or a determination 
     in response to a petition for revocation, the designated 
     organization may seek judicial review'';
       (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, amended designation, 
     or determination in response to a petition for revocation'' 
     after ``designation'';
       (C) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, amended designation, 
     or determination in response to a petition for revocation'' 
     after ``designation''; and
       (D) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``, amended designation, 
     or determination in response to a petition for revocation'' 
     after ``designation'' each place that term appears.
       (d) Savings Provision.--For purposes of applying section 
     219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act on or after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the term ``designation'', as 
     used in that section, includes all redesignations made 
     pursuant to section 219(a)(4)(B) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189(a)(4)(B)) prior to the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and such redesignations shall continue 
     to be effective until revoked as provided in paragraph (5) or 
     (6) of section 219(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
     (8 U.S.C. 1189(a)).
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 18 offered by Mr. Burton of Indiana:
       Page 78, after line 23, insert the following:

     SEC. 274. NOTICE TO UNITED STATES EMBASSIES ABROAD REGARDING 
                   CHILDREN WHO ARE THE SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL 
                   CHILD ABDUCTION AND GUIDELINES RELATING TO 
                   ASYLUM FOR SUCH CHILDREN.

       (a) Notice of International Child Abduction.--The Secretary 
     of State shall establish procedures to ensure that 
     appropriate United States Embassies abroad are notified of 
     the possible presence in that country of any child who has 
     been the subject of international child abduction in 
     violation of the order of a court in the United States.
       (b) Guidelines for Asylum.--The Secretary of State shall 
     promulgate guidelines for the personnel of United States 
     Embassies abroad concerning procedures relating to asylum at 
     such facilities for children who are the subject of 
     international child abduction.

     SEC. 275. INADMISSIBILITY OF ALIENS SUPPORTING INTERNATIONAL 
                   CHILD ABDUCTORS AND RELATIVES OF SUCH 
                   ABDUCTORS.

       (a) In General.--Section 212(a)(10)(C)(ii) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(10)(C)(ii)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subclause (I), by striking the comma at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (2) in subclause (II), by striking ``, or'' at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (3) by amending subclause (III) to read as follows:

       ``(III) is a spouse (other than the spouse who is the 
     parent of the abducted child), child (other than the abducted 
     child), parent, sibling, cousin, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, 
     or grandparent of an alien described in clause (i), is an 
     agent of such an alien, or is a principal employing such an 
     alien as an agent, if such person has been designated by the 
     Secretary of State at the Secretary's sole and unreviewable 
     discretion; or'' and

       (4) by adding at the end the following:

       ``(IV) is a spouse of the abducted child described in 
     clause (i), if such person has been designated by the 
     Secretary of State at the Secretary's sole and unreviewable 
     discretion,

     is inadmissible until such child is surrendered to the person 
     granted custody by the order described in that clause, and 
     such custodian and child are permitted to return to the 
     United States or such custodian's place of residence.''.
       (b) Identification of Aliens Supporting Abductors and 
     Relatives of Abductors; Notice to Custodial Parents and 
     Guardians; Annual Report; Definitions.--Section 212(a)(10)(C) 
     of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1182(a)(10)(C)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(iv) Identification of aliens supporting abductors and 
     relatives of abductors.--In all instances in which an alien 
     commits an act described in clause (i), the Secretary of 
     State shall take appropriate action to identify the 
     individuals who are inadmissible under clause (ii).
       ``(v) Notice to custodial parents and guardians.--In all 
     instances in which an alien commits an act described in 
     clause (i), the Secretary of State shall, upon request of the 
     person granted custody of the child concerned, inform the 
     person of whether, and when, any individual who is 
     inadmissible under clause (ii) by reason of such act has been 
     issued a visa or otherwise authorized to enter the United 
     States.
       ``(vi) Annual report.--The Secretary of State annually 
     shall submit to the Committee on International Relations, the 
     Committee on Government Reform, and the Committee on the 
     Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives, and 
     the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs, and the Committee on the Judiciary of 
     the United States Senate, a report that provides, with 
     respect to the preceding year, an accounting of the number of 
     cases known to the Secretary of State, disaggregated 
     according to the nationality of the alien concerned--

       ``(I) in which an authority under this subparagraph was 
     exercised (and with respect to each such case, the specific 
     ground for inadmissibility shall be specified); and
       ``(II) in which an authority under this subparagraph has 
     not been exercised but in which an alien, after entry of an 
     order by a court in the United States granting custody to a 
     person of a United States citizen child, detained or retained 
     the child, or withheld custody of the child, outside the 
     United States from the person granted custody by that order.

       ``(vii) Definitions.--For purposes of this subparagraph--

       ``(I) the term `child' means an individual who was a child 
     at the time the individual was detained or retained, or at 
     the time custody of the individual was withheld, as described 
     in clause (i), regardless of the age or marital status of the 
     individual after such time; and
       ``(II) the term `sibling' includes a step-sibling or half-
     sibling.''.
                                  ____


       Amendment No. 19 offered by Mr. Ackerman:
       Page 14, strike lines 1 through 4, and insert the 
     following:
       (5) Protection of Foreign Missions and Officials.--
       (A) For ``Protection of Foreign Missions and Officials'', 
     $25,000,000 for the fiscal year 2004 and $25,000,000 for the 
     fiscal year 2005.
       (B) In addition to amounts authorized to be appropriated by 
     subparagraph (A), there is authorized to be appropriated 
     $30,600,000 for ``Protection of Foreign Missions and 
     Officials'' only to reimburse the City of New York for 
     necessary expenses incurred since 1999 for the protection of 
     foreign missions and officials.
       (C) Notwithstanding section 34 of the State Department 
     Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2706), the Secretary 
     is authorized to reprogram not more than $5,000,000 of funds 
     otherwise authorized to be appropriated by this section for 
     the purposes of this paragraph.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 20 offered by Mr. Ackerman:
       Page 70, after line 2 insert the following (and amend the 
     table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 231. INTERFERENCE WITH PROTECTIVE FUNCTIONS.

       (a) Offense.--Chapter 7 of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 117. Interference with certain protective functions

       ``Whoever knowingly and willfully obstructs, resists, or 
     interferes with a Federal law enforcement agent engaged, 
     within the United States or the special maritime territorial 
     jurisdiction of the United States, in the performance of the 
     protective functions authorized by section 37 of the State 
     Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2709) or 
     section 103 of the Diplomatic Security Act (22 U.S.C. 4802) 
     shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 
     one year, or both.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is

[[Page 18124]]

     amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``117. Interference with certain protective functions.''.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 21 offered by Mr. Andrews:
       At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new 
     section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO REGARDING SECURITY FOR 
                   TAIWAN.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) For over half a century a close relationship has 
     existed between the United States and Taiwan which has been 
     of enormous economic, cultural, and strategic advantage to 
     both countries.
       (2) Taiwan today is a full-fledged democracy with a vibrant 
     economy and a vigorous multi-party political system that 
     respects human rights and the rule of law.
       (3) Taiwan is an ally of the United States, as most 
     recently evidenced by Taiwan's provision of humanitarian and 
     financial assistance to Afghanistan at the request of the 
     United States and its support for Operation Iraqi Freedom.
       (4) The security of the 23 million people in Taiwan is 
     threatened by the deployment by the People's Republic of 
     China of over 400 short-range ballistic missiles targeted at 
     Taiwan, and the purchase by the PRC of advanced weaponry 
     systems, including Su-27 and Su-30 fighter planes, Kilo 
     submarines, and Sovremenny destroyers.
       (5) Taiwan was threatened by missile exercises conducted by 
     the PRC in August 1995 and again in March 1996 when Taiwan 
     was conducting its first free and direct presidential 
     elections.
       (6) Section 2(b)(4) of the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C. 
     3301(b)(4)) considers any effort to determine the future of 
     Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or 
     embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western 
     Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States.
       (7) Section 2(b)(6) of the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C. 
     3301(b)(6)) requires the United States to maintain the 
     capacity to resist any resort to force or other forms of 
     coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or 
     economic system, of the people on Taiwan.
       (8) In his January 17, 2001, confirmation hearing as 
     Secretary of State, General Colin Powell stated that ``We 
     will stand by Taiwan and will provide for the defense needs 
     of Taiwan in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act and the 
     subsequent communiques.''.
       (9) President Bush stated on April 24, 2001, that the 
     United States will do whatever it takes to help Taiwan defend 
     itself.
       (10) In his testimony before the International Relations 
     Committee of the House of Representatives and the Foreign 
     Relations Committee of the Senate in February and March of 
     2002, Admiral Dennis Blair of the United States Pacific 
     Command testified that ``China continued to build and 
     exercise its force of short-range ballistic missiles ranging 
     Taiwan. It still seeks to develop a range of military options 
     to influence and intimidate Taiwan, and has not abandoned the 
     option of using force to resolve Taiwan's status.''.
       (11) The July 2002 U.S.-China Economic and Security Review 
     Commission report to Congress stated that ``China is 
     enhancing its capability to carry out attacks across the 
     Taiwan Strait with its special operations forces, air forces 
     and navy and missiles forces with little notice,'' and ``the 
     Commission recommends that the U.S. along with its allies 
     should continue to call upon China to renounce the threat of 
     or the use of force against Taiwan.''.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) grave concerns exist concerning the deployment by the 
     People's Republic of China of hundreds of ballistic missiles 
     directed toward Taiwan, which threaten the security and 
     stability in the Taiwan Strait;
       (2) the President should direct all appropriate United 
     States officials to raise these concerns with the appropriate 
     officials from the People's Republic of China, and should 
     seek a public, immediate, and unequivocal renunciation from 
     the leaders of the People's Republic of China of any threat 
     or use of force against Taiwan;
       (3) the President should affirm with the leaders of the 
     People's Republic of China that there will not be a quid pro 
     quo between the dismantling of missiles aimed at Taiwan by 
     the People's Republic of China, and arms sales to Taiwan by 
     the United States;
       (4) China should dismantle the missiles that threaten 
     Taiwan, otherwise the President should authorize the sale of 
     the Aegis system to Taiwan, which would enable Taiwan to 
     defend itself against the threat of a missile attack by 
     China; and
       (5) the future of Taiwan should be determined peacefully 
     and with the express consent of the people of Taiwan.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 22 offered by Mr. Bereuter:
       Page 211, after line 11, insert the following section (and 
     amend the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 736. SENSE OF CONGRESS IN APPRECIATION OF THE ARMED 
                   FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AND REGARDING 
                   RESTORING STABILITY AND SECURITY IN IRAQ.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The United States, with the support of forces from 
     Great Britain and other countries, historically and 
     courageously liberated Iraq in three weeks.
       (2) Conditions on the ground in parts of Iraq continue to 
     pose a grave threat to American troops, thereby complicating 
     efforts to restore law and order and essential public 
     services for Iraqis. Such efforts are further complicated by 
     the absence of effective communications with the Iraqi 
     people.
       (3) Ultimately, maintaining law and order in Iraq and 
     preserving its territorial integrity will require the 
     creation of a professionally trained Iraqi police force and a 
     reformed Iraqi military; however, that will take a 
     significant amount of time and in the meantime international 
     armed forces and police must assume these responsibilities.
       (4) Approximately 145,000 United States troops are 
     currently deployed in Iraq, meaning that American troops 
     comprise roughly 90 percent of Coalition forces. If, as the 
     Department of Defense has stated, an additional 10,000 
     international troops join the Coalition effort in Iraq by 
     September, Americans will still comprise roughly 85 percent 
     of Coalition forces.
       (5) Maintaining the existing force level in Iraq currently 
     requires $3,900,000,000 each month.
       (6) The Department of Defense has stated that it will 
     require one year to train a new Iraqi Army of 12,000 soldiers 
     and three years to train 40,000 soldiers.
       (7) The Coalition Provisional Authority has stated that it 
     will require at least one year to recruit and train a police 
     force of 40,000 officers capable of assuming minimal policy 
     functions in Iraq, that it will require five years to recruit 
     and train a full force of 75,000 officers, and that at least 
     5500 additional international police are needed to train, 
     assist, and jointly patrol with the existing Iraqi police 
     force.
       (8) President Bush has noted that ``The rise of Iraq, as an 
     example of moderation and democracy and prosperity, is a 
     massive and long-term undertaking,'' and it is clear that 
     increasing the number of troops and police from countries 
     other than the United States will reduce risks to American 
     soldiers and the financial cost to the United States.
       (9) Secretary Rumsfeld testified that ``We certainly want 
     assistance from NATO and from NATO countries'' and it is 
     clear that involving the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 
     as is being done in Afghanistan and has been done in Kosovo 
     and Bosnia, allows the Coalition to maintain a robust 
     military presence while decreasing the exposure and risk to 
     American troops.
       (10) Rebuilding Iraq's neglected infrastructure and economy 
     and administering Iraq--including providing basic services 
     and paying public sector salaries--is likely to require tens 
     of billions of dollars over several years and projected Iraqi 
     oil revenues will be insufficient to meet these costs.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) it is in the national security interests of the United 
     States to remain engaged in Iraq in order to ensure a 
     peaceful, stable, unified Iraq with a representative 
     government;
       (2) the President should consider requesting formally and 
     expeditiously that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     (NATO) raise a force for deployment in post-war Iraq similar 
     to what it has done in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Kosovo and 
     the Congress urges NATO allies and other nations to provide 
     troops and police to Coalition efforts in Iraq; and
       (3) the President should consider calling on the United 
     Nations to urge its member states to provide military forces 
     and civilian police to promote stability and security in Iraq 
     and resources to help rebuild and administer Iraq.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 23 offered by Ms. Bordallo:
       Page 83, after line 10, insert the following (and amend the 
     table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 311. TREATMENT OF TERRITORIES AND POSSESSIONS AS PART OF 
                   THE GEOGRAPHIC UNITED STATES FOR PURPOSES OF 
                   TRANSFER ALLOWANCES.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of 
     transfer allowances for employees of the Department of State 
     under section 5924(2)(B) of title 5, United States Code, the 
     territories and possessions of the United States, the 
     Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, shall be considered part of the 
     geographic United States.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 24 offered by Mr. Brown of Ohio:
       At the end of subtitle A of title VII (relating to 
     reporting requirements) insert the following:

     SEC. 713. REPORT CONCERNING OBSERVER STATUS FOR TAIWAN AT THE 
                   SUMMIT OF THE WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY.

       Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, and not later than

[[Page 18125]]

     April 1 of each year thereafter, the Secretary of State shall 
     submit a report to the Congress, in unclassified form, 
     describing the United States plan to endorse and obtain 
     observer status for Taiwan at the annual week-long summit of 
     the World Health Assembly (WHA) held by the World Health 
     Organization (WHO) in May of each year in Geneva, 
     Switzerland. Each report shall include the following:
       (1) An account of the efforts the Department of State has 
     made, following the previous year's meeting of the World 
     Health Assembly to enourage WHO member states to promote 
     Taiwan's bid to obtain observer status.
       (2) The steps the Department of State will take to endorse 
     and obtain observer status at the forthcoming annual meeting 
     of the World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 25 offered by Mr. Crane:
       At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new 
     section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. __. ATTACKS ON UNITED STATES CITIZENS BY PALESTINIAN 
                   TERRORISTS.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) Since Yasser Arafat renounced violence in the Oslo 
     Peace Accords on September 13, 1993, at least 42 United 
     States citizens, including one unborn child, have been 
     murdered by Palestinian terrorists.
       (2) On December 1, 1993, in a drive-by shooting north of 
     Jerusalem, Hamas killed United States citizen Yitzhak 
     Weinstock, 19, whose family came from Los Angeles.
       (3) On October 9, 1994, Hamas kidnapped and murdered United 
     States citizen Nachshon Wachsman, 19, whose family came from 
     New York City.
       (4) On April 9, 1995, an Islamic Jihad bomb attack on a bus 
     near Kfar Darom killed United States citizen Alisa Flatow, 
     20, from West Orange, New Jersey.
       (5) On August 21, 1995, in a Hamas bus bombing in 
     Jerusalem, United States citizen Joan Davenny, from New 
     Haven, Connecticut, was killed.
       (6) On September 9, 1995, Mara Frey of Chicago was stabbed 
     in Ma'ale Michmash resulting in her unborn child's death.
       (7) On February 25, 1996, three United States citizens, 
     Sara Duker of Teaneck, New Jersey, Matthew Eisenfeld of West 
     Hartford, Connecticut, and Ira Weinstein of New York City, 
     were killed in a Hamas bus bombing in Jerusalem.
       (8) On May 13, 1996, United States citizen David Boim, 17, 
     of New York City, was killed in a drive-by shooting near Beit 
     El, north of Jerusalem.
       (9) On June 9, 1996, United States citizen Yaron Ungar was 
     killed in a drive by-shooting near Beit Shemesh.
       (10) On July 30, 1997, United States citizen Leah Stern of 
     Passaic, New Jersey, was killed in a Hamas bombing in 
     Jerusalem's Mahane Yehuda market.
       (11) On September 4, 1997, a Hamas bombing on Ben-Yehuda 
     Street, Jerusalem, killed Yael Botwin, 14, of Los Angeles.
       (12) On April 19, 1998, an attack near the Israeli town of 
     Maon killed United States citizen Dov Dribben, 28.
       (13) On October 8, 2000, Rabbi Hillel Lieberman, 36, of New 
     York City, was stabbed and killed near Nablus.
       (14) On October 30, 2000, United States citizen Esh-Kodesh 
     Gilmore, 25, was shot in Jerusalem.
       (15) On December 31, 2000, Rabbi Binyamin Kahane, 34, and 
     his wife, Talia Hertzlich Kahane, both formerly of New York 
     City, were killed in a drive-by shooting near Ofra.
       (16) On May 9, 2001, Jacob ``Koby'' Mandell, 13, of Silver 
     Spring, Maryland, was killed in an attack near Tekoah.
       (17) On May 29, 2001, Sarah Blaustein, 53, of Lawrence, New 
     York, was killed in a drive-by shooting near Efrat.
       (18) On August 9, 2001, two United States citizens, Judith 
     L. Greenbaum, 31, and Malka Roth, 15, were killed in the 
     Jerusalem Sbarro pizzeria bombing.
       (19) On November 4, 2001, Shoshana Ben-Yishai, 16, of New 
     York City, was shot and killed during an attack on a 
     Jerusalem bus.
       (20) On January 15, 2002, Avraham Boaz, 72, of New York 
     City, was killed in a shooting near Bethlehem.
       (21) On January 18, 2002, United States citizen Aaron Elis, 
     32, was killed in a shooting in Hadera.
       (22) On February 15, 2002, United States citizen Lee 
     Akunis, was shot and killed near Ramallah.
       (23) On February 16, 2002, Keren Shatsky, 14, of New York 
     City and Maine, and Rachel Thaler, 16, of Baltimore, 
     Maryland, were killed in a bombing in Karnei Shomron.
       (24) On February 25, 2002, United States citizen Moran 
     Amit, 25, was stabbed and killed in Abu Tor Peace Forest, 
     Jerusalem.
       (25) On March 24, 2002, Esther Kleinman, 23, formerly of 
     Chicago, was shot and killed near Ofra.
       (26) On March 27, 2002, United States citizen Hannah Rogen, 
     90, was killed in a bombing at a hotel Passover seder in 
     Netanya.
       (27) On June 18, 2002, Moshe Gottlieb, 70, of Los Angeles, 
     was killed in a bus bombing in Jerusalem.
       (28) On June 19, 2002, United States citizen Gila Sara 
     Kessler, 19, was killed in a bombing at a Jerusalem bus stop.
       (29) On July 31, 2002, five United States citizens were 
     killed in a bombing of a Hebrew University cafeteria: Marla 
     Bennett, 24, of San Diego, Benjamin Blutstein, 25, of 
     Susquehanna Township, Pennsylvania, Janis Ruth Coulter, 36, 
     of Massachusetts, David Gritz, 24, of Peru, Massachusetts 
     (and of dual French-United States citizenship), and Dina 
     Carter, 37, of North Carolina.
       (30) On March 5, 2003, Abigail Leitel, 14, who was born in 
     Lebanon, New Hampshire, died in a bus bombing in Haifa.
       (31) On March 7, 2003, United States citizens Rabbi Eli 
     Horowitz, 52, who grew up in Chicago, and Dina Horowitz, 50, 
     who grew up in Florida, were killed in their home.
       (32) On June 11, 2003, United States citizen Alan Beer, 47, 
     who grew up in Cleveland, was killed in bus bombing in 
     Jerusalem.
       (33) On June 20, 2003, United States citizen Tzvi 
     Goldstein, 47, originally from New York City, was shot and 
     killed in an attack while driving through the West Bank.
       (34) At least another 79 United States citizens have been 
     injured in Palestinian terrorist attacks, including United 
     States citizen Jack Baxter, 50, of New York City, who was 
     injured on April 30, 2003, in a bombing at a Tel Aviv pub.
       (35) The official Palestinian Authority television 
     broadcast on March 14, 2003, of a live sermon calling for the 
     destruction of the United States and Israel was a blatant 
     attempt to incite violence against United States and Israeli 
     citizens.
       (b) Statements of Policy.--Congress--
       (1) condemns the attacks on United States citizens by 
     Palestinian terrorists and demands that the Palestinian 
     Authority work with Israel to protect all innocent 
     individuals, regardless of citizenship, from terrorist 
     atrocities;
       (2) offers its condolences to the families and loved ones 
     of United States citizens who were killed by Palestinian 
     terrorist attacks; and
       (3) calls on the Secretary of State to include a listing of 
     the killing of every United States citizen by terrorists in 
     the ``Chronology of Significant Terrorist Incidents'', as 
     included in the annual Department of State's Patterns of 
     Global Terrorism Report.
                                 ______
                                 
       Amendment No. 26 offered by Mr. Hunter:
       Page 211, after line 11, insert the following:

     SEC. 736. SENSE OF CONGRESS AND REPORT CONCERNING WASTEWATER 
                   TREATMENT AND THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND 
                   WATER COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND MEXICO.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
       (1) The failure by the International Boundary and Water 
     Commission, United States and Mexico, to complete 
     negotiations on a new Treaty Minute with Mexico, as directed 
     by Congress in Public Law 106-457, has endangered the health 
     of the residents of San Diego County.
       (2) The continued flow of Mexican sewage on San Diego, 
     California, beaches has caused extensive and persistent beach 
     closings thereby causing economic hardship to the local 
     economy.
       (3) The International Boundary and Water Commission has 
     shown insignificant progress in negotiations with Mexico.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that the United States Section of the International Boundary 
     and Water Commission shall make treaty negotiations with 
     Mexico on the establishment of a public-private partnership 
     to construct and operate a wastewater treatment facility in 
     Mexico as outlined in Public Law 106-457 a priority.
       (c) Report to Congress.--The United States Section of the 
     International Boundary and Water Commission, United States 
     and Mexcio, shall submit monthly reports to the appropriate 
     congressional committees concerning progress in negotiations 
     on a new Treaty Minute with Mexico.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 27 offered by Mr. Hyde:
       At the end of title XVII of division B of the bill, insert 
     the following:

     SEC. __. TRANSFER OF NAVAL VESSELS TO CERTAIN FOREIGN 
                   COUNTRIES.

       (a) Transfers by Grant.--The President is authorized to 
     transfer vessels to foreign countries on a grant basis under 
     section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 
     2321j), as follows:
       (1) Bahrain.--To the Government of Bahrain, the OLIVER 
     HAZARD PERRY class guided missile frigate GEORGE PHILIP (FFG 
     12).
       (2) Portugal.--To the Government of Portugal, the OLIVER 
     HAZARD PERRY class guided missile frigate SIDES (FFG 14).
       (b) Transfers by Sale.--The President is authorized to 
     transfer vessels to foreign countries on a sale basis under 
     section 21 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2761) as 
     follows:
       (1) Brazil.--To the Government of Brazil, the SPRUANCE 
     class destroyer O'BRIEN (DD 975).
       (2) Chile.--To the Government of Chile, the SPRUANCE class 
     destroyer FLETCHER (DD 992).
       (3) Turkey.--To the Government of Turkey, the ANCHORAGE 
     class dock landing ship ANCHORAGE (LSD 36).
       (c) Grants Not Counted in Annual Total of Transferred 
     Excess Defense Articles.--The value of a vessel transferred 
     to

[[Page 18126]]

     another country on a grant basis under section 516 of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j) pursuant to 
     authority provided by subsection (a) shall not be counted 
     against the aggregate value of excess defense articles 
     transferred to countries in any fiscal year under subsection 
     (g) of that section.
       (d) Costs of Transfers on Grant Basis.--Any expense 
     incurred by the United States in connection with a transfer 
     authorized to be made on a grant basis under section 516 of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j) pursuant 
     to the authority provided by subsection (a) shall be charged 
     to the recipient (notwithstanding section 516(e)(1) of such 
     Act).
       (e) Repair and Refurbishment in United States Shipyards.--
     To the maximum extent practicable, the President shall 
     require, as a condition of the transfer of a vessel under 
     this section, that the country to which the vessel is 
     transferred have such repair or refurbishment of the vessel 
     as is needed, before the vessel joins the naval forces of 
     that country, performed at a shipyard located in the United 
     States, including a United States Navy shipyard.
       (f) Expiration of Authority.--The authority to transfer a 
     vessel under this section shall expire at the end of the two-
     year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 28 offered by Mr. Hyde:
       Strike section 227 (relating to GAO assessment of security 
     capital cost sharing) and insert the following:

     SEC. 227. SECURITY CAPITAL COST SHARING.

       (a) Authorization.--The first section of the Foreign 
     Service Buildings Act, 1926 (22 U.S.C. 292) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Security Capital Cost-Sharing Program.--(1) The 
     Secretary of State, as the single manager of all buildings 
     and grounds acquired under this Act or otherwise acquired or 
     authorized for the use of the diplomatic and consular 
     establishments in foreign countries, is authorized to 
     establish and implement a Security Capital Cost-Sharing 
     Program to collect funds from each agency on the basis of its 
     total overseas presence in a manner that encourages 
     rightsizing of its overseas presence, and expend those funds 
     to accelerate the provision of safe, secure, functional 
     buildings for United States Government personnel overseas.
       ``(2) The Secretary is authorized to determine annually and 
     charge each Federal agency the amount to be collected under 
     paragraph (1) from the agency. To determine such amount, the 
     Secretary may prescribe and use a formula that takes into 
     account the number of authorized positions of each agency, 
     including contractors and locally hired personnel, who are 
     assigned to United States diplomatic facilities and are under 
     the authority of a chief of mission pursuant to section 207 
     of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3927).
       ``(3) The head of an agency charged a fee under this 
     section shall remit the amount of the fee to the Secretary of 
     State through the Intra-Governmental Payment and Collection 
     System or other appropriate means.
       ``(4) There shall be established on the books of the 
     Treasury an account to be known as the `Security Capital 
     Cost-Sharing Program Fund', which shall be administered by 
     the Secretary. There shall be deposited into the account all 
     amounts collected by the Secretary pursuant to the authority 
     under paragraph (1), and such funds shall remain available 
     until expended. Such funds shall be used solely for the 
     provision of new safe, secure, functional diplomatic 
     facilities that comply with all applicable legal standards, 
     including those standards established under the authority of 
     the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 
     1999. The Secretary shall include in the Department of 
     State's Congressional Presentation Document an accounting of 
     the sources and uses of the amounts deposited into the 
     account.
       ``(5) The Secretary shall not collect a fee for an 
     authorized position of an agency of the Federal Government 
     that has been or would be granted a waiver pursuant to 
     section 606(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Secure Embassy Construction 
     and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (22 U.S.C. 
     4865(a)(2)(B)(i)).
       ``(6) In this subsection--
       ``(A) the term `agency of the Federal Government'--
       ``(i) includes the Interagency Cooperative Administrative 
     Support Service; and
       ``(ii) does not include the Marine Security Guard; and
       ``(B) the term `United States diplomatic facility' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 603 of the Secure Embassy 
     Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (22 U.S.C. 4865 
     note).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on October 1, 2004.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 29 offered by Mr. Hyde:
       In section 226 (relating to validity of United States 
     passports) strike ``travellers'' both places it appears and 
     insert ``travelers''.
       Strike line 14 on page 43 through line 2 on page 46.
       Page 79, line 15, after ``Act'' insert ``of 1956''.
       Page 79, lines 16 and 18, strike ``(o)'' and insert 
     ``(n)''.
       Page 79, line 20, strike ``(p)'' and insert ``(o)''.
       In the first sentence in section 301(b)(1) of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961, as proposed to be added by section 
     116(e) of the bill, strike ``For fiscal year fiscal year 
     2004'' and insert ``For fiscal year 2004''.
       In section 1707 of the bill, redesignate the second 
     paragraph (1) as paragraph (2).
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 30 offered by Mr. Lantos:
       In section 1713 of the bill (relating to enhanced police 
     training)--
       (1) strike ``Section 660(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act 
     of 1961'' and insert ``(a) In General.--Section 660(b) of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961''; and
       (2) add at the end the following new subsection:
       (b) Notification Requirement.--Section 660 of the Foreign 
     Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2420) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Funds may not be obligated for assistance under 
     subsection (b)(8) unless the Secretary of State notifies the 
     Committee on International Relations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the 
     Senate of the amount and nature of the proposed assistance at 
     least 15 days in advance of the proposed obligation in 
     accordance with the procedures applicable to reprogramming 
     notifications pursuant to section 634A of this Act. Such 
     notification shall include a comprehensive report and, where 
     practicable, a plan describing the police assistance and rule 
     of law programs of relevant United States agencies for each 
     country which is to receive assistance under section 
     660(b)(8).''.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 31 offered by Mrs. Maloney:
     In division B of the bill--
       (1) redesignate title XVII as title XVIII (and conform all 
     sections therein accordingly and conform the table of 
     contents); and
       (2) insert after title XVI the following new title (and 
     conform the table of contents accordingly):

                  TITLE XVII--ACCESS FOR AFGHAN WOMEN

     SEC. 1701. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Access for Afghan Women 
     Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 1702. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Despite the removal of the Taliban from power, women in 
     Afghanistan continue to experience brutal and frequent 
     violation of their human rights, generally outside of Kabul 
     where warlords are reexerting control.
       (2) Strong and continued support from the United States and 
     the international community can ensure that the advances made 
     by Afghan women since the fall of the Taliban will continue 
     and grow, rather than recede.
       (3) While the United States and the international community 
     continue to make substantial contributions to emergency 
     humanitarian and relief operations in Afghanistan, the 
     establishment of a stable, peaceful, prosperous, and 
     democratic Afghanistan with a broad-based, multi-ethnic, 
     gender-sensitive, and fully representative government 
     requires a significant increase in long-term investments in 
     development and reconstruction assistance.
       (4) The maternal mortality rate in Afghanistan is among the 
     highest in the world, with recent reports estimating that 
     every 30 minutes an Afghan woman dies of pregnancy related 
     causes, or approximately 15,000 women every year. The 
     estimated maternal mortality rate of 1,600 deaths per 100,000 
     live births can be significantly reduced through access to 
     primary health care services, including safe birthing 
     supplies, emergency obstetric care, prenatal and postnatal 
     care, contraception, and prevention and treatment for the 
     effects of sexual coercion and rape.
       (5) Women comprise 75 percent or more of the refugees and 
     internally displaced in camps, urban areas, and villages in 
     Afghanistan.
       (6) 85 percent of Afghanistan's population lives in rural 
     areas. The women in rural areas perform vital roles in food 
     production, processing, and preparation. Successful 
     reconstruction and development assistance must target rural 
     women as part of any agricultural interventions.
       (7) Within Afghanistan and outside of Afghanistan, local 
     women's organizations are delivering critical services and 
     have the knowledge and experience to assist the United States 
     in delivering effective relief aid.
       (8) The Afghan Ministry for Women's Affairs is an important 
     ministry that is essential for re-establishing women's human 
     rights, ensuring that women are included in all development 
     efforts, and delivering critical legal, health, education, 
     and economic services to women throughout Afghanistan's 30 
     provinces.
       (9) Afghan women are taking the initiative to reach across 
     the conflict divide and foster peace. Women's perspectives 
     and experiences in seeking solutions to conflicts are 
     necessary to ensure lasting peace.
       (10) The inadequate security situation in Afghanistan 
     disproportionately impacts women and girls as the lack of 
     rule of law results in the frequent assault, kidnapping,

[[Page 18127]]

     and sexual abuse of Afghan women and girls throughout 
     Afghanistan.
       (11) Despite significant improvements in healthcare and 
     education infrastructure for women and girls in Afghanistan, 
     the lack of security and rule of law throughout most of 
     Afghanistan effectively denies access to these facilities and 
     the critical services they provide.

     SEC. 1703. ESTABLISHMENT OF AFGHAN WOMEN'S FUND.

       (a) Establishment.--The Administrator of the United States 
     Agency for International Development shall establish a fund 
     for the purpose of assisting women and girls in Afghanistan 
     in the areas of political and human rights, health care, 
     education, training, security, and shelter.
       (b) Activities Supported.--The fund established under 
     subsection (a) shall support the activities described in 
     section 103(a)(7) of the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act of 
     2002 and the following activities:
       (1) Direct financial and programmatic assistance to the 
     Ministry of Women's Affairs in Afghanistan (hereafter in this 
     section referred to as the ``Ministry'') to promote the 
     strengthening of the Ministry as the Government of 
     Afghanistan continues its transition to a long-term 
     government structure and to enable the Ministry to fulfill 
     its mandate. The Ministry may use such assistance to support 
     activities such as the following:
       (A) Multiyear women-centered economic development programs, 
     including programs to assist widows, female heads of 
     household, women in rural areas, and disabled women.
       (B) Collaboration with the Ministry of Health to construct 
     culturally appropriate health infrastructure and delivery of 
     high-quality comprehensive health care programs, including 
     primary, maternal, child, reproductive, and mental health 
     care.
       (C) Programs to prevent trafficking in persons, assist 
     victims, and apprehend and prosecute traffickers in persons.
       (2) Direct financial assistance to the National Human 
     Rights Commission of Afghanistan.
       (3) Construction of women's educational facilities in 
     Afghanistan.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section not less than 
     $22,500,000 for each of the fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 2005 
     and such sums as are necessary for each subsequent fiscal 
     year.

     SEC. 1704. ASSISTANCE TO AFGHANISTAN.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, not less than 
     15 percent of the aggregate amount of economic and 
     humanitarian assistance authorized to be appropriated under 
     section 1703(c) to be made available to Afghanistan for each 
     of the fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 2005 shall be made 
     available for assistance directly to Afghan-led local 
     nongovernmental organizations, including Afghan women-led 
     organizations, with demonstrated experience in delivering 
     services to Afghan women and children to support their 
     programmatic activities and organizational development. In 
     recognition of the appreciating capacity of Afghan-led local 
     nongovernmental organizations, including Afghan women-led 
     organizations, an appropriate percentage of the aggregate 
     amount of economic and humanitarian assistance authorized to 
     be made available to Afghanistan for fiscal year 2006 and 
     each subsequent fiscal year shall be made available for 
     assistance directly to Afghan-led local nongovernmental 
     organizations, including Afghan women-led organizations.

     SEC. 1705. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO UNITED STATES ACTIVITIES 
                   IN AFGHANISTAN.

       (a) In General.--Activities described in subsections (b) 
     through (e) that are carried out by the United States in 
     Afghanistan should comply with the applicable requirements 
     contained in such subsections.
       (b) Governance of Afghanistan.--With respect to the 
     governance of Afghanistan, the applicable requirements are 
     the following:
       (1) Include the perspectives and advice of Afghan women's 
     organizations, networks, and leaders in United States 
     policymaking related to the governance of Afghanistan.
       (2) Promote the inclusion of a significant number of women 
     in future legislative bodies to ensure that women's full 
     range of human rights are included and upheld in any 
     constitution or legal structures of Afghanistan.
       (3) Encourage the appointment of women to high level 
     positions within Afghan Ministries.
       (c) Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Development.--With 
     respect to activities relating to post-conflict stability in 
     Afghanistan, the applicable requirements are the following:
       (1) Encourage United States organizations that receive 
     funds authorized by this title to partner with or create 
     Afghan-led counterpart organizations and provide these 
     organizations with significant financial resources, technical 
     assistance, and capacity building.
       (2) Increase women's access to or ownership of productive 
     assets such as land, water, agricultural inputs, credit, and 
     property.
       (3) Provide long-term financial assistance for primary, 
     secondary, higher, nontraditional, and vocational education 
     for Afghan girls, women, boys, and men.
       (4) Integrate education and training programs for former 
     combatants with economic development programs to encourage 
     their reintegration into society and to promote post-conflict 
     stability.
       (5) Provide assistance to rehabilitate children affected by 
     the conflict, particularly child soldiers.
       (6) Support educational efforts to increase awareness with 
     respect to landmines, facilitate the removal of landmines, 
     and provide services to individuals with disabilities caused 
     by landmines.
       (d) Afghan Military and Police.--With respect to training 
     for military and police forces in Afghanistan, the applicable 
     requirements are the following:
       (1) Include training on the protection, rights, and the 
     particular needs of women and emphasize that violations of 
     women's rights are intolerable and should be prosecuted.
       (2) Encourage such trainers who will carry out the 
     activities in paragraph (1) to consult with women's 
     organizations in Afghanistan to ensure that training content 
     and materials are adequate, appropriate, and comprehensive.
       (e) Relief, Resettlement, and Repatriation of Refugees and 
     Internally Displaced Persons.--With respect to the relief, 
     resettlement, and repatriation of refugees and internally 
     displaced persons in Afghanistan, the applicable requirements 
     are the following:
       (1) Take all necessary steps to ensure that women refugees 
     and internally displaced persons in camps, urban areas, and 
     villages are directly receiving food aid, shelter, relief 
     supplies, and other services from United States-sponsored 
     programs.
       (2) Take all necessary steps to ensure that women refugees 
     in camps, urban areas, and villages are accessing high-
     quality health and medical services, including primary, 
     maternal, child, and mental health services.
       (3) Take all necessary steps to ensure that women and 
     children in refugee camps are protected from sexual 
     exploitation.
       (4) Take all necessary steps to ensure refugees and 
     internally displaced persons that seek to return to their 
     place of origin can do so voluntarily, safely, and with the 
     full protection of their rights. United States-sponsored 
     efforts shall not coerce refugees or internally displaced 
     persons to return to their places of origin.

     SEC. 1706. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, and annually thereafter, the President shall 
     prepare and transmit to Congress a report that contains 
     documentation of the progress in implementing the 
     requirements of section 1705. All data in the report shall be 
     disaggregated by gender.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 34 offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey:
       Add at the end of the bill the following new division (and 
     conform the table of contents accordingly):

                  DIVISION C--ASSISTANCE FOR VIET NAM

  TITLE XX--CONDITIONS ON INCREASED NONHUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO THE 
                         GOVERNMENT OF VIET NAM

     SEC. 2001. BILATERAL NONHUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Assistance.--
       (1) In general.--United States nonhumanitarian assistance 
     may not be provided to the Government of Viet Nam in an 
     amount exceeding the amount so provided for fiscal year 
     2003--
       (A) for fiscal year 2004 unless not later than 30 days 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act the President 
     determines and certifies to Congress that the requirements of 
     subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (2) have been met 
     during the 12-month period ending on the date of the 
     certification; and
       (B) for each subsequent fiscal year unless the President 
     determines and certifies to Congress in the most recent 
     annual report submitted pursuant to section 501 that the 
     requirements of subparagraphs (A) through (E) of paragraph 
     (2) have been met during the 12-month period covered by the 
     report.
       (2) Requirements.--The requirements of this paragraph are 
     that--
       (A) the Government of Viet Nam has made substantial 
     progress toward releasing all political and religious 
     prisoners from imprisonment, house arrest, and other forms of 
     detention;
       (B)(i) the Government of Viet Nam has made substantial 
     progress toward respecting the right to freedom of religion, 
     including the right to participate in religious activities 
     and institutions without interference by or involvement of 
     the Government; and
       (ii) has made substantial progress toward returning estates 
     and properties confiscated from the churches;
       (C) the Government of Viet Nam has made substantial 
     progress toward allowing Vietnamese nationals free and open 
     access to United States refugee programs;
       (D) the Government of Viet Nam has made substantial 
     progress toward respecting the human rights of members of 
     ethnic minority groups in the Central Highlands and elsewhere 
     in Viet Nam; and
       (E)(i) neither any official of the Government of Viet Nam 
     nor any agency or entity wholly or partly owned by the 
     Government of Viet Nam was complicit in a severe form of 
     trafficking in persons; or

[[Page 18128]]

       (ii) the Government of Viet Nam took all appropriate steps 
     to end any such complicity and hold such official, agency, or 
     entity fully accountable for its conduct.
       (b) Exception.--
       (1) Continuation of assistance in the national interest.--
     Notwithstanding the failure of the Government of Viet Nam to 
     meet the requirements of subsection (a)(2), the President may 
     waive the application of subsection (a) for any fiscal year 
     if the President determines that the provision to the 
     Government of Viet Nam of increased United States 
     nonhumanitarian assistance would promote the purposes of this 
     Act or is otherwise in the national interest of the United 
     States.
       (2) Exercise of waiver authority.--The President may 
     exercise the authority under paragraph (2) with respect to--
       (A) all United States nonhumanitarian assistance to Viet 
     Nam; or
       (B) one or more programs, projects, or activities of such 
     assistance.
       (c) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Severe form of trafficking in persons.--The term 
     ``severe form of trafficking in persons'' means any activity 
     described in section 103(8) of the Trafficking Victims 
     Protection Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-386 (114 Stat. 1470); 
     22 U.S.C. 7102(8)).
       (2) United states nonhumanitarian assistance.--The term 
     ``United States nonhumanitarian assistance'' means--
       (A) any assistance under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 
     (including programs under title IV of chapter 2 of part I of 
     that Act, relating to the Overseas Private Investment 
     Corporation), other than--
       (i) disaster relief assistance, including any assistance 
     under chapter 9 of part I of that Act;
       (ii) assistance which involves the provision of food 
     (including monetization of food) or medicine; and
       (iii) assistance for refugees; and
       (B) sales, or financing on any terms, under the Arms Export 
     Control Act.

TITLE XXI--ASSISTANCE TO SUPPORT HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY IN VIET NAM

     SEC. 2101. ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--The President is authorized to provide 
     assistance, through appropriate nongovernmental 
     organizations, for the support of individuals and 
     organizations to promote democracy and internationally 
     recognized human rights in Viet Nam.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the President to carry out subsection 
     (a) $2,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

               TITLE XXII--UNITED STATES PUBLIC DIPLOMACY

     SEC. 2201. RADIO FREE ASIA TRANSMISSIONS TO VIET NAM.

       (a) Policy of the United States.--It is the policy of the 
     United States to take such measures as are necessary to 
     overcome the jamming of Radio Free Asia by the Government of 
     Viet Nam, including the active pursuit of broadcast 
     facilities in close geographic proximity to Viet Nam.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to such 
     amounts as are otherwise authorized to be appropriated for 
     the Broadcasting Board of Governors, there are authorized to 
     be appropriated to carry out the policy under subsection (a) 
     $9,100,000 for the fiscal year 2004 and $1,100,000 for the 
     fiscal year 2005.

     SEC. 2202. UNITED STATES EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE 
                   PROGRAMS WITH VIET NAM.

       It is the policy of the United States that programs of 
     educational and cultural exchange with Viet Nam should 
     actively promote progress toward freedom and democracy in 
     Viet Nam by providing opportunities to Vietnamese nationals 
     from a wide range of occupations and perspectives to see 
     freedom and democracy in action and, also, by ensuring that 
     Vietnamese nationals who have already demonstrated a 
     commitment to these values are included in such programs.

               TITLE XXIII--UNITED STATES REFUGEE POLICY

     SEC. 2301. REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT FOR NATIONALS OF VIET NAM.

       (a) Policy of the United States.--It is the policy of the 
     United States to offer refugee resettlement to nationals of 
     Viet Nam (including members of the Montagnard ethnic minority 
     groups) who were eligible for the Orderly Departure Program 
     (ODP), Resettlement Opportunities for Vietnamese Returnees 
     (ROVR) or any other United States refugee program and who 
     were deemed ineligible due to administrative error or who for 
     reasons beyond the control of such individuals (including 
     insufficient or contradictory information or the inability to 
     pay bribes demanded by officials of the Government of Viet 
     Nam) were unable or failed to apply for such programs in 
     compliance with deadlines imposed by the Department of State.
       (b) Authorized Activity.--Of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of State for Migration and 
     Refugee Assistance for each of the fiscal years 2004, 2005, 
     and 2006, such sums as may be necessary are authorized to be 
     made available for the protection (including resettlement in 
     appropriate cases) of Vietnamese refugees and asylum seekers, 
     including Montagnards in Cambodia.

 TITLE XIV--ANNUAL REPORT ON PROGRESS TOWARD FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY IN 
                                VIET NAM

     SEC. 2401. ANNUAL REPORT.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act and every 12 months thereafter, the 
     Secretary of State shall submit to the Congress a report on 
     the following:
       (1)(A) The determination and certification of the President 
     that the requirements of section 2001(a)(2) have been met, if 
     applicable.
       (B) The determination of the President under section 
     2001(b)(2), if applicable.
       (2) Efforts by the United States Government to secure 
     transmission sites for Radio Free Asia in countries in close 
     geographical proximity to Viet Nam in accordance with section 
     2201(a).
       (3) Efforts to ensure that programs with Viet Nam promote 
     the policy set forth in section 302 and with section 102 of 
     the Human Rights, Refugee, and Other Foreign Policy 
     Provisions Act of 1996 regarding participation in programs of 
     educational and cultural exchange.
       (4) Steps taken to carry out the policy under section 
     2301(a).
       (5) Lists of persons believed to be imprisoned, detained, 
     or placed under house arrest, tortured, or otherwise 
     persecuted by the Government of Viet Nam due to their pursuit 
     of internationally recognized human rights. In compiling such 
     lists, the Secretary shall exercise appropriate discretion, 
     including concerns regarding the safety and security of, and 
     benefit to, the persons who may be included on the lists and 
     their families. In addition, the Secretary shall include a 
     list of such persons and their families who may qualify for 
     protection under United States refugee programs.
       (6) A description of the development of the rule of law in 
     Viet Nam, including, but not limited to--
       (A) progress toward the development of institutions of 
     democratic governance;
       (B) processes by which statutes, regulations, rules, and 
     other legal acts of the Government of Viet Nam are developed 
     and become binding within Viet Nam;
       (C) the extent to which statutes, regulations, rules, 
     administrative and judicial decisions, and other legal acts 
     of the Government of Viet Nam are published and are made 
     accessible to the public;
       (D) the extent to which administrative and judicial 
     decisions are supported by statements of reasons that are 
     based upon written statutes, regulations, rules and other 
     legal acts of the Government of Viet Nam;
       (E) the extent to which individuals are treated equally 
     under the laws of Viet Nam without regard to citizenship, 
     race, religion, political opinion, or current or former 
     associations;
       (F) the extent to which administrative and judicial 
     decisions are independent of political pressure or 
     governmental interference and are reviewed by entities of 
     appellate jurisdiction; and
       (G) the extent to which laws in Viet Nam are written and 
     administered in ways that are consistent with international 
     human rights standards, including the requirements of the 
     International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
       (b) Contacts With Other Organizations.-- In preparing the 
     report under subsection (a), the Secretary shall, as 
     appropriate, consult with and seek input from nongovernmental 
     organizations, human rights advocates (including Vietnamese-
     Americans and human rights advocates in Viet Nam), and the 
     United States Commission on Religious Freedom.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 35 offered by Mr. Souder:
       Page 78, after line 23, insert the following section (and 
     amend the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 274. ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY OF UNITED STATES EMBASSIES, 
                   CONSULATES, AND OTHER DIPLOMATIC BUILDINGS.

       It is the sense of the Congress that, to the greatest 
     extent possible, in the construction and renovation of United 
     States embassies, consulates, and other diplomatic buildings, 
     the Secretary of State shall consider and seek to preserve 
     the architectural integrity and cohesiveness of the 
     neighborhood and environs and minimize any disruption due to 
     the presence of the embassy, consulate, or other diplomatic 
     building.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 36 offered by Mr. Stearns:
       Page 211, after line 11, insert the following:

     SEC. 736. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES 
                   FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AS THE CENTRAL 
                   AUTHORITY FOR THE UNITED STATES UNDER THE HAGUE 
                   CONVENTION ON INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION.

       It is the sense of the Congress that the Department of 
     State should direct significant resources to their new role 
     as the central authority for the United States under the 
     Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 38 offered by Mr. Dreier:
       Strike section 731 (page 199, line 22 through page 204, 
     line 10) and insert the following:


[[Page 18129]]

     SEC. 731. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING MIGRATION ISSUES 
                   BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
       (1) During President Bush's first meeting with President 
     Fox in Guanajuato, Mexico, the Presidents stated in the Joint 
     Communique of February 16, 2001 that ``we are instructing our 
     Governments to engage, at the earliest opportunity, in formal 
     high level negotiations aimed at achieving short and long-
     term agreements that will allow us to constructively address 
     migration and labor issues between our two countries.''.
       (2) During President Fox's official visit to Washington, 
     D.C., the Joint Statement of September 6, 2001, summarized 
     the meeting as follows: ``The Presidents reviewed the 
     progress made by our joint working group on migration chaired 
     by Secretaries Powell, CastaZeda, and Creel and Attorney 
     General Ashcroft and noted this represented the most fruitful 
     and frank dialogue we have ever had on a subject so important 
     to both nations. They praised implementation of the border 
     safety initiative, and recognized that migration-related 
     issues are deeply felt by our publics and vital to our 
     prosperity, well-being, and the kind of societies we want to 
     build. They renewed their commitment to forging new and 
     realistic approaches to migration to ensure it is safe, 
     orderly, legal and dignified, and agreed on the framework 
     within which this ongoing effort is based. This includes: 
     matching willing workers with willing employers; serving the 
     social and economic needs of both countries; respecting the 
     human dignity of all migrants, regardless of their status; 
     recognizing the contribution migrants make to enriching both 
     societies; shared responsibility for ensuring migration takes 
     place through safe and legal channels. Both stressed their 
     commitment to continue our discussions, instructing the high-
     level working group to reach mutually satisfactory results on 
     border safety, a temporary worker program and the status of 
     undocumented Mexicans in the United States. They requested 
     that the working group provide them proposals with respect to 
     these issues as soon as possible. The Presidents recognized 
     that this is an extraordinarily challenging area of public 
     policy, and that it is critical to address the issue in a 
     timely manner and with appropriate thoroughness and depth.''.
       (3) On September 7, 2001, during President Fox's historic 
     State Visit to Washington, the United States and Mexico 
     issued a joint statement instructing our cabinet-level 
     working group to provide us with specific proposals to forge 
     a new and realistic framework that will ensure a safe, legal, 
     orderly, and dignified migration flow between our countries. 
     We have today agreed that our Cabinet level migration group 
     should continue the work we charged it with in Guanajuato and 
     Washington.
       (4) When the Presidents met in Monterrey, Mexico, the 
     Presidents stated in a Joint Statement on March 22, 2002, as 
     follows: ``Slightly more than one year ago, in Guanajuato, we 
     talked about migration as one of the major ties that join our 
     societies. We launched then the frankest and most productive 
     dialogue our countries have ever had on this important and 
     challenging subject. Those talks have continued over the past 
     year, and have yielded a clearer assessment of the scope and 
     nature of this issue. This bond between our nations can 
     render countless benefits to our respective economies and 
     families.
       (5) Over the past year, important progress has been made to 
     enhance migrant safety and particularly in saving lives by 
     discouraging and reducing illegal crossings in dangerous 
     terrain.
       (6) At the conclusion of the Mexico-United States 
     Binational Commission (BNC) meeting in Mexico City in 
     November 2002, Secretary of State Powell's press conference 
     was summarized by the State Department as follows: The BNC's 
     migration working group ``affirmed our strong commitment to 
     advancing our bilateral migration agenda,'' he stressed, 
     adding that ``there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that 
     this is a priority for President Bush, just as it is a 
     priority for [Mexican] President [Vicente] Fox.''
       (7) Secretary Powell said no schedule had been established 
     for a migration accord, but he confirmed that the United 
     States and Mexico want to come up with a series of migration 
     initiatives over the course of the next six months to a year.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that--
       (1) that the United States and Mexico should as soon as is 
     practicable commence negotiations in an attempt to reach a 
     migration accord that is as comprehensive as possible and 
     which addresses the key issues of concern for both nations; 
     and
       (2) that as part of any migration agreement between the 
     United States and Mexico, the issues of the extradition of 
     violent criminals and law enforcement cooperation between the 
     two nations be addressed.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 39 offered by Mr. Walsh:
       Page 77, after line 3, insert the following new section and 
     (amend the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 258. AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION OF IRISH PEACE PROCESS 
                   CULTURAL AND TRAINING PROGRAM.

       (a) Amendment of Program.--
       (1) Section 2(a)(2)(A) of such the Irish Peace Process 
     Cultural and Training Program Act of 1998 (8 U.S.C. 1101 
     note) is amended by adding at the end ``No participant in the 
     program may have a degree from an institution of higher 
     education.''.
       (2) Section 101(a)(15)(Q)(ii)(I) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(Q)(ii)(I)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``35 years of age or younger having a 
     residence'' and inserting ``21 to 35 years of age, unemployed 
     for not less than 6 months, having resided for not less 6 
     months in the Republic of Ireland or the United Kingdom,''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``36 months'' and inserting ``24 months''.
       (3) Section 212(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
     (8 U.S.C. 1182(e)) is amended by inserting after subsection 
     (p) the following:
       ``(q)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), no person 
     admitted under section 101(a)(15)(Q)(ii)(I) or acquiring such 
     status after admission shall be eligible to apply for an 
     immigrant visa, or for permanent residence, or for 
     nonimmigrant visa status under this Act until it is 
     established that such person has resided and been physically 
     present in the country of nationality or last residence for 
     an aggregate of a least two years following departure from 
     the United States.
       ``(2) The Secretary of Homeland Security may waive the 
     requirement of such one-year foreign residence abroad if the 
     Secretary determines that--
       ``(A) departure from the United States would impose 
     exceptional hardship upon the alien's spouse or child (if 
     such spouse or child is a citizen of the United States or an 
     alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence); or
       ``(B) the admission of the alien is in the public interest 
     or the national interest of the United States.''.
       (b) Extension of Program.--Section 2 of the Irish Peace 
     Process Cultural and Training Program Act of 1998 (8 U.S.C. 
     1101 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (d)(1) by striking ``2006,'' and 
     inserting ``2008,'';
       (2) in subsection (d)(2) by striking ``2005,'' and 
     inserting ``2011,'';
       (3) in subsection (a)(3) by striking ``the third program 
     year and for the 3 subsequent years,'' and inserting ``each 
     program year''.
       (c) Technical and Conforming Changes.--The Irish Peace 
     Process Cultural and Training Program Act of 1998 (8 U.S.C. 
     1101 note; Public Law 105-319) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Attorney General'' each place it appears 
     and inserting ``Secretary of Homeland Security''; and
       (2) by striking ``Immigration and Naturalization Service'' 
     each place it appears and inserting ``Department of Homeland 
     Security''.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 40 offered by Mr. Collins:
       At the end of subtitle B of title VII, add the following 
     new section:

     SEC. __. TRANSFER OF VIETNAM-ERA CESSNA L-19D BIRD DOG 
                   AIRCRAFT TO ARMY AVIATION HERITAGE FOUNDATION.

       (a) Authority To Convey.--The Secretary of State may 
     convey, without consideration, to the Army Aviation Heritage 
     Foundation, a nonprofit organization incorporated in the 
     State of Georgia, all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to a Vietnam-era Cessna L-19D Bird Dog 
     aircraft (serial No. 24020, National registration number 
     N32FL)(in this section referred to as the ``aircraft'') that 
     is excess to the needs of the Department of State. The 
     conveyance shall be made by means of a conditional deed of 
     gift
       (b) Condition of Aircraft.--The aircraft shall be conveyed 
     in its current ``as is'' condition. The Secretary is not 
     required to repair or alter the condition of the aircraft 
     before conveying ownership of the aircraft.
       (c) Condition on Conveyance.--The Secretary shall include 
     in the instrument of conveyance of the aircraft the following 
     conditions:
       (1) The Army Aviation Heritage Foundation may not convey 
     any ownership interest in, or transfer possession of, the 
     aircraft to any other party without the prior approval of the 
     Secretary.
       (2) The Army Aviation Heritage Foundation shall operate and 
     maintain the aircraft in compliance with all applicable 
     limitations and maintenance requirements imposed by the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
       (d) Reverter Upon Breach of Conditions.--If the Secretary 
     determines at any time that the Army Aviation Heritage 
     Foundation has conveyed an ownership interest in, or 
     transferred possession of, the aircraft to any other party 
     without the prior approval of the Secretary, all right, 
     title, and interest in and to the aircraft, including any 
     repair or alteration of the aircraft, shall revert to the 
     United States, and the United States shall have the right of 
     immediate possession of the aircraft.
       (e) Conveyance at No Cost to the United States.--The 
     conveyance of the aircraft shall be made at no cost to the 
     United

[[Page 18130]]

     States. Any costs associated with the conveyance and costs of 
     operation and maintenance of the aircraft conveyed shall be 
     borne by the Army Aviation Heritage Foundation.
       (f) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with a conveyance under this section as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.
       (g) Clarification of Liability.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, upon the conveyance of ownership of the 
     aircraft to the Army Aviation Heritage Foundation, the United 
     States shall not be liable for any death, injury, loss, or 
     damage that results from any use of that aircraft by any 
     person other than the United States.
                                  ____

       Amendment No. 42 offered by Mr. Hefley:
       After section 1312 of the bill, insert the following new 
     section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 1313. CONDITION ON THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN FUNDS TO 
                   INDONESIA.

       (a) Condition on Assistance.--Subject to subsection (c), no 
     funds made available under section 23 of the Arms Export 
     Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2763) or chapter 5 of part II of the 
     Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2347 et seq.) in 
     fiscal year 2004, other than funds made available for 
     expanded military education and training under such chapter, 
     may be available for a program that involves the Government 
     of Indonesia or the Indonesian Armed Forces until the 
     President makes the certification described in subsection 
     (b).
       (b) Certification.--The certification referred to in 
     subsection (a) is a certification submitted by the President 
     to the appropriate congressional committees that the 
     Government of Indonesia and the Indonesian Armed Forces are 
     taking effective measures, including cooperating with the 
     Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation--
       (1) to conduct a full investigation of the attack on United 
     States citizens in West Papua, Indonesia on August 31, 2002; 
     and
       (2) to criminally prosecute the individuals responsible for 
     such attack.
       (c) Limitation.--Nothing in this section shall prohibit the 
     United States Government from continuing to conduct programs 
     or training with the Indonesian Armed Forces, including 
     counterterrorism training, officer visits, port visits, or 
     educational exchanges that are being conducted on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.
                                  ____

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that Crane amendment 
No. 25, Burton of Indiana amendment No. 18 and Dreier amendment No. 38 
be modified in the form I have caused to be placed at the desk.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendments, as 
modified.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       The amendment as modified is as follows:
       At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new 
     section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. __. ATTACKS ON UNITED STATES CITIZENS BY PALESTINIAN 
                   TERRORISTS.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) Since Yasser Arafat renounced violence in the Oslo 
     Peace Accords on September 13, 1993, at least 41 United 
     States citizens have been murdered by Palestinian terrorists 
     and one United States citizen miscarried after being stabbed 
     in a Palestinian terrorist attack.
       (2) On December 1, 1993, in a drive-by shooting north of 
     Jerusalem, Hamas killed United States citizen Yitzhak 
     Weinstock, 19, whose family came from Los Angeles.
       (3) On October 9, 1994, Hamas kidnapped and murdered United 
     States citizen Nachshon Wachsman, 19, whose family came from 
     New York City.
       (4) On April 9, 1995, an Islamic Jihad bomb attack on a bus 
     near Kfar Darom killed United States citizen Alisa Flatow, 
     20, from West Orange, New Jersey.
       (5) On August 21, 1995, in a Hamas bus bombing in 
     Jerusalem, United States citizen Joan Davenny, from New 
     Haven, Connecticut, was killed.
       (6) On September 9, 1995, Mara Frey of Chicago was stabbed 
     in Ma'ale Michmash resulting in her unborn child's death.
       (7) On February 25, 1996, three United States citizens, 
     Sara Duker of Teaneck, New Jersey, Matthew Eisenfeld of West 
     Hartford, Connecticut, and Ira Weinstein of New York City, 
     were killed in a Hamas bus bombing in Jerusalem.
       (8) On May 13, 1996, United States citizen David Boim, 17, 
     of New York City, was killed in a drive-by shooting near Beit 
     El, north of Jerusalem.
       (9) On June 9, 1996, United States citizen Yaron Ungar was 
     killed in a drive by-shooting near Beit Shemesh.
       (10) On July 30, 1997, United States citizen Leah Stern of 
     Passaic, New Jersey, was killed in a Hamas bombing in 
     Jerusalem's Mahane Yehuda market.
       (11) On September 4, 1997, a Hamas bombing on Ben-Yehuda 
     Street, Jerusalem, killed Yael Botwin, 14, of Los Angeles.
       (12) On April 19, 1998, an attack near the Israeli town of 
     Maon killed United States citizen Dov Dribben, 28.
       (13) On October 8, 2000, Rabbi Hillel Lieberman, 36, of New 
     York City, was stabbed and killed near Nablus.
       (14) On October 30, 2000, United States citizen Esh-Kodesh 
     Gilmore, 25, was shot in Jerusalem.
       (15) On December 31, 2000, Rabbi Binyamin Kahane, 34, and 
     his wife, Talia Hertzlich Kahane, both formerly of New York 
     City, were killed in a drive-by shooting near Ofra.
       (16) On May 9, 2001, Jacob ``Koby'' Mandell, 13, of Silver 
     Spring, Maryland, was killed in an attack near Tekoah.
       (17) On May 29, 2001, Sarah Blaustein, 53, of Lawrence, New 
     York, was killed in a drive-by shooting near Efrat.
       (18) On August 9, 2001, two United States citizens, Judith 
     L. Greenbaum, 31, and Malka Roth, 15, were killed in the 
     Jerusalem Sbarro pizzeria bombing.
       (19) On November 4, 2001, Shoshana Ben-Yishai, 16, of New 
     York City, was shot and killed during an attack on a 
     Jerusalem bus.
       (20) On January 15, 2002, Avraham Boaz, 72, of New York 
     City, was killed in a shooting near Bethlehem.
       (21) On January 18, 2002, United States citizen Aaron Elis, 
     32, was killed in a shooting in Hadera.
       (22) On February 15, 2002, United States citizen Lee 
     Akunis, was shot and killed near Ramallah.
       (23) On February 16, 2002, Keren Shatsky, 14, of New York 
     City and Maine, and Rachel Thaler, 16, of Baltimore, 
     Maryland, were killed in a bombing in Karnei Shomron.
       (24) On February 25, 2002, United States citizen Moran 
     Amit, 25, was stabbed and killed in Abu Tor Peace Forest, 
     Jerusalem.
       (25) On March 24, 2002, Esther Kleinman, 23, formerly of 
     Chicago, was shot and killed near Ofra.
       (26) On March 27, 2002, United States citizen Hannah Rogen, 
     90, was killed in a bombing at a hotel Passover seder in 
     Netanya.
       (27) On June 18, 2002, Moshe Gottlieb, 70, of Los Angeles, 
     was killed in a bus bombing in Jerusalem.
       (28) On June 19, 2002, United States citizen Gila Sara 
     Kessler, 19, was killed in a bombing at a Jerusalem bus stop.
       (29) On July 31, 2002, five United States citizens were 
     killed in a bombing of a Hebrew University cafeteria: Marla 
     Bennett, 24, of San Diego, Benjamin Blutstein, 25, of 
     Susquehanna Township, Pennsylvania, Janis Ruth Coulter, 36, 
     of Massachusetts, David Gritz, 24, of Peru, Massachusetts 
     (and of dual French-United States citizenship), and Dina 
     Carter, 37, of North Carolina.
       (30) On March 5, 2003, Abigail Leitel, 14, who was born in 
     Lebanon, New Hampshire, died in a bus bombing in Haifa.
       (31) On March 7, 2003, United States citizens Rabbi Eli 
     Horowitz, 52, who grew up in Chicago, and Dina Horowitz, 50, 
     who grew up in Florida, were killed in their home.
       (32) On June 11, 2003, United States citizen Alan Beer, 47, 
     who grew up in Cleveland, was killed in bus bombing in 
     Jerusalem.
       (33) On June 20, 2003, United States citizen Tzvi 
     Goldstein, 47, originally from New York City, was shot and 
     killed in an attack while driving through the West Bank.
       (34) At least another 79 United States citizens have been 
     injured in Palestinian terrorist attacks.
       (b) Statements of Policy.--Congress--
       (1) condemns the attacks on United States citizens by 
     Palestinian terrorists;
       (2) calls on the Palestinian Authority to work with Israel 
     to protect all innocent individuals, regardless of 
     citizenship, from terrorist atrocities;
       (3) offers its condolences to the families and loved ones 
     of United States citizens who were killed by Palestinian 
     terrorist attacks; and
       (4) calls on the Secretary of State to include a listing of 
     the killing of every United States citizen by terrorists in 
     the ``Chronology of Significant Terrorist Incidents'', as 
     included in the Department of State's Patterns of Global 
     Terrorism Report issued after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
                                  ____


    Modification to the Amendment Offered by Mr. Burton of Indiana,

       The amendment as modified is as follows:
       Page 78, after line 23, insert the following:

     SEC. 274. NOTICE TO UNITED STATES EMBASSIES ABROAD REGARDING 
                   CHILDREN WHO ARE THE SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL 
                   CHILD ABDUCTION AND GUIDELINES RELATING TO 
                   SANCTUARY FOR SUCH CHILDREN.

       (a) Notice of International Child Abduction.--The Secretary 
     of State shall establish procedures to ensure that 
     appropriate United States Embassies abroad are notified of 
     the possible presence in that country of any child who has 
     been the subject of international child abduction in 
     violation of the order of a court in the United States.
       (b) Guidelines for Sanctuary.--The Secretary of State shall 
     promulgate guidelines for the personnel of United States 
     Embassies abroad concerning procedures relating to sanctuary 
     at such facilities for children who are the subject of 
     international child abduction.

[[Page 18131]]



     SEC. 275. INADMISSIBILITY OF ALIENS SUPPORTING INTERNATIONAL 
                   CHILD ABDUCTORS AND RELATIVES OF SUCH 
                   ABDUCTORS.

       (a) In General.--Section 212(a)(10)(C)(ii) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(10)(C)(ii)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subclause (I), by striking the comma at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (2) in subclause (II), by striking ``, or'' at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (3) by amending subclause (III) to read as follows:

       ``(III) is a spouse (other than the spouse who is the 
     parent of the abducted child), child (other than the abducted 
     child), parent, sibling, cousin, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, 
     or grandparent of an alien described in clause (i), is an 
     agent of such an alien, or is a principal employing such an 
     alien as an agent, if such person has been designated by the 
     Secretary of State at the Secretary's sole and unreviewable 
     discretion; or'' and

       (4) by adding at the end the following:

       ``(IV) is a spouse of the abducted child described in 
     clause (i), if such person has been designated by the 
     Secretary of State at the Secretary's sole and unreviewable 
     discretion,

     is inadmissible until such child is surrendered to the person 
     granted custody by the order described in that clause, and 
     such custodian and child are permitted to return to the 
     United States or such custodian's place of residence.''.
       (b) Identification of Aliens Supporting Abductors and 
     Relatives of Abductors; Notice to Custodial Parents and 
     Guardians; Annual Report; Definitions.--Section 212(a)(10)(C) 
     of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1182(a)(10)(C)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(iv) Identification of aliens supporting abductors and 
     relatives of abductors.--In all instances in which an alien 
     commits an act described in clause (i), the Secretary of 
     State shall take appropriate action to identify the 
     individuals who are inadmissible under clause (ii).
       ``(v) Notice to custodial parents and guardians.--In all 
     instances in which an alien commits an act described in 
     clause (i), the Secretary of State shall, upon request of the 
     person granted custody of the child concerned, inform the 
     person of whether, and when, any individual who is 
     inadmissible under clause (ii) by reason of such act has been 
     issued a visa or otherwise authorized to enter the United 
     States.
       ``(vi) Annual report.--The Secretary of State annually 
     shall submit to the Committee on International Relations, the 
     Committee on Government Reform, and the Committee on the 
     Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives, and 
     the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs, and the Committee on the Judiciary of 
     the United States Senate, a report that provides, with 
     respect to the preceding year, an accounting of the number of 
     cases known to the Secretary of State, disaggregated 
     according to the nationality of the alien concerned--

       ``(I) in which an authority under this subparagraph was 
     exercised (and with respect to each such case, the specific 
     ground for inadmissibility shall be specified); and
       ``(II) in which an authority under this subparagraph has 
     not been exercised but in which an alien, after entry of an 
     order by a court in the United States granting custody to a 
     person of a United States citizen child, detained or retained 
     the child, or withheld custody of the child, outside the 
     United States from the person granted custody by that order.

       ``(vii) Definitions.--For purposes of this subparagraph--

       ``(I) the term `child' means an individual who was a child 
     at the time the individual was detained or retained, or at 
     the time custody of the individual was withheld, as described 
     in clause (i), regardless of the age or marital status of the 
     individual after such time; and
       ``(II) the term `sibling' includes a step-sibling or half-
     sibling.''.
                                  ____


          Modification to the Amendment Offered by Mr. Dreier

       The amendment, as modified is as follows:
       Strike section 731 (page 199, line 22 through page 204, 
     line 10) and insert the following:

     SEC. 731. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING MIGRATION ISSUES 
                   BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
       (1) During President Bush's first meeting with President 
     Fox in Guanajuato, Mexico, the Presidents stated in the Joint 
     Communique of February 16, 2001 that ``we are instructing our 
     Governments to engage, at the earliest opportunity, in formal 
     high level negotiations aimed at achieving short and long-
     term agreements that will allow us to constructively address 
     migration and labor issues between our two countries.''.
       (2) During President Fox's official visit to Washington, 
     D.C., the Joint Statement of September 6, 2001, summarized 
     the meeting as follows: ``The Presidents reviewed the 
     progress made by our joint working group on migration chaired 
     by Secretaries Powell, CastaZeda, and Creel and Attorney 
     General Ashcroft and noted this represented the most fruitful 
     and frank dialogue we have ever had on a subject so important 
     to both nations. They praised implementation of the border 
     safety initiative, and recognized that migration-related 
     issues are deeply felt by our publics and vital to our 
     prosperity, well-being, and the kind of societies we want to 
     build. They renewed their commitment to forging new and 
     realistic approaches to migration to ensure it is safe, 
     orderly, legal and dignified, and agreed on the framework 
     within which this ongoing effort is based. This includes: 
     matching willing workers with willing employers; serving the 
     social and economic needs of both countries; respecting the 
     human dignity of all migrants, regardless of their status; 
     recognizing the contribution migrants make to enriching both 
     societies; shared responsibility for ensuring migration takes 
     place through safe and legal channels. Both stressed their 
     commitment to continue our discussions, instructing the high-
     level working group to reach mutually satisfactory results on 
     border safety, a temporary worker program and the status of 
     undocumented Mexicans in the United States. They requested 
     that the working group provide them proposals with respect to 
     these issues as soon as possible. The Presidents recognized 
     that this is an extraordinarily challenging area of public 
     policy, and that it is critical to address the issue in a 
     timely manner and with appropriate thoroughness and depth.''.
       (3) On September 7, 2001, during President Fox's historic 
     State Visit to Washington, the United States and Mexico 
     issued a joint statement instructing our cabinet-level 
     working group to provide us with specific proposals to forge 
     a new and realistic framework that will ensure a safe, legal, 
     orderly, and dignified migration flow between our countries. 
     We have today agreed that our Cabinet level migration group 
     should continue the work we charged it with in Guanajuato and 
     Washington.
       (4) When the Presidents met in Monterrey, Mexico, the 
     Presidents stated in a Joint Statement on March 22, 2002, as 
     follows: ``Slightly more than one year ago, in Guanajuato, we 
     talked about migration as one of the major ties that join our 
     societies. We launched then the frankest and most productive 
     dialogue our countries have ever had on this important and 
     challenging subject. Those talks have continued over the past 
     year, and have yielded a clearer assessment of the scope and 
     nature of this issue. This bond between our nations can 
     render countless benefits to our respective economies and 
     families.
       (5) Over the past year, important progress has been made to 
     enhance migrant safety and particularly in saving lives by 
     discouraging and reducing illegal crossings in dangerous 
     terrain.
       (6) At the conclusion of the Mexico-United States 
     Binational Commission (BNC) meeting in Mexico City in 
     November 2002, Secretary of State Powell's press conference 
     was summarized by the State Department as follows: The BNC's 
     migration working group ``affirmed our strong commitment to 
     advancing our bilateral migration agenda,'' he stressed, 
     adding that ``there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that 
     this is a priority for President Bush, just as it is a 
     priority for [Mexican] President [Vicente] Fox.''
       (7) Secretary Powell said no schedule had been established 
     for a migration accord, but he confirmed that the United 
     States and Mexico want to come up with a series of migration 
     initiatives over the course of the next six months to a year.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that--
       (1) that the United States and Mexico should as soon as is 
     practicable conclude negotiations in an attempt to reach a 
     migration accord that is as comprehensive as possible and 
     which addresses the key issues of concern for both nations; 
     and
       (2) that as part of any migration agreement between the 
     United States and Mexico, the issues of the extradition of 
     violent criminals and law enforcement cooperation between the 
     two nations be addressed.

  Mr. HYDE (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent 
that the modifications be considered as read and printed in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Without objection, the amendments are 
modified.
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Lantos) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise in strong support of the Hyde en bloc amendments. This measure 
includes a number of critical amendments that were ruled in order by 
the Committee on Rules. They include initiatives in support of U.S. 
companies

[[Page 18132]]

and U.S. workers obtaining procurement contracts from our foreign 
policy agencies, improvements in our visa processing system, tools to 
fight international child abduction, an important measure encouraging a 
greater role for the United Nations and for NATO in maintaining peace 
in Iraq, support for the women of Afghanistan, and an important plan to 
compel the agencies that use our diplomatic facilities to share the 
costs of building and protecting them.
  A number of our colleagues contributed to this important package, and 
I would like to recognize them. I commend the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Crowley), the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the 
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Ackerman), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), the 
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo), and the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Maloney) for their important work; and I urge all of 
my colleagues to support the Hyde en bloc amendments.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Hyde) for an opportunity to talk about what has happened to 
manufacturing in our country and to thank the gentleman for including 
this amendment in the en bloc amendments.
  In the latest report put out by the National Association for 
Manufacturing, the executive summary ends with this startling 
statement. ``If the U.S. manufacturing base continues to shrink at its 
present rate and its critical mass is lost, the manufacturing 
innovation process will shift to other global centers. Once that 
happens, a decline in U.S. living standards in the future is virtually 
assured.''
  What this amendment does, it requires the State Department to 
increase the content of the articles, materials and supplies for 
construction, alteration or repair, to increase it from the 50 percent 
threshold to 65 percent. It is a modest amendment, but it takes the 
acquisitions that our government has and uses them to level the playing 
field so as to assure contracts to help out our precious manufacturing 
base.
  We have lost nearly 3 million manufacturing jobs in the past 2 and a 
half years. Fifty-four thousand manufacturing jobs are lost every 
month, and that has been continuous for the past 34 months.
  So we come to the United States Congress and the House of 
Representatives and we say something has to be done to stop the 
destruction of manufacturing in this country. This amendment helps out 
because it increases the content, which assures more manufacturing jobs 
for the manufacturers of America.

  Securing America's Future: The Case for a Strong Manufacturing Base

       U.S. manufacturing is the heart of a significant process 
     that generates economic growth and has produced the highest 
     living standards in history. But today this complex process 
     faces serious domestic and international challenges which, if 
     not overcome, will lead to reduced economic growth and 
     ultimately a decline in living standards for future 
     generations of Americans.
       Manufacturing's innovation process is the key to past, 
     present and future prosperity and higher living standards. 
     The intricate process starts with an idea for a new product 
     or process, prompting investments in research and 
     development. R&D successes lead to investments in capital 
     equipment and workers, and to ``spillovers'' that benefit 
     manufacturing and other economic sectors. This process not 
     only generates new products and processes, but also leads to 
     well-paying jobs, increased productivity, and competitive 
     pricing. Yet while this process produces wealth and higher 
     living standards, most of it is hidden from view and poorly 
     understood.
       Manufacturing's innovation process provides enormous 
     benefits for the entire U.S. economy:
       Grows the Economy--Manufacturing growth spawns more 
     additional economic activities and jobs than any other 
     economic sector. Every $1 of final demand for manufactured 
     goods generates an additional $0.67 in other manufactured 
     products and $0.76 in products and services from 
     nonmanufacturing sectors.
       Invents the Future--Manufacturers are responsible for 
     almost two-thirds of all private sector R&D--$127 billion in 
     2002. Spillovers from this R&D benefit other manufacturing 
     and nonmanufacturing firms. R&D spillovers are enhanced by 
     geographic proximity.
       Generates Productivity Increases--Manufacturing 
     productivity gains are historically higher than those of any 
     other economic sector--over the past two decades, 
     manufacturing averaged twice the annual productivity gains of 
     the rest of the private sector. These gains enable Americans 
     to do more with less, increase our ability to compete, and 
     facilitates higher wages for all employees.
       Provides More Rewarding Employment--Manufacturing salaries 
     and benefits average $54,000, higher than the average for the 
     total private sector. Two factors in particular attract 
     workers to manufacturing: higher pay and benefits, and 
     opportunities for advanced education and training.
       Pays the Taxes--Manufacturing has been an important 
     contributor to regional economic growth and tax receipts at 
     all levels of government. During the 1990s, manufacturing 
     corporations paid 30-34 percent of all corporate taxes 
     collected by state and local governments, Social Security and 
     payroll taxes, excise taxes, import and tariff duties, 
     environmental taxes and license taxes.
       Meanwhile, other nations, recognizing that a strong 
     manufacturing base is the proven path to a world-class 
     economy, have been learning from the American example and are 
     forging their own innovation processes to compete with ours.
       America's manufacturing innovation process requires a 
     critical mass to generate wealth and higher standards of 
     living. If the U.S. manufacturing base continues to diminish 
     at its present rate that process may deteriorate beyond 
     repair and with it the seedbed of our industrial strength and 
     competitive edge.
       The most serious challenges to the long-term viability of 
     the U.S. manufacturing base and the innovation process that 
     underlie it are:
       Loss of Jobs--U.S. manufacturers historically lead the way 
     in an economic expansion, but are still struggling to recover 
     from the recent recession. Since July 2000, manufacturing has 
     lost 2.3 million jobs, many of which have been outsourced or 
     relocated overseas. Manufacturing output has shown no growth 
     since December 2001--the official end of the recession--in 
     the weakest manufacturing recovery since 1919.
       Loss of Export Potential--Manufacturing exports as a share 
     of GDP have contracted since 1997, reflecting the strong 
     dollar overseas, the impact of the recession on our trading 
     partners, the terrorist attacks in the United States in 
     September 2001, and increased global competition. The U.S. 
     trade deficit has ballooned to historic highs--reflecting an 
     increase in purchases of foreign-made goods, especially from 
     countries which do not freely float their currencies.
       Investments are Going Elsewhere--U.S. manufacturing's share 
     of capital investment and R&D expenditures, once a dominant 
     feature of our nation's commitment to progress, is 
     diminishing. While U.S. manufacturers conduct two-thirds of 
     private R&D, their R&D spending between 2000 and 2002 grew at 
     only half the pace of the previous decade.
       Needs More Skilled Workers--Despite the loss of 2.3 million 
     jobs, manufacturing is facing a potential shortfall of highly 
     qualified employees with specific educational backgrounds and 
     skills, especially those specific skills needed to produce 
     manufactured goods. If the skills and knowledge of the 
     American workforce do not improve it will be detrimental to 
     manufacturing's competitive edge and to the prospect for 
     economic growth.
       Facing Dramatically Rising Costs--The cost of doing 
     business in the United States is rising dramatically, in 
     large measure because of significant costs related to 
     healthcare, litigation, and regulation. As a result, many 
     U.S. manufacturers shut down or move production overseas to 
     countries where they do not face, to the same extent, those 
     kinds of impediments to reducing productions.
       U.S. manufacturing's innovation process leads to 
     investments in equipment and people, to productivity gains, 
     to beneficial spillovers, and to new and improved products 
     and processes. This intricate process generates economic 
     growth and higher living standards superior to any other 
     economic sector. But serious challenges threaten to undermine 
     the critical mass of manufacturing necessary to maintain a 
     dynamic innovation process. If the U.S. manufacturing base 
     continues to shrink at its present rate and the critical mass 
     is lost, the manufacturing innovation process will shift to 
     other global centers. Once that happens, a decline in U.S. 
     living standards in the future is virtually assured.

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I wanted to speak in support of the amendment which expresses a sense 
of

[[Page 18133]]

the Congress that the International Boundary and Water Commission 
should move forward with a program that is intended to eliminate the 
flow of Mexican sewage across the international border in the Pacific 
region into waters that end up polluting the Southern California 
coastline and requiring a quarantine of that coastline.
  Mr. Chairman, we have been urging the International Boundary and 
Water Commission to make treaty negotiations with Mexico on 
establishing a public-private partnership to construct and operate a 
wastewater treatment facility in Mexico as outlined in existing Public 
Law 106-457. To date, they have shown insignificant progress. They have 
shown no inclination to move forward on this important mandate which is 
in law, and this is a sense of Congress to urge them to get moving.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Guam (Ms. Bordallo).
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support the en bloc 
amendment, which includes a provision to bring equity between the State 
Department employees from Guam and other insular areas with those from 
the mainland United States.
  Current law allows the reimbursement of travel expenses for employees 
and their dependents in a foreign posting to return home. However, 
because of a flawed definition, the State Department is prohibited from 
providing this benefit if the home location is a U.S. territory. My 
amendment would correct this problem. My amendment would include Guam, 
American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and the Northern 
Mariana Islands within the geographic definition of the United States 
for the purposes of educational travel from a foreign area posting. I 
hope that in conference this might be perfected to include all of the 
State Department allowances in Title V. Congress would then eliminate 
the need to revisit this issue for every allowance.
  Let me close by giving an example of the problem that the current 
language imposes. A constituent of mine who is proudly serving our 
Nation as a State Department employee in Beijing wanted to send his son 
home to the University of Guam. His request was denied only to be told 
that Guam and the University of Guam is not in the United States.
  Today, the House will right this wrong; and I would like to thank the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Lantos), the ranking member, and the State Department for 
supporting this change.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the en bloc 
amendments and appreciate the fact that it includes amendment No. 22, 
so I thank the chairman and the ranking member.
  This amendment offered by this Member begins with a set of findings 
concerning the liberation of Iraq by U.S. coalition forces, the current 
situation on the ground and the challenges and demands facing American 
military forces and American taxpayers in bringing stability to Iraq.
  Included in the findings is a statement by President Bush that, ``The 
rise of Iraq as an example of moderation and democracy and prosperity 
is a massive and long-term undertaking,'' and testimony by Defense 
Secretary Rumsfeld that, ``We certainly want assistance from NATO and 
from NATO countries.''
  This amendment exactly parallels the amendment offered by Senator 
Biden, endorsed by Senator Lugar which passed the Senate recently by a 
97-0 vote. In the operative section, the amendment expresses the sense 
of Congress that it is in the national security interest of the United 
States to remain engaged in Iraq in order to ensure a peaceful, stable, 
unified Iraq with a representative government.

                              {time}  1645

  The amendment goes on to suggest that the President should consider a 
formal request for NATO to assume a greater role in Iraq and that other 
NATO allies and other nations should provide troops and police to 
coalition efforts in Iraq. Finally, the amendment again, a sense of 
Congress amendment, asks the President to consider calling on the 
United Nations to urge its member states to provide personnel and 
resources to stabilize and rebuild Iraq.
  Let me emphasize that the amendment text makes clear that sovereign 
member states should provide military forces and civilian police to 
promote security, not the U.N. itself. The situation in Iraq is far too 
dangerous for a U.N. peacekeeping operation. It deserves to have the 
first-rate one, NATO.
  Mr. Chairman, this Member believes we have no option but to remain 
engaged in Iraq, but this Member believes that we should seek as much 
assistance in this effort as possible.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I want to rise in support of the en bloc 
amendment and certainly recognize the wisdom that has now been included 
in the en bloc amendment of my original amendment in the Committee on 
International Relations calling for a conclusion of a migratory 
agreement between the United States and Mexico in the national 
interests of both countries. It certainly is in the national interest 
of the United States to regularize the border between Mexico and the 
United States, to make sure that the human capital that helps fuel our 
economy here at home can be had but in a way that is dignified on both 
sides.
  And certainly I am happy to see the removal of the Mexican oil from 
the migration agreement that was not only offensive but outright wrong 
as far as our foreign policy is concerned. As the ranking Democrat on 
the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, I am pleased to see that we 
are headed now in the right direction. I am very pleased that Democrats 
have led on this issue and that our Republican colleagues have joined 
us on it in this en bloc amendment.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
  Mrs. MALONEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding time and for his 
extraordinary leadership on international affairs and so many issues 
that are important to this country.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to support the en bloc amendment and to 
note that the amendment which the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Lantos) and I put forward to help women and girls in Afghanistan was 
included. I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).
  The amendment creates the Afghan Women's Fund of not less than $22 
million per year for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005. The Afghan Women's 
Fund will support the efforts of the Afghan Ministry of Women's 
Affairs, other government ministries, and independent commissions to 
increase women and girls' access to health care, education, and income-
earning opportunities, as well as to programs to prevent trafficking in 
girls and women. This amendment also ensures that not less than 15 
percent of the Afghan Women's Fund will reach organizations run by 
Afghans, especially Afghan women.
  These organizations and civil society leaders are ideal partners, as 
they offer extensive development experience, knowledge of the local 
culture, and deep connections with the people they serve. Their success 
is also very closely tied to the success of efforts in Afghanistan for 
democracy because democracies cannot stabilize without a strong civil 
society. The Afghan women's amendment will support Afghan women and 
girls as they endeavor to make their country a more stable, safer, and 
better place.
  I thank the leadership on the Democrat and Republican side for 
including this important amendment.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Filner).
  Mr. FILNER. I thank my colleague for yielding me this time. I want to

[[Page 18134]]

thank the managers of the bill, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), 
for including in the en bloc amendment the so-called Hunter-Cunningham-
Davis-Filner amendment, which deals with a rather amazing situation on 
the Mexico-California border in my district. Three years ago, this 
House passed by unanimous vote a bill that was authored by then-
Congressman Bilbray and myself which set up a process and a plan for 
solving the sewage problem at the border.
  Mr. Chairman, there are 50 million gallons of raw sewage that flow 
throughout my district every day. Because the Tijuana River flows 
north, Mexico simply does not have the technical ability to treat its 
sewage, we get it, and the health of our citizens is threatened. Mr. 
Bilbray and I, sanctioned by this House, came up with a public-private 
partnership to solve this issue. Three years ago, we voted unanimously 
to instruct the International Boundary and Water Commission to carry 
out this plan. Three years and nothing has happened. Absolutely nothing 
has occurred to carry out the wishes of this Congress and to protect 
the health of the citizens of the United States. That is absolutely 
incredible. It is absolutely threatening to, really, the authority of 
the United States Congress.
  What we have in the en bloc amendment is a sense of Congress saying 
to the IBWC, the International Boundary and Water Commission, to get to 
it, do something. I think they should be held in contempt of Congress 
myself because the Chair of that commission, in testimony to the United 
States Congress, to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
said they were going to carry this out. He has not done so. That 
commission, Mr. Chairman, is in disarray. This Congress should carry 
out an investigation of that commission, but this is a first step in 
the sense of Congress resolution. I thank the managers for it.
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak on the 
State Department Authorization Bill. The bill contains key provisions 
that will improve international relations. I commend Chairman Hyde and 
Ranking Member Lantos on their hard work and dedication to 
international affairs.
  The citizens of the United States have benefitted greatly from the 
strides made by medical science, but despite these advances, the health 
status of people living in developing countries lags far behind the 
rest of our citizens. Funding for the United Nations Population Fund is 
needed to ensure that future generations in other countries prosper. 
The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) is the largest 
internationally funded source of population assistance to developing 
countries. Over the past 33 years, UNFPA has provided more than $6 
billion in assistance to more than 160 countries for voluntary family 
planning and maternal and child health care.
  The UNFPA provides great assistance to a number of African countries. 
UNFPA's priorities include working to increase access to reproductive 
health services, improve approaches to adolescent reproductive health; 
promote safe pregnancy and delivery, reduce maternal mortality, provide 
emergency assistance in refugee situations, and prevent and treat HIV/
AIDS. I am especially concerned about the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa. 
The HIV/AIDS virus infected approximately 3.5 million Africans. HR 1950 
calls for $1,000,000 for the fiscal year 2004 to be available for HIV/
AIDS research and mitigation strategies internationally.
  In addition to health assistance, we need to do more to help 
countries in the continent of Africa with peacekeeping solutions. The 
diplomatic capacity at the UN needs to be enhanced to end the suffering 
of the people of Africa. In the country of Liberia, the people have 
endured and suffered bloody civil war and unrest for the past 13 years. 
This war is destroying the future of many Liberian children who are 
forced to become brutal soldiers at such young ages. We as a nation 
must assist the people of Liberia. We must help them reverse the 
deterioration of their country. This bill will provide $40,000,000 to 
implement peackeeping activities in Africa.
  Heightened awareness of what we can do to improve international 
affairs is very important. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I would urge all 
people throughout America and, quite frankly, throughout the world to 
pay more attention to our developing countries so that not only can we 
all maintain better health, but also so that we can have peace. Peace 
is the only way to gain prosperity.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I speak to 
you today regarding a pressing matter that deserves attention as we 
balance out the debate on H.R. 1950. While the stringent nature of the 
Rules governing the amendment process for this bill preclude my input 
by way of amendment, I submit that the issue of famine in Ethiopia is 
worthy of inclusion with the report language on this bill.
  Unfortunately, even as we speak now, some 11-14 million people will 
go hungry in the coming months.


              Effect of Famine on the Agriculture Industry

  Severe drought conditions destroyed over 15 percent of the October-
November 2002 harvest in Ethiopia. The resultant failure of root 
vegetables and green crops to grow has caused families that depend on 
subsistence farming to not only lack food, but also seeds for 
replanting next year. This situation makes the availability of 
genetically modified organism (GMO) seeds dangerously attractive to the 
hungry, inuring them to the host of side affects and ailments that have 
yet to be confirmed or denied by the Food and Drug Administration.
  As a result of the poor arability of the land and other adverse 
conditions, not only are the people's crops suffering, but their 
livestock as well. With the mortality rate steadily rising, those 
remaining are experiencing a lowered body weight, which results in 
reduced traction, power and milk production, which again will lead to 
insecure food sources. Unless veterinary services improve, the death 
toll will continue to increase as the livestock's immune system grows 
weaker resulting from poor conditions and common diseases.
  The combined effect of plummeting livestock prices and skyrocketing 
cereal prices, the poorer households face an even worse predicament in 
obtaining food. Their wage rate is reported to be 3 times lower in the 
current year than in the same period last year.
  According to recent studies, there were 35,000 people in Ziquala, 
34,920 people in Ambassel, 16,300 in Wadla, 17,455 in Kewet and 156,200 
in the three words of South Gondar who were in need of external 
assistance through the upcoming months.


                Ethiopian Economy in the Face of Famine

  Ethiopia's poverty-stricken economy is based on agriculture, which 
accounts for half of GDP, 85% of exports, and 80% of total employment. 
The agricultural sector suffers from frequent drought and poor 
cultivation practices, and as many as 4.6 million people need food 
assistance annually. Coffee is critical to the Ethiopian economy with 
exports of some $260 million in 2000. Other important exports include 
live animals, hides, and gold.
  The war with Eritrea in 1999-2000 and recurrent drought have buffeted 
the economy, in particular coffee production. In November 2001, 
Ethiopia qualified for debt relief from the Highly Indebted Poor 
Countries (HIPC) initiative. Under Ethiopia's land tenure system, the 
government owns all land and provides long-term leases to the tenants; 
the system continues to hamper growth in the industrial sector as 
entrepreneurs are unable to use land as collateral for loans. Despite 
this limitation, strong growth is expected to continue in the near term 
as good rainfall, the cessation of hostilities, and renewed foreign aid 
and debt relief push the economy forward.


short-term consequences of inaction or lack of timely remedial measures

  An estimated six children die of drought-related conditions daily in 
Ethiopia, according to one estimate. Many of them have collapsed from 
disease or dehydration after walking for days with their families in 
search of nourishment. Thousands are fleeing remote villages where 
wells have dried up and agencies have yet to establish food stations.


                            who is at risk?

  The U.N. warns that as many as 16 million people are at risk of 
starvation in 10 countries across East and central Africa, from Burundi 
to Eritrea on the Red Sea. The crisis is most severe in Ethiopia's 
perpetually dry Ogaden region, where wells have gone dry, crops have 
withered and the skeletons of cattle and sheep lay in barren fields. 
Camels in Ogaden have stopped lactating, leaving children without milk, 
a staple in the impoverished nation.
  Some Ethiopians are fortunate enough to have access to feeding 
centers, which supply rehydration treatments and high protein biscuits. 
Relief agencies are struggling to set up more centers in remote regions 
before residents migrate elsewhere for food. Sometimes, lack of clean 
drinking water, which is needed to mix the children's food into gruel, 
makes it impossible for centers to be stationed in some areas.


  a rich history of fighting hunger in the 18th congressional district

  The late Honorable Mickey Leland established the House Select 
Committee on Hunger in 1984 and served as its chairman until his

[[Page 18135]]

tragic death in 1989. The Select Committee was instrumental in drawing 
attention to the problem of hunger internationally and within the 
United States. On a humanitarian mission to Africa, Mickey experienced 
the death of a starving child in his arms. This eye-opening experience 
led him to redouble his efforts to fight hunger, resulting in 350,000 
tons of food to aid famine victims in Ethiopia. Congressman Leland lost 
his life in Ethiopia trying to save more lives. I would like to work 
with this committee to include report language in this bill that 
encourages a greater emphasis on the ongoing famine and a solution to 
this deadly problem.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I speak to 
you today regarding a pressing matter that deserves attention as we 
balance out the debate on H.R. 1950. I appreciate the opportunity to 
discuss with you an issue, the relevance of which, will potentially 
merit inclusion into the House Reports on H.R. 1950, the State 
Department Authorization bill. The issue concerns the initiative of 
achieving international peace by way of the leadership of women.


        women leaders as the universal Hub in the peace process

  Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I propose that women play any and 
all roles that will give them an opportunity to use their leadership 
skills in the peace process. Therefore, this request would include 
diplomatic as well as formal organizational leadership roles. I support 
the International Leadership Act of 2003, co-authored by you and 
Representative David Dreier, Chairman of the House Committee on Rules 
and included in the bill provisions.


        women's role in the international leadership act of 2003

  I see women leading and adding important skills to the ``Democracy 
Caucus'' proposed in the Act. The Democracy Caucus would work as a very 
timely vehicle for women to lead the way, especially in the area of 
rebuilding democratic government in post-war Iraq. With the help of the 
United Nations, we can prevent rogue regimes from assuming dangerous 
amounts of influence and taking advantage of the vulnerabilities of 
rebuilding nations such as Iraq and even Liberia. I would posit that 
fashioning the proposed diplomacy program under the Act to give women 
particular attention will greatly enhance the multilateral character of 
our ambassador fleet.


             The Oslo Summit: Women's Partnership for Peace

  Mr. Chairman, I took advantage of a unique experience when I served 
as an Honorary Chair for the Women's Partnership for Peace in the 
Middle East in Oslo, Norway in June of this year. I shared a panel with 
an unprecedented group of more than 70 women from Israel, Palestine, 
the United States, Europe and Asia who met in Oslo, Norway at the Nobel 
Peace Institute to launch the Women's Partnership for Peace in the 
Middle East.
  The objective of the Oslo Summit was to set clear goals and devise a 
plan of action for achieving a greater role for women in peace 
negotiations in the region and in the overall effort to achieve peace, 
a movement largely devoid of women's perspectives and participations. I 
would like to see women play a more pronounced role not only in the 
establishment of business opportunity but also in the peace process, 
and this kind of forum offers a platform that is both transnational as 
well as international. In training our diplomats to act as more 
efficient international ``joints,'' it is critical that we deputize our 
strong women leaders.


     her excellency dr. inonge mbikusita-lewanika: an icon of peace

  As a final remark and by way of example, I would like to highlight 
the experience and achievement of Her Excellency Dr. Inonge Mbikusita-
Lewanika, Ambassador to Zambia. This woman, whom I had the honor and 
pleasure of presenting the Freedom Magazine Award for Human Rights 
Leadership on July 9, 2003 is an example of the impact a woman can have 
on international peace negotiations and efforts.
  If I may chronicle a few of her accomplishments, she was appointed as 
a special envoy to the African Union and allowed to advance the 
movement of women in her nation in the effort for peace. Her various 
posts have decorated her career with great international breadth and 
astute conflict-resolution skill: UNICEF Regional Advisor for Families 
and Children in 19 countries; as stated above, a Peace Envoy convening 
numerous peace missions such as the Organization for African Unity; and 
the United Nations-sponsored peace mission to Rwanda amidst the period 
of human rights atrocity and genocide. In fact, Her Excellency Lewanika 
is one of the few prominent African women to serve in United Nations 
missions for war-torn African nations. Moreover, she understands the 
importance and the benefits of structuring and maintaining an organized 
democratic government and an effective electoral process. These 
initiatives are evidenced by her audacious efforts to lead a 1,000-
member observe team from the Electoral Institute of Southern Africa to 
Zimbabwe's parliamentary elections and to spearhead the nine-member 
resignation from the Ruling Party in Zambia due to findings of 
corruption and lack of vision in 1993, whereupon she was elected 
Founding President of the Opposition National Party. Furthermore, her 
positions of leadership in organizations such as the Forum for 
Parliamentarians for Peace in Eastern and Southern Africa; the African 
Women Committee for Peace and Development; the Women Development 
Association; and the Federation of African Women's Peace Networks, 
heading the first delegation of women for peace to Ethiopia and Eritrea 
during the bloody and tumultuous border war Zambia's Opposition Party, 
Agenda for Zambia as President, exemplifies her tenacity and 
willingness to commit the time and effort that is required to follow 
through on organization mission statements rather than spewing forth 
rhetoric and flowery speeches absent any real action.
  For the reasons stated above, I would hope that these concerns 
regarding women involved in international peace efforts can be included 
in report language during conference.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I speak to 
you today regarding a pressing matter that deserves attention as we 
balance out the debate on H.R. 1950. I appreciate the opportunity to 
discuss with you an issue, the relevance of which, will potentially 
merit inclusion into the House Reports on H.R. 1950, the State 
Department Authorization bill. The issue concerns a nation that was 
founded during the nineteenth century by freed American slaves. Once a 
nation founded on the premises of freedom and opportunity, the Liberia 
of today is wrought with political upheaval and social unrest.
  Within the last twenty years, Liberia has been the site of intense 
devastation and profound loss due to almost two decades of civil war. 
The latest war has lasted for approximately three years and has caused 
immense disruption to the social and political fabric of the region.
  The health infrastructure in Liberia has crumbled, schools have 
become refugee camps, and the people have taken the law into their own 
hands. Nearly half of the Liberian population has been forced to flee 
to neighboring countries or to internationally assisted camps in 
Liberia. Large numbers of innocent, young children are being made into 
child soldiers. Those children that are fortunate enough to escape the 
life of forced military service are often left with little to no 
options aside from living on the streets. This conflict has brought 
about political destablization on a mass scale, increased economic 
disparity, and what can only be described as societal chaos. And 
although a ceasefire was recently agreed upon, fighting and civil 
disobedience within the country has yet to subside.
  Charles Taylor has exacerbated the civil war in Liberia since 1989 
when he led the armed military faction that initiated a seven-year 
civil war in Monrovia. Of the emerging military factions in Liberia 
during this unsettling time, the group led by Charles Taylor was 
arguably the most dangerous and recalcitrant. An attempted peace 
process in mid-1996 resulted in the unexpected election of Charles 
Taylor as president. Although Liberia appeared to have entered into a 
time of normalcy, the killing and harassment of notable opposition 
leaders and the censure of Liberia's print and radio media raised 
doubts among many observers and prompted immediate concern from the 
U.S. as well as the rest of the international community. In 1999, 
President Taylor was charged with aiding the Revolutionary Front (RUF) 
rebels fighting the Sierra Leonean government. The U.S. has 
subsequently pursued unilateral policies that directly target the 
Taylor government.
  The U.S. has had a long historical relationship with Liberia dating 
back to its original founding. Views diverge on whether the U.S. should 
provide Liberia with any assistance and if so what type of how much. 
The extensive historical involvement between U.S. and Liberia 
obligates, in my opinion, our government to take special responsibility 
to answer Liberia's humanitarian and developmental needs, promote an 
effective democracy, and work diligently to stop human rights abuses. 
Liberia has served as an important ally for the U.S. particularly 
during the Cold War era; it is in recognition of this long-standing 
relationship that the U.S. should serve as a vigilant presence in the 
efforts to bring calm and civility to this war-ravaged country.
  Of course this is not the first time that U.S. presence has been 
requested to aid in the

[[Page 18136]]

restoration of civility in a nation. Our involvement with conflicts and 
civil strife in Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo are a few of the more recent 
examples of successful humanitarian interventions. We were certainly 
more than willing to involve ourselves in Iraq under the auspices of 
terrorism and global peace; if peace be our aim, then we should have no 
qualms about coming to the aid of Liberian citizens. The question we 
should ask is why there is any hesitation to become involved with 
Liberia when there are well-established historical ties to this 
country. It is vital that the U.S. send in U.S. peacekeeping and 
humanitarian aid to support the Economic Community of West African 
States.
  We know that Charles Taylor needs to go. He has been negating the 
peace process for years and it is therefore high time that he make his 
exit, once and for all.
  The rhetoric put forth by those on the other side of the table, on 
the surface, speak to the dangers and long-term global implications of 
external intervention. However, we are quite selective about the 
dangers we are willing to face and the implications we are willing to 
make in the name of peace. What determines this difference? I think 
that those on the other side simply view Liberia as a region of non-
strategic importance for U.S. foreign policy interests. This type of 
biased selectivity is unproductive and ineffective in the global 
community in which we live.
  A consistent supply of humanitarian aid in the form of shelter, food, 
water, and medical care should be supplied to the region as well. In 
essence, we must do all we can to ensure that peace and stability 
return to Liberia once and for all. I hope to monitor the debate on 
this need and would hope that report language could be included in the 
report of the bill on helping Liberia now!
  Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered 
by the four co-chairs of the Congressional Taiwan Caucus endorsing 
Taiwan's entrance into the World Health Organization.
  It is unconscionable that 23 million Taiwanese are precluded from 
receiving the benefits of membership in the WHO. This politicized 
exclusion has deprived the people of Taiwan from a number of 
progressive health care developments, impaired its crisis response 
teams and created a wall of separation between Taiwan's medical field 
and that of the rest of the world. Moreover, Taiwan's exclusion from 
the WHO has deprived the international community from the invaluable 
contributions of Taiwan has made to promote medical research and global 
health.
  Never were the affects of Taiwan's exclusion from the WHO more 
pronounced than this past year, when Taiwan was denied assistance from 
the WHO to diagnose and treat suspected cases of SARS--a disease which 
caused over 800 deaths, 84 of which occurred in Taiwan. Despite the 
extraordinary grave health conditions posed by SARS, the WHO repeatedly 
rejected Taiwan's requests for help, and consequently endangered the 
lives of its entire population.
  Unconscionably, the WHO's decisions were based--not upon its concern 
for the people of Taiwan--but rather, on short-sided political 
considerations and China's rejection of Taiwan's membership in the WHO.
  Mr. Chairman, health is an issue that transcends borders and 
politics. As the pace of globalization quickens, so too does the spread 
of infectious disease. In this post-SARS world, it's clear that all 
nations--including Taiwan--must work together to promote global health, 
combat disease and ensure the safety of their citizens in organizations 
like the WHO.
  This amendment makes a clear and uncompromising declaration of U.S. 
support for Taiwan's candidacy for observer status in the WHO and 
secures an even stronger commitment from President Bush and the State 
Department in this regard. I urge the Bush Administration, which has 
taken bold steps to assist Taiwan in the past, to bring this issue to a 
vote at the World Health Assembly in May 2004.
  Mr. Chairman, the SARS crisis further highlights the urgency of 
combating disease on a global scale. It is apparent that until Taiwan's 
23 million citizens become members of the WHO, they will continue to be 
deprived of the critical assistance needed to fight infectious disease 
and safeguard its people from harm.
  Today, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this amendment, which 
protects the health interests of the people of Taiwan and ensures that 
they will not fall victim to the next global health crisis.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of an 
amendment to support human rights in Vietnam. This important amendment 
will impose a significant penalty on the dictators in Hanoi for their 
ongoing and egregious persecution of their own people.
  During the 107th Congress, I introduced H.R. 2833, legislation 
designed to address the human rights situation in Vietnam. It passed 
the House by an overwhelming 410-1 margin, but stalled in the Senate. 
This year, I introduced nearly identical legislation, H.R. 1587, with 
30 original cosponsors.
  Many felt that the ratification of the Bilateral Trade Agreement with 
Vietnam in 2001 would lead to an improvement in human rights. 
Unfortunately, the human rights situation in Vietnam has deteriorated 
dramatically since this agreement, especially for Montagnard Christians 
in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. Legislation to address the serious 
human rights situation is needed now more than ever.
  In late 2002 the Government of Vietnam launched a fresh wave of 
arrests and crackdowns against peaceful critics of the Vietnamese 
government, its policy of repression, and its corrupt practices. 
Unfortunately, Dr. Nguyen Dan Que, one of the country's greatest human 
rights leaders who has already endured two lengthy prison sentences, 
was arrested on March 17. This is a government that consistently 
pursues a policy of harassment, discrimination, and intimidation, and, 
increasingly in the last three years, imprisonment and other forms of 
detention, against those who peacefully express dissent from 
government's extreme policies against religion and freedom. This is a 
government that punishes not just individuals who oppose them, but also 
often their family members.
  At its Seventh Plenum in January 2003, the Communist Party's Central 
Committee issued a resolution calling for the establishment of cells of 
Communist Party members within each of Vietnam's six approved religions 
in order to foil ``hostile forces.'' All religious groups in Vietnam 
face great restrictions and suffer some form of persecution.
  To address these and other abuses, my amendment, based on the text of 
H.R. 1587: requires the President to issue a certification each year on 
the progress of the regime towards respecting human rights; prohibits 
an increase in nonhumanitarian U.S. assistance unless the regime shows 
improvement; seeks to fund the efforts of NGOs who promote democracy in 
Vietnam and help to overcome the jamming of Radio Free Asia; helps 
ensure continued access of refugees to our refugee resettlement 
programs; and requires the State Department to give detailed reports 
about the status of human rights in Vietnam that include victims lists.
  Unfortunately, the list of human rights abuses carried out by the 
regime goes on and on. Buddhists, Protestants, Catholics and members of 
indigenous Vietnamese religions are subject to persecutions that 
include detention and imprisonment of both religious leaders and 
believers, church closings, and confiscation of religious and personal 
property. One of the most courageous religious leaders imprisoned is 
Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Catholic priest.
  Tens of thousands of children suffer exploitation as workers and many 
Vietnamese suffer under the government's official export labor program, 
in which the government forces its own people to endure involuntary 
servitude and debt bondage.
  As Chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, I am 
particularly concerned about the continued persecution of the 
Montagnards, who were some of our greatest allies during the war. Many 
of our pilots are alive today and have families because they were 
rescued by Montagnards after bailing out of downed aircraft. We receive 
numerous and credible reports that allege that Montagnards are being 
imprisoned, tortured and systematically relocated to infertile lands by 
the Communist Party leaders in retaliation for their past loyalty to 
America. This past December, Vietnamese soldiers reportedly threatened 
to shoot Montagnard Christians if they celebrated Christmas, and 
several were arrested and tortured.
  I would like to submit the findings of H.R. 1587, which lay out a 
more complete case of Human Rights in Vietnam, to the Congressional 
Record. They were kept out of this amendment because of their length, 
but they speak loudly with respect to the regime and the world about 
the egregious human rights abuses occurring in Vietnam.
  Vietnam's continued policy of harassment, discrimination, 
intimidation, and persecution of religious and human rights leaders is 
shameful. The Vietnam Human Rights amendment in the State Department 
Authorization Bill sends as strong a message that this persecution and 
tyranny will not be tolerated.

       Findings From H.R. 1587, ``The Vietnam Human Rights Act''

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Viet Nam is a one-party state, ruled and controlled by 
     the Vietnamese Communist Party.
       (2)(A) The Government of Viet Nam denies the people of Viet 
     Nam the right to change their government and prohibits 
     independent political, social, and labor organizations.

[[Page 18137]]

       (B) The Government of Viet Nam prohibits and hinders the 
     formation of civil society in Viet Nam.
       (3)(A) The Government of Viet Nam consistently pursues a 
     policy of harassment, discrimination, and intimidation, and 
     sometimes of imprisonment and other forms of detention, 
     against those who peacefully express dissent from government 
     or party policy. This policy includes collectively punishing 
     family members of individuals targeted for persecution. A 
     government decree allows detention without trial for 6 months 
     to 2 years.
       (B) Following the United States ratification of the 
     Bilateral Trade Agreement with Viet Nam in 2001, the human 
     rights situation in Viet Nam has remained extremely poor. For 
     certain groups, such as the Montagnards, and other ethnic 
     minorities in Central and North Vietnam, conditions have 
     deteriorated dramatically. In late 2002, the Government of 
     Viet Nam launched a fresh wave of arrests and crackdowns 
     against peaceful critics of the Vietnamese Government, its 
     policy of repression, and its corrupt practices.
       (C) Recent victims of such mistreatment, which violates the 
     rights to freedom of expression and association recognized in 
     the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, include Dr. Nguyen 
     Dan Que, a leading human rights activist who was arrested on 
     March 17, 2003, and has already served two lengthy prison 
     sentences, Dr. Nguyen Thanh Giang, Most Venerable Thich Huyen 
     Quang, Most Venerable Thich Quang Do, linguist Tran Khue, 
     businessman Nguyen Khac Toan, journalist Nguyen Vu Binh, 
     publicist Le Chi Quang, writer Hoang Tien, military historian 
     Pham Que Duong, Hoang Minh Chinh, Tran Dung Tien, Hoang Trong 
     Dung, Nguyen Vu Viet, Nguyen Truc Cuong, Nguyen Thi Hoa, Vu 
     Cao Quan, Nguyen The Dam, Nguyen Thi Thanh Xuan, Father Chan 
     Tin, author Duong Thu Huong, poet Bui Minh Quoc, Dr. Nguyen 
     Xuan Tu (Ha Si Phu), Dr. Pham Hong Son, Mai Thai Linh, Most 
     Venerable Thich Huyen Quang, Most Venerable Thich Quang Do, 
     Father Nguyen Van Ly, Pastor Nguyen Lap Ma, Father Phan Van 
     Loi, numerous leaders of the Hoa Hao Buddhist Church and of 
     independent Protestant churches, and an undetermined number 
     of members of the Montagnard ethnic minority groups who 
     participated in peaceful demonstrations in the Central 
     Highlands of Viet Nam during February 2001.
       (4) The Government of Viet Nam systematically deprives its 
     citizens of the fundamental right or organized religious 
     activities outside the state's control. Although some freedom 
     of worship is permitted, believers are forbidden to 
     participate in religious activities except under 
     circumstances rigidly defined and controlled by the 
     Government:
       (A)(i) In April, 1999 the Government issued a Decree 
     Concerning Religious Activities, which declared in pertinent 
     part that ``[a]ll activities using religious belief in order 
     to oppose the State of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, to 
     prevent the believers from carrying out civic 
     responsibilities, to sabotage the union of all the people, 
     and against the health culture of our nation, as well as 
     superstitious activities, will be punished in conformity with 
     the law''.
       (ii) All public religious activities must be approved by 
     the Government in advance. The United States Commission on 
     International Religious Freedom in October 2002 recommended 
     that Viet Nam be classified as a country of particular 
     concern. At its Seventh Plenum in January 2003, the Communist 
     Party's Central Committee issued a resolution calling for the 
     establishment of cells of Communist Party members within each 
     of Vietnam's 6 approved religions in order to foil ``hostile 
     forces''.
       (B)(i) The Unified Buddhist Church of Viet Nam (UBCV), the 
     largest religious denomination in the country, has been 
     declared illegal by the Government, and over the last 27 
     years its clergy have often been imprisoned and subjected to 
     other forms of persecution. The Patriarch of the Unified 
     Buddhist Church, 85-year-old Most Venerable Thich Huyen 
     Quang, has been detained for 25 years in a ruined temple in 
     an isolated area of central Viet Nam.
       (ii) Most Venerable Thich Quang Do, the Executive President 
     of the Unified Buddhist Church, has also been in various 
     forms of detention since 1977, and was recently rearrested 
     and placed under house arrest after he had proposed to bring 
     Most Venerable Thich Huyen Quang to Saigon for medical 
     treatment.
       (iii) Many other leading Buddhist figures, including Thich 
     Hai Tang, Thich Khong Tanh, Thich Thai Hoa, Thich Tue Si, 
     Thich Quang Hue, Thich Tam An, Thich Nguyen Ly, Thich Thanh 
     Huyen, Thich Thong Dat, Thich Chi Mau, Thich Chi Thang, Thich 
     Chon Niem, Thich Thanh Quang are under tight surveillance. 
     Several members of the UBCV have fled to Cambodia
       (C)(i) The Hao Hoa Buddhist Church was also declared to be 
     illegal until 1999, when the Government established an 
     organization which purports to govern the Hao Hoa. According 
     to the United States Commission on International Religious 
     Freedom, ``[t]his organization is made up almost entirely of 
     Communist Party members and apparently is not recognized as 
     legitimate by the vast majority of Hao Hoas . . . 
     [n]evertheless, [this government-sponsored organization] has 
     sought to control all Hao Hoa religious activity, 
     particularly at the Hao Hoa village, which is the center of 
     Hao Hoa religious life''.
       (ii)(I) Hao Hoa believers who do not recognize the 
     legitimacy of the government organization are denied the 
     right to visit the Hao Hoa village, to conduct traditional 
     religious celebrations, or to display Hao Hoa symbols. Many 
     have been arrested and subjected to administrative detention, 
     and several Hao Hoa have been sentenced to prison terms for 
     protesting these denials of religious freedom.
       (II) The Government interferes with Hao Hoa efforts to 
     conduct charitable works, and prohibits public celebration to 
     commemorate the founder's disappearance as well as the 
     distribution of the founder's teachings. The Government 
     controls greatly the leadership selection process of the Cao 
     Dais, another indigenous Vietnamese religion.
       (III) At least the following Hao Hoa believers are known to 
     be in prison or house detention: Ha Hai, Tran Van Be Cao, 
     Tran Nguyen Huon, Phan Thi Tiem, Le Quang Liem, Nguyen Van 
     Dien, Le Minh Triet, and Vo Van Thanh Liem.
       (D)(i) Independent Protestants, most of whom are members of 
     ethnic minority groups, are subjected to particularly harsh 
     treatment by the Government of Viet Nam. According to the 
     United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, 
     such treatment includes ``police raids on homes and house 
     churches, detention, imprisonment, confiscation of religious 
     and personal property, physical and psychological abuse, and 
     fines for engaging in unapproved religious activities (such 
     as collective worship, public religious expression and 
     distribution of religious literature, and performing 
     baptisms, marriages, or funeral services) . . . [i]n 
     addition, it is reported that ethnic Hmong Protestants have 
     been forced by local officials to agree to abandon their 
     faith''.
       (ii)(I) According to human rights activists in Viet Nam, 2 
     secret central plans--Plan 184A and 184B--issued in 1999 by 
     the Communist Party to combat Protestant believers were fully 
     implemented throughout the country, and led to a crackdown on 
     the Protestant movement, especially in the Central and 
     Northern Highland areas.
       (II) An estimated 14,000 Christians fled from the North to 
     the Central Highlands in the past 5 years. According to the 
     Southern Evangelical Church of Viet Nam, the Government of 
     Viet Nam forcibly closed 354 of the 412 churches in Dak Lak 
     province, 56 pastors from the Central Highlands have 
     disappeared, and at least 43 evangelical Montagnards have 
     been sentenced to prison. Freedom House has reported on the 
     beating death of Hmong Christian Mua Bua Senh by police 
     authorities.
       (E)(i) Other religious organizations, such as the Catholic 
     Church, are formally recognized by the Government but are 
     subjected to pervasive regulation which violates the right to 
     freedom of religion. For instance, the Catholic Church is 
     forbidden to appoint its own bishops without Government 
     consent, which is frequently denied, to accept seminarians 
     without specific official permission, and to profess Catholic 
     doctrines which are inconsistent with Government policy. 
     Government restrictions on the seminary process have caused a 
     severe shortage of priests.
       (ii) A Catholic priest, Father Nguyen Van Ly, was arrested 
     in March 2001 and remains in detention after submitting 
     written testimony to the United States Commission on 
     International Religious Freedom. On October 19, 2001, he was 
     sentenced to a total of 20 years of imprisonment and house 
     arrest; the trial in Hue took place closed to the public and 
     without a defense lawyer.
       (iii) In October 2002, the Vietnamese Bishops Conference 
     took an unprecedented step when they protested to the 
     National Assembly about the persecutions endured by Catholic 
     ethnic minorities.
       (F) The Government has also confiscated numerous churches, 
     temples, and other properties belonging to religious 
     organizations. The vast majority of these properties--even 
     those belonging to religious organizations formally 
     recognized by the Government--have never been returned.
       (5)(A) Since 1975 the Government of Viet Nam has persecuted 
     veterans of the Army of the Republic of Viet Nam and other 
     Vietnamese who had opposed the Viet Cong insurgency and the 
     North Vietnamese invasion of South Viet Nam. Such persecution 
     typically included substantial terms in ``re-education 
     camps'', where detainees were often subjected to torture and 
     other forms of physical abuse, and in which many died.
       (B) Re-education camp survivors and their families were 
     often forced into internal exile in ``New Economic Zones''. 
     Many of these former allies of the United States, as well as 
     members of their families, continue until the present day to 
     suffer various forms of harassment and discrimination, 
     including denial of basic social benefits and exclusion from 
     higher education and employment.
       (6)(A) The Government of Viet Nam has been particularly 
     harsh in its treatment of members of the Montagnard ethnic 
     minority groups of the central Highlands of Viet Nam, who 
     were the first line in the defense of South Viet Nam against 
     invasion from the

[[Page 18138]]

     North and who fought courageously beside members of the 
     Special Forces of the United States, suffering 
     disproportionately heavy casualties, and saving the lives of 
     many of their American and Vietnamese comrades-in-arms.
       (B) Since 1975 the Montagnard peoples have been singled out 
     for severe repression, in part because of their past 
     association with the United States and in part because their 
     strong commitment to their traditional way of life and to 
     their Christian religion is regarded as inconsistent with the 
     absolute loyalty and control demanded by the Communist 
     system. The Government employs a policy of assimilation and 
     oppression against the Montagnards, forcibly displacing them 
     from their ancestral lands to make way for North Vietnamese 
     settlers, coffee plantations, and logging operations.
       (C) Between February and March 2001, several thousand 
     members of the mountain tribes Djarai, Bahnar, and Rhade from 
     the provinces of Pleiku, Gialai, and Daklak took part in a 
     series of peaceful demonstrations to demand the release of 2 
     Montagnard Christians, religious freedom and restoration of 
     their confiscated lands. The Government responded by closing 
     off the Central Highlands and sending in military forces, 
     tanks and helicopter gunships. Hundreds of demonstrators were 
     injured. Altogether, more than 200 people, among them 60 
     evangelical priests and tribal chieftains, were arrested. 
     Some regions of the Central Highlands remain closed to 
     journalists and foreign diplomats.
       (D) Credible reports by refugees who have escaped to 
     Cambodia indicate that the Government has executed some 
     participants in the demonstrations and has subjected others 
     to imprisonment, torture, and other forms of physical abuse.
       (E) The Government of Viet Nam has also taken steps to 
     prevent further Montagnards from escaping, and there are 
     credible reports that Vietnamese security forces in Cambodia 
     are offering bounties for the surrender of Montagnard asylum 
     seekers.
       (F) According to Human Rights Watch, in December 2002 
     ``[The Government] arrested or detained dozens of highlanders 
     and banned Christmas church services in order to prevent 
     minority Christians from gathering. Six highlanders were 
     detained during the third week in December in Krong Ana and 
     Cu Jut districts, Dak Lak, during Christmas prayer services, 
     while another eight were taken into custody as they were 
     attempting to cross the border to Cambodia. Villagers 
     throughout the Central Highlands were warned they would face 
     fines and even imprisonment if they organized Christmas 
     services. In many areas authorities banned gatherings of four 
     or more people''.
       (7) The Government of Viet Nam has also persecuted members 
     of other ethnic minority groups, including the Khmer Kron 
     from the Mekong Delta, many of whom fought alongside United 
     States military personnel during the Viet Nam war and whose 
     Hinayana Buddhist religion is not among those recognized by 
     the Government.
       (8) The Government of Viet Nam also engages in or condones 
     serious violations of the rights of workers. In August 1997, 
     the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) reported that 
     child labor exploitation is on the rise in Viet Nam with tens 
     of thousands of children under 15 years of age being subject 
     to such exploitation. The government's official labor export 
     program also has subject workers, many of whom are women, to 
     involuntary servitude, debt bondage, and other forms of 
     abuse, and the reaction of government officials to worker 
     complaints of such abuse has been to threaten the workers 
     with punishment if they do not desist in their complaints. 
     The government of Viet Nam has made some minor efforts to 
     improve this situation, but enforcement of child labor laws 
     remains weak, and the child exploitation still persists.
       (9)(A) United States refugee resettlement programs for 
     Vietnamese nationals, including the Orderly Departure Program 
     (ODR), the Resettlement Opportunities for Returning 
     Vietnamese (ROVR) program, and resettlement of boat people 
     from refugee camps throughout Southeast Asia, were authorized 
     by law in order to rescue Vietnamese nationals who have 
     suffered persecution on account of their wartime associations 
     with the United States, as well as those who currently have a 
     well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, 
     religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a 
     particular social group.
       (B) In general, these programs have served their purposes 
     well. However, many refugees who were eligible for these 
     programs were unfairly denied or excluded, in some cases by 
     vindictive or corrupt Communist officials who controlled 
     access to the programs, and in others by United States 
     personnel who imposed unduly restrictive interpretations of 
     program criteria. These unfairly excluded refugees include 
     some of those with the most compelling cases, including many 
     Montagnard combat veterans and their families.
       (C) The Department of State has agreed to extend the 
     September 30, 1994, registration deadline for former United 
     States employees, ``re-reduction'', survivors, and surviving 
     spouses spouses of those who did not survive ``re-education'' 
     camps to sign for United States refugee programs.
       (D) The Department of State has agreed to resume the 
     Vietnamese In-Country Priority One Program in Viet Nam to 
     provide protection to victims of persecution on account of 
     race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership 
     in a particular social group who otherwise have no access to 
     the Orderly Departure Program.
       (E) The Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Service in 
     the Department of Homeland Security has agreed to resume the 
     processing of former United States employees under the U11 
     program, which had been unilaterally suspended by the United 
     States Government.
       (F) The Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Service has 
     agreed to review the applications of Americans, children of 
     American servicemen left behind in Viet Nam after the war 
     ended in April 1975, for resettlement to the United States 
     under the Amerasian Homecoming Act of 1988.
       (10) The Government of Viet Nam systematically jams 
     broadcasts by Radio Free Asia, an independent broadcast 
     service funded by the United States in order to provide news 
     and entertainment to the people of countries in Asia whose 
     government deny the right to freedom of expression and of the 
     press.
       (11) In 1995 the Governments of the United States and Viet 
     Nam announced the ``normalization'' of diplomatic relations. 
     In 1998 then-President Clinton waived the application of 
     section 402 of the Trade Act of 1974 (commonly) known as the 
     ``Jackson-Vanik Amendments'', which restircts economic 
     assistance to countries with non-market economies whose 
     government also restrict freedom of emigration. In 1999 the 
     Governments of the United States and Viet Nam announced ``an 
     agreement in principle,'' on a bilateral trade agreement. 
     This agreement was signed in 2000 and came into effect on 
     December 10, 2001.
       (12) The Congress and the American People are united in 
     their determination that the extension or expansion of trade 
     relations with a country whose Government engaged in serious 
     and systematic violations of fundamental human rights must be 
     considered as a statement of approval or complacency about 
     such practices. The promotion of freedom and democracy around 
     the world--and particularly for people who have suffered in 
     large part because of their past association with the United 
     States and because they share our values--is and must 
     continue to be a central objective of United States foreign 
     policy.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Hunter 
amendment. This amendment is critically important in both its timing 
and substance. The beaches of San Diego County are suffering from a 
massive pollution problem that has crippled the tourism industry and 
disrupted the lives of thousands of beach enthusiasts. For the past few 
years, pollution has forced San Diego County beaches to close for as 
many as 200 days of the year. This problem originates from an estimated 
60 million gallons of raw sewage that is pumped into the Tijuana River 
in Mexico on a daily basis. The problem has grown from a minor 
annoyance to a major health crisis.
  I find it frustrating that this problem was to have been addressed by 
the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) in 2000, yet 
little has been done since then. On September 12, 2000, the House 
passed the Tijuana River Valley Estuary and Beach Sewage Cleanup Act, 
which required the IBWC to negotiate a resolution to this problem with 
the government of Mexico. So what has been happening these past three 
years? A review of the progress on this project is a frustrating lesson 
in the damage that an ineffective and slow-moving bureaucracy can do to 
a good idea.
  The IBWC opposed the idea of building a wastewater treatment plant in 
Mexico because they insisted on maintaining total control over the 
project. They demanded the authority and the extra money they felt they 
needed to build it on the U.S. side of the border. In their effort to 
develop this plant, the IBWC completely lost financial control of the 
project, forcing Congress to cap it at $239 million--over $100 million 
more than had been authorized for the project. Despite the massive cost 
overrun, the plant still did not meet U.S. Clean Water Act standards 
and may soon be forced to close as a result of numerous Clean Water Act 
violations.
  In an attempt to find an innovative solution to this problem, the 
House authorized a public-private partnership that will keep the cost 
for a new plant low, while meeting the need to provide water treatment 
for the City of Tijuana. Furthermore, an estimated 56 percent of 
Tijuana's water needs will be met by reclaimed water from this proposed 
plant. More importantly, this project will be built in Mexico, at the 
source of the problem and it will be built quicker and cheaper than any 
public-only alternative.
  This amendment requires the IBWC to make this project a priority and 
finally, after 70

[[Page 18139]]

years of misery for San Diego beach communities, end the pollution 
problem that has damaged our coastline. This project is critical for 
the future of San Diego County, and it is critical for California. I 
urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I am grateful to the Rules Committee for 
making this amendment in order that I might take this opportunity to 
lend the support of Congress to the Office of Children's Issues who 
will now act as the central authority on the Hague Convention on 
intercountry adoption. This office will act in the best interest of the 
child and the families by facilitating the placement of children in 
permanent homes while making certain that the strictest protection 
guidelines are in place throughout the process.
  There are too many children in this country and abroad who are 
growing up without a family. Tonight, around the world, no one knows 
how many children will go to bed in orphanages. There is no United 
States agency or international organization that counts the number of 
children who are warehoused in institutions. The U.S. has proven that 
it has an interest in and the ability to adopt children that would 
otherwise grow up without a family in their own country. This year the 
State Department expects that 21-25 thousand children will be brought 
to this country and placed in permanent, loving homes. That number 
speaks of a huge victory in the fight for abandoned children throughout 
the world. The numbers prove that the office of Children's Issues could 
be a powerful ally in the fight against the harmful 
institutionalization of children worldwide. Unfortunately, some 
powerful international organizations believe that, with respect to the 
child, even institutionalization is better than adoption outside a 
child's home country. While everyone would hope that a child could find 
a loving, permanent family within their home country, we recognize that 
intercountry adoption may offer the advantage of a permanent family to 
a child for whom a suitable family cannot be found in his or her 
country of origin.
  The office of Children's Issues will soon assume their new 
responsibility as the central authority for the Hague Convention. In 
this capacity, they will act to assist in the placement of children 
into families of this country while working to protect those children 
who are at risk for exploitation in vulnerable regions of the world. 
This office will also increase our nation's ability to protect children 
by establishing a system by which agencies may be accredited to ensure 
a transparent placement process. As such, understanding that it must 
take measures to ensure that intercountry adoptions are made in the 
best interest of the child, the office will not only work to ensure 
that all of these adoptions are conducted with respect to the 
fundamental rights of the child, they will also work to prevent the 
abduction of, sale of, or trafficking in children.
  In this new role, the office will find their duties greatly expanded 
and we hope that this amendment will express the support of Congress 
not only to the efforts of the State Department on behalf of 
intercountry adoption, but also to the Commerce, Justice, and State 
Appropriations Committee whose job it will be to ensure that the Office 
of Children's Issues has sufficient resources to continue their work on 
behalf of the millions of children in orphanages throughout the world.
  I am thankful to the Chairman for his support of the amendment and 
would urge Members who wish to support the State Department's role in 
intercountry adoptions to also support the amendment.
  Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, Imperial Beach, the city 
which is the brilliant cornerstone on the Southwestern point of our 
country, has a beautiful beach as well as a unique location. However, 
for too many days of the year, this natural resource cannot be enjoyed 
by its children, families, and visitors.
  Unfortunately, the burgeoning city of Tijuana located just across the 
border and the source of the Tijuana River lacks adequate sewage 
treatment. As a result, particularly when rain falls on the mesas and 
canyons along this border, raw sewage and other pollutants are washed 
into the Tijuana River, flow across the Tijuana Estuary on the Imperial 
Beach side of the border, and empty into the Pacific Ocean just next to 
the beautiful sand of Imperial Beach.
  Congress enacted Public Law 106-457 in 2000 to authorize the 
International Boundary and Water Commission, composed of 
representatives of both the United States and Mexico, to complete a new 
Treaty Minute for creation of a public-private partnership to construct 
and operate a wastewater treatment facility in Mexico. However, this 
has not occurred.
  As members of Congress, our San Diego delegation has sought to 
resolve this issue through repeated questions of members of the IBWC. 
However, they have not been forthcoming. Therefore, this amendment is 
needed to make completion of this agreement not only obligatory but 
also to require monthly reports from that Commission on its progress to 
the appropriate congressional committees.
  The community of Imperial Beach has been prevented from fully using 
its natural resource for too many years. It is time to require action.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is intended to highlight a 
troubling situation in Indonesia.
  On August 31, 2002, the staff of the International School in West 
Papua, Indonesia decided to take a picnic. The teachers lived and 
worked in Tembagapura, a company town located high in the mountains 
near the Grasberg gold and copper mines. The group of eleven people, 
including a six-year old child, drove in two vehicles to a picnic site 
about ten miles away on the road to Timika. Because it began to rain, 
they decided to return to town for lunch.
  The road they were traveling on is not an ordinary road. The road is 
surrounded by the gold and copper mine, and is heavily guarded by the 
Indonesian military. At both ends of this mountain road are military 
check points, which seal the road and control access to Tembagapura.
  As they returned home, the group was brutally attacked by a band of 
terrorists. Two Americans, Ted Burgon (from Oregon) and Rick Spier 
(from Colorado), and an Indonesian man were killed in the ambush. The 
attack, which occurred less than a half-mile away from an Indonesian 
military check point, went on for approximately 45 minutes. Hundreds of 
rounds were fired at the teachers and their vehicles. Most of the 
survivors, including the six-year old child, were shot. Several of the 
teachers were shot multiple times and suffered horrible injuries.
  Ted Burgon of Sunriver, Oregon was killed and his wife Nancy suffered 
facial cuts and abrasions. Rick Spier of Littleton, Colorado was 
killed, and his wife Patsy was shot in the back and foot. Francine 
Goodfriend of Rockford, Illinois was shot and has a spinal cord injury. 
Steven Emma of Broward County, Florida was shot in the legs, buttocks, 
and suffered injuries to his back. Lynn Poston of Olga, Washington was 
shot in the shoulder and legs. Suandra Hopkins of Sunriver, Oregon was 
shot in the side, legs, and pellets around the eye and his wife Taia 
was shot in the buttocks.
  Following the attack, the Indonesian Police promptly began in 
investigation. They collected evidence, interviewed witnesses and 
reconstructed the ambush. The Indonesian Police issued a report (that I 
ask for unanimous consent to submit for the record) concluding, ``there 
is a strong possibility that the Tembagapura case was perpetrated by 
members of the Indonesian National Army Force, however, it still needs 
to be investigated further.''
  In early November 2002, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that 
``United States intelligence agencies have intercepted messages between 
Indonesian army commanders indicating that they were involved in 
staging an ambush at the remote mine in which three school teachers, 
two of them Americans, were killed. . . .'' The Washington Post has 
reported these same intelligence intercepts.
  Despite this intelligence, the investigation of the attack has 
faltered. The Indonesian Police have been effectively removed from the 
case due to their report that implicated the military. The two senior 
Indonesian police officers who uncovered evidence of the army's 
involvement have been transferred to new posts, and the investigation 
has now been handed over to a joint military police team. Not 
surprisingly, the Indonesian military has exonerated itself. American 
investigative teams, including the FBI, have not been able to complete 
their investigations due mainly to the Indonesian military's refusal to 
cooperate and its tampering of evidence.
  The evasions and obstructions of the Indonesian military are wholly 
unacceptable, and it is incumbent upon this Congress to see that a 
thorough investigation is conducted. The victims of this brutal attack 
deserve no less. My amendment is, therefore, intended to ensure that 
the perpetrators of this heinous crime against Americans are brought to 
justice. To the extent that the Indonesian military was involved, the 
United States should insist on criminal prosecution of all involved 
parties.
  My amendment would limit Indonesia from receiving International 
Military Education and Training (IMET) funds until the President 
certifies to Congress that the Government of Indonesia and the 
Indonesian Armed Forces are taking effective measures, including 
cooperating with the Director of the FBI, in conducting a full 
investigation of the attack and to criminally prosecute the individuals 
responsible for the attack.

[[Page 18140]]

  My amendment will not prohibit the United States from continuing to 
conduct programs or training with the Indonesian Armed Forces, 
including counter-terrorism training, officer visits, port visits, or 
educational exchanges that are being conducted on the date of enactment 
it would prevent future exchanges.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is important. It gives voice to our 
commitment that the United States will hold accountable the 
perpetrators and protectors of terrorism. We will exhaust every means 
to protect our citizens. We will pursue terrorists wherever they may be 
and hold to account. We will demand justice for attacks against our 
citizens and withhold aid from those countries that do not cooperate in 
bringing terrorists to justice. As President Bush has stated, ``if you 
are not with us you are against us.'' It is time for Indonesia to 
choose who it will align itself with, the terrorists or the coalition 
of nations that bring them to justice.
  Make no mistake, a vote against this amendment is a vote against 
holding nations accountable for terrorist attacks.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question 
is on the amendments en bloc, as modified, offered by the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).
  The amendments en bloc, as modified, were agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 17 printed in House Report 108-206.


               Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Hostettler

  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment made in order 
under the rule.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 17 offered by Mr. Hostettler:
       Page 70, after line 2, insert the following new section 
     (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 231. ISSUANCE OF CONSULAR IDENTIFICATION CARDS BY 
                   FOREIGN MISSIONS.

       (a) Issuance of Consular Identification Cards.--The 
     Congress finds that foreign governments have been issuing 
     consular identification cards to foreign nationals in the 
     United States for purposes other than those intended by the 
     Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (done at Vienna on 24 
     April 1963).
       (b) Issuance of Consular Identification Cards.--The 
     issuance by foreign missions of consular identification cards 
     shall be considered a benefit to a foreign mission under 
     section 203(2) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act 
     of 1956 and shall be regulated by the Secretary in accordance 
     with this section and section 204 of that Act.
       (c) Authority to Issue Regulations.--Not later than 180 
     days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary of State shall issue regulations consistent with 
     this section with respect to the issuance by foreign missions 
     in the United States of consular identification cards to 
     foreign nationals residing in the United States.
       (d) Content of Regulations.--Regulations referred to in 
     subsection (c) shall include the following restrictions and 
     requirements:
       (1) Notification to the united states government.--A 
     foreign mission shall notify the Secretary of State of each 
     consular identification card issued within the United States, 
     including the name and current address within the United 
     States of the recipient of a card.
       (2) Issuance to bona fide citizens of the country of 
     origin.--A foreign mission may issue a consular 
     identification card only to a national of the country 
     represented by the foreign mission. Foreign missions shall 
     establish procedures to verify the nationality of card 
     recipients through either national birth registry systems or 
     voter registration identification systems, and bona fide 
     documents such as a passport issued by the country of origin.
       (3) Maintenance of accurate and complete records.--A 
     foreign mission shall maintain at the mission complete and 
     accurate records of all consular identification cards issued 
     and shall maintain an automated record system that contains 
     such records in a manner that can be rapidly accessed to 
     prevent duplicate or fraudulent issuance of such cards.
       (4) Address change notification requirement.--A foreign 
     mission shall require card recipients to notify the foreign 
     mission of any change of address within 30 days after such 
     address change.
       (5) Access to audit records.--At the request of the 
     Secretary of State, a foreign mission shall make available 
     for audit and review, by the Secretary or the Inspector 
     General of the Department of State, the records of all 
     consular identification cards issued.
       (e) Failure to Adhere to Regulations.--
       (1) If the Secretary of State determines that a foreign 
     mission has issued consular identification cards in violation 
     of the requirements of regulations related to the issuance of 
     such cards by foreign missions and such violation potentially 
     threatens the security of the United States or facilitates 
     fraudulent or criminal acts, the Secretary of State shall 
     notify the government of the country represented by the 
     foreign mission that the foreign mission must suspend the 
     issuance of consular identification cards until compliance 
     with applicable regulations is established.
       (2) If the foreign mission of a country fails to suspend 
     issuance of consular identification cards in accordance with 
     a notification under paragraph (1), the Secretary of State 
     shall direct consular officials in that country to cease the 
     issuance of immigrant or nonimmigrant visas, or both, to 
     nationals of that country until such time as the Secretary of 
     State determines that the foreign mission of that country is 
     in compliance with the requirements of regulations related to 
     the issuance of such cards by foreign missions.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler) and the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Menendez) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  This amendment establishes, Mr. Chairman, requirements that must be 
met by foreign governments in issuing consular identification cards in 
the United States and authorizes the Secretary of State to regulate the 
issuance of those documents.
  In the last 2 years, foreign governments have issued more than 1.5 
million consular cards in the United States. Recent testimony by the 
FBI before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and 
Claims, which I chair, highlights the need for such requirements. The 
FBI explained that the most commonly issued of these cards are 
vulnerable to fraud and forgery, posing both criminal threats and a 
potential terrorist threat. The requirements set forth in the amendment 
will address these flaws.
  It is important to note that this amendment does not address the 
acceptance of these documents in the United States, nor does it 
prohibit their issuance so long as the foreign mission complies with 
the requirements of the amendment. Rather, it simply extends the 
Secretary of State's authority under the Foreign Missions Act to 
regulate consulates to include their issuance of consular ID cards.
  Further, this amendment does not violate our responsibilities under 
the Vienna Convention. In light of these facts, I urge passage of the 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment may seem by the way it was just 
described rather innocuous, but it is rather outrageous. It is a thinly 
veiled attempt to end something called the matricula consular.
  To start with, this amendment could create a negative boomerang 
effect on the United States. The amendment tells other countries' 
consulates what they can and cannot do above and beyond existing law. 
Do we want other countries to do the same to us? Do we want other 
countries to tell our consulates how we can relate to our own citizens 
abroad? This is an unprecedented attempt to change how a country can 
relate to its own nationals in a host country. I think it is a patently 
improper interpretation of the Foreign Missions Act and the Vienna 
Convention on Consular Affairs. The amendment would set a dangerous 
precedent for our embassies abroad.
  But let me get to the core issue. This amendment is another anti-
immigration tactic designed to get rid of the matricula consular. 
Basically, they have loaded this amendment with requirements that are 
unreasonable for workers in this country to be able to achieve. How can 
migrant workers be expected to notify their own mission within 30 days 
every time they move? And we expect poor people from rural areas to 
produce all of the records that they suggest. This makes no sense. And

[[Page 18141]]

then in a final attempt to completely get rid of the matricula 
consular, they included a punishment so strong that many countries 
might simply stop using it. If a country fails to comply with these 
onerous provisions, the United States would stop issuing immigrant and 
nonimmigrant visas. What country could take that risk?
  I do not quite understand it. I thought we had a victory collectively 
in moving into the right way in our bilateral relations with Mexico. 
This amendment takes us another step back. Over and over again, Members 
on the other side of the aisle have shown their true feelings about 
some of the issues on the Hispanic community, the immigrant 
communities; and this amendment is no exception.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this outrageous and 
dangerous amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), chairman of the Committee on 
International Relations.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, increasingly, foreign governments have been 
lobbying localities in the United States to accept their consular cards 
as valid identification. At least two countries now issue consular 
cards in the U.S. for these purposes and many others are planning to do 
so. No standards govern those cards, and there is little information on 
which localities can rely in deciding whether to accept a country's 
consular card. All this amendment does is clarify the Secretary of 
State's power to ensure that issuance of these cards is rational and 
safe.
  By authorizing the Secretary of State to regulate these cards and 
setting requirements that countries must meet in issuing the cards, 
this amendment will allow localities to make informed decisions on 
whether to accept such documents. Regulation of the cards will also 
protect the American people from the risks that unregulated and 
unreliable documents pose. Those risks were underscored recently by the 
FBI, which determined that because of their vulnerability to fraud and 
forgery, these cards pose criminal threats as well as a potential 
terrorist threat. The requirements in this amendment will address those 
threats by deterring fraud and improving the reliability of consular 
identification cards.
  The amendment also provides an enforcement mechanism that empowers 
the Secretary of State to regulate consulates' compliance with these 
requirements. It is appropriate to vest this responsibility in the 
State Department. Not only does its Office of Foreign Missions 
currently regulate the activities of foreign consulates in the U.S. but 
the Department will also bring to this role its expertise in evaluating 
foreign documents. This amendment is needed to allow the State 
Department necessary authority to regulate foreign consulates in a 
changing environment. For this reason, I urge passage of this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I just would like to respond to my friend from New 
Jersey who every time someone offers an amendment or a bill trying to 
get a handle on illegal immigration, known as undocumented, where we 
have God knows how many people in this country living in substandard 
style because of the illegality of their presence, and it could be in 
the millions, it does not mean there is some antipathy toward a racial 
group or an ethnic group at all. It is just a feeble attempt to get a 
handle on the borders of our country and who is here and who is not.

                              {time}  1700

  The problem is not getting better. It is getting worse. But trying to 
do something about it in good faith does not manifest the hostility at 
all. We are all immigrants sooner or later or back far enough, but I 
really resent the conclusion the gentleman draws that all Republicans 
do not like people of different ethnicity. I would say just the 
opposite.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I appreciate the chairman's concern. I resent the constant surge of 
amendments that confront particularly a single community.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman 
from California (Mr. Berman), senior member of the Committee on 
International Relations who has worked on these issues.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I rise in very strong opposition to the amendment. I have to say to 
the chairman of the committee, if this amendment were to pass, there 
will be no such card and the issue of finding out where the 
undocumented people are and who they are will not be enhanced one bit 
because no one who is here in undocumented status will give their 
accurate address if they know it is going to be turned over to the 
administration for enforcement. So the amendment totally undermines the 
goal of the chairman of the committee in his comments.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BERMAN. I have 20 seconds. Can I take it on the gentleman's time?
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say no card is better than a 
misleading card.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, that is where I believe where a card which 
truly reflects the identity of the person who is getting it, which this 
card does, helps the police. It helps banks know to open checking 
accounts, to stop loan sharks who are trying to put incredible 
surcharges on remittances.
  Most of all, it is the sanction of this amendment where they have the 
gall to say that if the Mexican or any other government refuses to 
comply with the State Department's guidelines, we will penalize any 
employer in the United States who wanted to get specialized H-1B visa 
for a Mexican national, anyone who has stayed in Mexico and waited in 
line for 8 years, no nonimmigrant visas, no immigrant visas. What an 
outrageous sanction for people who are abiding by the law, for American 
employers and American families who are trying to reunite. The sanction 
has no relationship whatsoever to the conduct the author of the 
amendment is seeking to address.
  I strongly urge the body to vote no.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.
  In recent weeks we have held a number of hearings on the issue of 
identity cards issued by foreign states to their nationals in the 
United States. In these hearings, representatives of the Departments of 
Justice, Homeland Security, and State have testified that they are 
participating in an interagency working group that is studying the 
issuance of these cards and developing a policy on their use. I look 
forward to seeing the result of their work.
  In the meantime, we have been presented with this very troublesome 
amendment.
  There are three very important reasons to oppose this amendment:
  It will encourage fraud. This amendment lays out a policy for the 
State Department to implement and part of that policy would be require 
foreign states issuing these identity cards to provide the name and 
address of every cardholder to the State Department. Knowing as we do 
that many of these cards are held by undocumented aliens in the United 
States, we can be sure that if the cardholders know that their address 
is being sent to the United States government they will be less likely 
to provide an accurate address.
  This would totally undermine the benefits of these cards to state and 
local law enforcement. We have to solve the problem of undocumented 
aliens in this country, but in the meantime, undocumented aliens are 
living in our states and cities.
  Police Departments across the country have decided to accept this 
card when other identification is not available. Having some form of ID 
is better than having none.
  This amendment tells the State Department to implement a policy on 
these cards and then requires State to order another sovereign nation 
to stop issuing cards to its own nationals if that foreign government 
does not comply with the policy. While it is certainly our business to 
decide what forms of identification we accept from foreign nationals, 
it is not the business of our government to order another government to 
stop issuing identification to its citizens.
  Finally, under the Hostettler amendment, a foreign state's refusal to 
comply with a State Department order to stop issuing identification to 
its citizens would result in the State Department instituting a ban on 
visas for the offending country. This makes absolutely no sense.

[[Page 18142]]

Under this logic, we would punish nationals of a country, refuse them 
visas for which they qualify--for family reunification or to accept a 
job. We would punish these lawful immigrants, their families, and U.S. 
employers because some nationals of their country might have a 
meaningless ID. This punishes those who follow the rule because there 
are some who might not.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. 
It is bad for foreign policy; it is bad for domestic policy; and we 
should reject it.
  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly).
  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. Chairman, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security have 
serious national security concerns regarding the issuance of consular 
cards. The FBI concluded the matricula consular is not a reliable form 
of identification due to the nonexistence of any means to verify the 
true identity of the card holder. The FBI also testified that, although 
there are many generations of the Mexican consular card, 90 percent of 
those in circulation are the older generation, which are very 
vulnerable to counterfeit and forgery.
  The truth is that Poland, Mexico, Nicaragua, and other countries that 
are trying to expand their consular ID programs in the United States 
are doing so in an effort to allow illegal immigrants to receive 
services to which they are not entitled. One service is the ability to 
use such cards to board commercial airplanes. Mr. Chairman, this is a 
dramatic step backwards toward the type of security we had before 9/11.
  In addition, the six countries currently expanding the consular card 
programs could easily be 60 in the next few years.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to advocate that the United States 
Federal Government, through the Department of State, regulate the 
issuance of those cards.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) who resides and deals 
with the border all the time.
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the 
Hostettler-Gallegly amendment. It is a thinly veiled attack on the 
consular ID card that has been used by the Embassy of Mexico for over 
130 years, sometimes referred to as the Matricula Consular card.
  Contrary to what the Hostettler-Gallegly amendment contends, Mexico 
and other foreign governments have been issuing consular identification 
cards to foreign nationals in the United States following precisely the 
guidelines established by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. 
This amendment would constitute a violation of that convention.
  Under that convention, consular function is established as 
``performing any other functions entrusted to a consular post which are 
not prohibited by the laws and regulations of the receiving state.'' 
There is no U.S. Federal law which forbids the issuance of consular ID 
cards. In fact, the Treasury Department has issued regulations under 
section 326 of the PATRIOT Act that would allow the financial 
institutions to accept consular ID cards as valid forms of ID for the 
purpose of opening accounts.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Hostettler/Gallegly 
amendment. It is a thinly veiled attack on the Consular ID Card that 
has been issued by the Embassy of Mexico for over 131 years, sometimes 
referred to as the Matricula Consular card.
  Contrary to what the Hostettler-Gallegly amendment contends, Mexico 
and other foreign governments have been issuing consular identification 
cards to foreign nationals in the United States following precisely the 
guidelines established by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. 
This amendment would constitute a violation of that convention.
  Under that convention, consular function is established as 
``performing any other functions entrusted to a consular post which are 
not prohibited by the laws and regulations of the receiving State.'' 
There is no U.S. Federal law which forbids the issuance of Consular ID 
cards.
  In fact, the Treasury Department has issued regulations under Section 
326 of the PATRIOT Act that would allow financial institutions to 
accept Consular ID cards as valid forms of ID for the purpose of 
opening accounts. More than 100 financial institutions accept these 
cards as valid forms of ID. Police Departments across the United States 
praise the use of these cards, because they enable them to identify 
foreign nationals.
  The State Department adamantly opposes this amendment because an 
Interagency Working Group is already working to address the issue of 
Consular ID cards. Consequently, this amendment prejudges the outcome 
of the Interagency Working Group's efforts.
  The State Department also has reciprocity concerns. The U.S. does, in 
certain instances, issue Consular ID cards to American nationals 
overseas.
  The State Department fears reciprocal retaliation from overseas if 
the amendment were to pass.
  These Consular ID cards are simply identification cards. They do not 
legalize the status of any immigrant.
  They cannot be used to obtain any immigration or citizenship benefits 
such as work authorization or to obtain public benefits.
  Their continued use, with consultations between the U.S. and Mexican 
governments, will foster greater transparency and increase security in 
the United States.
  For these reasons and many others, I strongly urge my colleagues to 
oppose this amendment.
  Mr. BACA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Tancredo 
Amendment.
  I have always been a strong advocate of efforts that give Hispanics 
and other minorities greater access to our financial services system.
  Whether that means providing more financial literacy programs or 
approving the use of the matricula consular card, we must do what it 
takes to make sure that every person in this country can live the 
American dream.
  That is why I am here today.
  When we look to the future, we have to make sure that it includes 
people of all races and all colors. We must give all members of our 
society the tools they need to fully participate and benefit from our 
great democracy.
  Unfortunately, there are those in this body who are trying to shut 
the doors on our immigrant community.
  They do not care that there are as many as 10 million American 
households that do not have bank accounts. That is not acceptable.
  Hispanics deserve the same opportunity others have to buy a home, 
invest in a business, pay for a college education, and improve the 
financial security of their families.
  How do we do this? We do this by giving everyone the keys that open 
the doors to our financial system.
  Everyone deserves the opportunity to open a bank account or get a 
credit card. We cannot have a society of ``haves'' and ``have-nots.''
  That is why Arrowhead Credit Union in my district, Wells Fargo, Bank 
of America, and credit unions and banks across the country support the 
use of the matricula consular.
  They understand that when you hurt our most vulnerable members of our 
society, we all lose.
  The support that financial institutions have given to these cards is 
matched by the support we have received from local law enforcement 
organizations.
  In my district, the Rialto police department recently decided to 
accept matricula consular cards, joining the police departments in 
Chino, Colton, Fontana, Indio, Redlands, San Bernardino, and Upland.
  There are now more than 100 law enforcement agencies in California 
that accept the matricula card.
  I trust our local law enforcement officers, our first responders, to 
protect our communities. I urge you to do the same.
  I urge all my colleagues to vote NO on the Hostettler/Gallegly/
Tancredo amendment.
  Mr. SOLIS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this 
amendment.
  If passed, it would require the State Department to heavily regulate 
foreign government's issuance of identification documents.
  If the State Department determines that a foreign government is not 
in compliance with the issued regulations, a foreign government could 
have to suspend issuance of the identification documents and stop 
issuing visas to individuals from that country altogether.
  The amendment would violate the Vienna Convention on Consular 
Relations and U.S. citizens living abroad.
  If the U.S. does not acknowledge valid foreign IDs, others have no 
obligation to recognize U.S. IDs.

[[Page 18143]]

  It's clear to me that this amendment is an attack on the Mexican 
consular ID and the millions of Mexicans living in the U.S. and 
elsewhere who use it daily as a form of identification.
  The matricula plays a vital role in our homeland security efforts by 
enabling the reliable identification of millions of Mexicans living and 
working in the United States.
  800 police departments, various local governments, and at least 80 
banks have accepted the matricula because it increases public safety, 
national security, and our economic competitiveness.
  Law enforcement understands that the matricula helps identify people, 
including suspects, witnesses, and those who come forward to report 
crimes and suspicious activities.
  The matricula is a safe, secure form of identification.
  It has a number of extremely sophisticated security features, 
including a digitized photo, in-person consular interviews and review 
of supporting documentation, as well as standards for supporting 
documentation that are more demanding than those used for U.S.-
government issued IDs.
  Acceptance of the Mexican consular ID has a proven track record of 
increasing public safety.
  Failure to recognize it would preclude millions of Mexicans living 
and working in the U.S. to identify themselves and assist in our 
homeland security efforts.
  I urge my colleagues to vote against the Hostettler-Gallegly 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Hostettler) will be postponed.


          Sequential Votes Postponed In Committee Of The Whole

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, 
proceedings will now resume on those amendments on which further 
proceedings were postponed, in the following order: Amendment No. 6 
offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), amendment No. 7 offered 
by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), amendment No. 8 offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher), and amendment No. 17 
offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
  The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. 
Remaining votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes.


                  Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Paul

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Paul) 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 pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 74, 
noes 350, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 364]

                                AYES--74

     Barrett (SC)
     Barton (TX)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Boozman
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Coble
     Collins
     Crane
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Deal (GA)
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Duncan
     Everett
     Feeney
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gibbons
     Goode
     Hayes
     Hostettler
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kingston
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     Miller (FL)
     Moran (KS)
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Norwood
     Obey
     Otter
     Paul
     Pence
     Platts
     Pombo
     Putnam
     Renzi
     Rogers (AL)
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryun (KS)
     Schrock
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shuster
     Smith (MI)
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Weldon (FL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Young (AK)

                               NOES--350

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Ballenger
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Bell
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burns
     Burr
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Case
     Castle
     Chocola
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Cole
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harman
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nethercutt
     Northup
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sweeney
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner (OH)
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Bartlett (MD)
     Berkley
     Chabot
     Ferguson
     Gephardt
     Hayworth
     Janklow
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Millender-
       McDonald


                Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

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

                              {time}  1729

  Messrs. McDERMOTT, LINDER, MATHESON, CASTLE, MEEKS of New York, 
ABERCROMBIE, HOLT, and

[[Page 18144]]

GRAVES changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. NEY, KINGSTON, SMITH of Michigan, YOUNG of Alaska, SCHROCK, 
PUTNAM, and CRANE changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                              {time}  1730


              Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The pending business is the 
demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 7 offered by the gentleman 
from Iowa (Mr. King) 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 pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, the 
remainder of this series will be conducted as 5-minute votes.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 187, 
noes 237, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 365]

                               AYES--187

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Boozman
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Collins
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Everett
     Feeney
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gibbons
     Gingrey
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harris
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline
     LaHood
     Latham
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     Manzullo
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Otter
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner (OH)
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (SC)
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--237

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Becerra
     Bell
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bono
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Case
     Castle
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Cole
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Tom
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Goss
     Greenwood
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     John
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Majette
     Maloney
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Simmons
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Wilson (NM)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Berkley
     Emerson
     Ferguson
     Gephardt
     Hayworth
     Janklow
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Millender-McDonald
     Spratt

                              {time}  1738

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


                Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mrs. Tauscher

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on amendment No. 8 offered by the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Tauscher) 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 pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 207, 
noes 219, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 366]

                               AYES--207

     Abercrombie
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Becerra
     Bell
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Cannon
     Capps
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Case
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Flake
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gilchrest
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     John
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Kleczka
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Majette
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Osborne
     Owens

[[Page 18145]]


     Pallone
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Petri
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Rodriguez
     Rohrabacher
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sweeney
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Towns
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weller
     Wexler
     Wilson (SC)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--219

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capuano
     Carson (OK)
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Cox
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Deal (GA)
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dingell
     Doolittle
     Duncan
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Feeney
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Goode
     Goss
     Granger
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harris
     Hart
     Hayes
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hostettler
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kildee
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Lampson
     Lantos
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Pascrell
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schrock
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Turner (OH)
     Velazquez
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Berkley
     Ferguson
     Gephardt
     Hayworth
     Janklow
     Jefferson
     Millender-McDonald
     Spratt


                Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised that 
there are two minutes remaining in the vote.

                              {time}  1751

  Messrs. CARTER, SIMPSON, TANCREDO, OTTER, NEUGEBAUER, TERRY, 
WHITFIELD, BURTON of Indiana, BROWN of South Carolina, Mrs. CUBIN, 
Messrs. SHIMKUS, FEENEY, BRADY of Texas, NETHERCUTT, KIRK, Mrs. JOHNSON 
of Connecticut and Mrs. BIGGERT changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''
  Mrs. KELLY, and Messrs. EDWARDS, THOMAS, RAHALL and ABERCROMBIE 
changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


               Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Hostettler

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The pending business is the 
demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler) 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

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 226, 
noes 198, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 367]

                               AYES--226

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Boozman
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carson (OK)
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Doolittle
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Feeney
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gingrey
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (KY)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     Manzullo
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Portman
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ross
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner (OH)
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (PA)
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--198

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Becerra
     Bell
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bono
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Case
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Tom
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Green (TX)
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hensarling
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     John
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Kleczka
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Linder
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Majette
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNulty
     Meehan

[[Page 18146]]


     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tauscher
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weller
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Berkley
     Ferguson
     Gephardt
     Hayworth
     Janklow
     Jefferson
     Millender-McDonald
     Smith (WA)
     Spratt
     Weldon (FL)


                Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

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

                              {time}  1759

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


                          personal explanation

  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman. As you know, I was absent today for 
medical reasons. If I had been in attendance, I would have voted ``no'' 
on rollcall vote No. 364; ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 365; ``no'' on 
rollcall vote No. 366; and ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 367.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 32 printed in House Report 108-206.


                 Amendment No. 32 Offered by Mr. Rangel

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

       Amendment No. 32 offered by Mr. Rangel:
       At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following 
     (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. __. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT HIV/AIDS IN CERTAIN COUNTRIES 
                   OF THE CARIBBEAN REGION.

       Section 1(f)(2)(B)(ii)(VII) of the State Department Basic 
     Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2651a(f)(2)(B)(ii)(VII)) 
     is amended by inserting after ``Zambia,'' the following: 
     ``Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, 
     Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica, Montserrat, Saint Kitts and 
     Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Lucia, 
     Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Dominican Republic,''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and a Member opposed (Mr. 
Bereuter) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) and I have 
brought this amendment to this piece of legislation which would expand 
the coverage of the $15 billion emergency plan for AIDS relief to 
include 14 additional countries in the Caribbean.
  Recently, the President had a very successful trip to Africa where, 
in support of the African Growth and Opportunity Bill, he made it 
abundantly clear that in order to be healthy trading partners with the 
United States of America you had to be healthy, and the $15 billion was 
an attempt to prevent and to provide cure for the ravaging epidemic 
that has swept sub-Saharan Africa.
  In addition to Africa, Haiti and Guyana were named. What we are 
saying is that we have spent a lot of time and effort in trying to 
build a better Caribbean basin initiative program where our friends in 
the Caribbean can share in trade with the United States of America. The 
leaders of the countries in this area believe that in order to get a 
handle on this disease, which is the largest region second only to sub-
Saharan Africa, that you have to go beyond Guyana, you have to go 
beyond Haiti; you have to have a comprehensive approach to this disease 
in education, in prevention and in cure.
  And so it makes a lot of sense, we think, that as we approach this 
serious disease, that we give the leaders, especially the medical 
leaders in this area, an opportunity to put their program to work.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lee), who has spent most of her legislative career 
trying to correct this disease, and I thank her for her effort, and I 
ask unanimous consent that she be entitled to yield to whomever the 
time would allow her to yield to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Isakson). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and 
I want to thank the gentleman from New York for yielding me this time 
and for his leadership and his commitment to addressing the HIV/AIDS 
pandemic globally.
  We passed very recently H.R. 1298, the United States Leadership 
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003, and the 
President signed this into law. This bill would expand the list of 
countries which the HIV/AIDS response coordinator has directed funding 
authority over.
  Now, while USAID administers programs in some of the countries, such 
as Jamaica and the Dominican Republic, the practical effect of this 
amendment would be to highlight the Caribbean as a region that deserves 
our special attention in the fight against the global AIDS pandemic. As 
we look at the Caribbean, we must focus on the fact that the prevalence 
rates are similar to what they were in sub-Saharan Africa before this 
unbelievable explosion.
  Today, over 500,000 people in the Caribbean are estimated to be 
living with HIV and AIDS with prevalence rates in most countries 
ranging from 1 to 3 percent. While it is clear that Africa, as the 
epicenter of the AIDS pandemic, should be the focus of our global AIDS 
initiative, we must be very clear and aware that the Caribbean is 
poised to undergo a dramatic increase in the number of new AIDS cases, 
with estimates of over 1 million people infected by 2010.
  The Caribbean has, as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) 
indicated, the second largest population of persons affected outside of 
sub-Saharan Africa with AIDS. And it is important that while he support 
AIDS prevention and treatment efforts in Haiti and Guyana, two of the 
hardest-hit countries respectively, we must also promote a regional 
response to the epidemic rather than a piecemeal two-country strategy. 
Such a response must also take into consideration the high volume of 
mobility within the Caribbean due to labor force shifts and the tourism 
industry.
  We have a moral obligation to act not only because of the devastation 
that the AIDS pandemic has and will cause, but also because of our 
close connection to the Caribbean region and its people, as there are 
nearly 23 million Caribbean immigrants residing in the United States 
today; and over 10 million people from the United States visit the 
Caribbean annually.
  The Rangel-Lee amendment does not preclude other countries from 
receiving funding, it does not authorize new funding, and will not 
steer an arbitrary level of funding to go to the Caribbean. It merely 
adds CARICOM countries and the Dominican Republic to the list of 
countries the HIV/AIDS response coordinator will oversee so that we can 
better coordinate our response to the pandemic in the Caribbean region.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. LEE. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the Rangel-Lee 
amendment. I think it is a very constructive contribution to our global 
fight against AIDS, and I urge all of our colleagues to do so.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentlewoman's time has expired.

[[Page 18147]]


  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I did claim the time in opposition, although I recognize the efforts 
and interests on the part of the gentleman from New York and the 
gentlewoman from California, and I respect the contribution just made 
by the ranking member of the committee. They want to focus more 
attention on HIV/AIDS in the Caribbean region. That is understandable. 
Actually, the authorizing legislation focuses not just on Africa, not 
sub-Saharan Africa only, but also specifically mentions the Caribbean, 
the only other part of the world mentioned beyond sub-Saharan Africa.
  It is a growing problem in the island nations and the coastal 
countries of the Caribbean, no doubt about it; and this would add 13 
countries to the list of two Caribbean countries already identified by 
the President as focus countries. Under PL 180-25, the United States 
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS Act, it provides the President with the 
authority to add additional countries to the list of countries under 
the purview of the coordinator.
  I would have to say to the gentleman from New York that this does not 
expand the coverage because there are no limits on the number of 
countries that may be assisted; but it does place those countries 
listed, illustrative countries, as being under the purview of the 
coordinator to give special attention. It actually puts more control by 
the White House through the coordinator on any of those that are 
listed. And if the gentleman expands that list, then we run the danger, 
I think, of diluting the focus of the HIV/AIDS. China could just as 
well be listed soon, unfortunately; Southeast Asia, certainly countries 
there.
  I would say, Mr. Chairman, that since we have no adverse and 
negative, or very negative reaction from the White House, and since I 
think it does no damage, although we may well be adding all of the 
countries eventually we are going to work under this kind of theory, I 
would not express opposition to the gentleman and gentlewoman's 
amendment.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BEREUTER. I yield to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to 
me, and I will be brief.
  A little over a month ago, I rose to urge the passage of H.R. 1298 
because of the moral imperative for Congress to act and take an 
affirmative step towards fighting AIDS globally, particularly in Africa 
and the Caribbean. We may not be able to correct all the deficiencies 
we saw in that bill today, but the Lee-Rangel amendment does help in 
one critical area, and that is in expanding the coverage of that $15 
billion emergency plan to an additional 14 countries in the Caribbean. 
As you know, Mr. Chairman, the Caribbean has the second highest rate of 
HIV infection and AIDS in the world, and the economies of those small 
island nations are strained to deal with the impact of it.
  I want to take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Rangel) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for their 
leadership and commitment for the Caribbean and for continuing to press 
for the amendment that is before us now. I urge my colleagues to 
support it.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I urge support of the amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 33 printed in House Report No. 108-206.


                Amendment No. 33 Offered by Mr. Sherman

  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment made in order under 
the rule.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 33 offered by Mr. Sherman:
       At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new 
     section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. __. STATEMENT OF POLICY RELATING TO DEMOCRACY IN IRAN.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) Iran is neither free nor democratic. Men and women are 
     not treated equally in Iran, women are legally deprived of 
     internationally recognized human rights, and religious 
     freedom is not respected under the laws of Iran. Undemocratic 
     institutions, such as the Guardians Council, thwart the 
     decisions of elected leaders.
       (2) The April 2003 report of the Department of State states 
     that Iran remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism 
     in 2002.
       (3) That report also states that Iran continues to provide 
     funding, safe-haven, training and weapons to known terrorist 
     groups, notably Hizballah, HAMAS, the Palestine Islamic 
     Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States that--
       (1) currently, there is not a free and fully democratic 
     government in Iran;
       (2) the United States supports transparent, full democracy 
     in Iran;
       (3) the United States supports the rights of the Iranian 
     people to choose their system of government; and
       (4) the United States condemns the brutal treatment, 
     imprisonment and torture of Iranian civilians expressing 
     political dissent.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, our hearts go out to the people of Iran who are 
fighting valiantly for freedom and democracy. The least we could do in 
this bill is to provide our support and put the United States on record 
in favor of minority rights, women's rights, democracy, and freedom for 
the people of Iran.
  I want to commend Senator Brownback, who authored the very words of 
this amendment and persuaded the Senate to adopt them and add them to 
their version of this bill. I want to commend the Senate for adopting 
these words on a voice vote.
  Let me just summarize the provisions of this amendment. It contains, 
first, findings which state: ``Iran is neither free nor democratic. Men 
and women are not treated equally. Women are deprived of legal and 
internationally recognized rights. Religious freedom is not respected 
under the laws of Iran. And undemocratic institutions, such as the 
Guardians Council, thwart the decisions of elected leaders.''
  It goes on to cite the September 2003 report of the Department of 
State which identified Iran as the most active state sponsor of 
terrorism in the year 2002, and specifically sites the provisions of 
that report which indicate that Iran continues to provide funding and 
safe haven to such terrorist groups as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the 
Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
  The second part of the amendment indicates it is the policy of the 
United States to support transparent, full democracy in Iran; that the 
United States supports the rights of the Iranian people to choose their 
system of government; and the United States condemns the brutal 
treatment and torture of Iranian civilians expressing political 
dissent.
  Mr. Chairman, I would hope that we could adopt this amendment on 
voice vote, just as the Senate did, so as to eliminate a possible 
difference between the bodies as this bill goes to conference.
  I should also point out, Mr. Chairman, that I have a separate bill, 
H.R. 2466, that provides much more substantive support for democracy. 
It is called the Iran Democracy Support Act, and I would hope that on 
some other occasion we would be on this floor debating that bill, and I 
invite my colleagues to cosponsor it.
  But for now let me urge the adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SHERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, we have no objection to the gentleman's 
amendment, and we hope he will take yes for an answer.

[[Page 18148]]


  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SHERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from California.

                              {time}  1815

  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I congratulate the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Sherman) for introducing this important amendment.
  The Iranian people continue to suffer under a theocratic, terror-
supporting dictatorship. Those courageous enough to call for democratic 
change are regularly met by the regimes-supported security forces and 
vigilante groups. Just last month the Iranian government acknowledged 
they arrested some 4,000 peaceful demonstrators. What was their crime? 
They wanted freedom.
  This amendment affirms that the view of this body is that Iranians 
deserve real freedom, that they should not suffer because of their 
religious or political beliefs or because of their gender. The Sherman 
amendment supports Iranians' right to choose their own system of 
government, rather than having to endure the theocracy that has been 
forced upon them.
  Oppression in Iran is a humanitarian issue, but it is not only that. 
The existence of a dictatorial Iranian regime directly affects the 
security of the United States which now faces an enemy with a rigid 
ideology which it backs through an unlimited use of terrorism, and it 
may soon have nuclear weapons.
  Freedom in Iran is a nonpartisan issue. I strongly support this 
amendment and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me 
in voting in favor of it.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I urge support for 
this amendment today. I urge my colleagues to take a look at H.R. 2466, 
the Iran Democracy Support Act, for consideration on another day. I 
thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Isakson). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 37 printed in House Report 108-206.


                 Amendment No. 37 Offered by Mr. McKeon

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

       Amendment No. 37 offered by Mr. McKeon:
       At the end of title VII of the bill, add the following new 
     section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE EXTRADITION OF 
                   VIOLENT CRIMINALS FROM MEXICO TO THE UNITED 
                   STATES.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
       (1) The Mexican Supreme Court ruled in October 2001 that 
     Mexico will not extradite criminals who face life sentences 
     in the United States.
       (2) Due to this ruling, the United States has been unable 
     to prosecute numerous suspects wanted for violent crimes that 
     they committed in the United States if there is a possibility 
     that these criminals will face life imprisonment.
       (3) The person or persons responsible for the April 29, 
     2002, murder of Los Angeles County Sheriff Deputy David March 
     is believed to have fled to Mexico to avoid prosecution for a 
     possible life imprisonment.
       (4) The attorneys general from all 50 States have asked 
     United States Attorney General John Ashcroft and Secretary of 
     State Colin Powell to continue to address this extradition 
     issue with their counterparts in Mexico.
       (5) The Governments of the United States and Mexico have 
     experienced positive cooperation on numerous matters relevant 
     to their bilateral relationship.
       (6) The Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs has been 
     demonstrating to the Mexican Supreme Court the international 
     ramifications of the Court's October 2001 ruling.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the United States Government should encourage the Mexican 
     Government to work closely with the Mexican Supreme Court to 
     persuade the Court to reconsider its October 2001 ruling so 
     that the possibility of life imprisonment will not have an 
     effect on the timely extradition of criminal suspects from 
     Mexico to the United States.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to the Foreign 
Relations Authorization Act to address the issue of extradition, 
specifically as it pertains to Mexico. The seriousness of this issue is 
best described by the following tragic story:
  On April 29, 2002, over a year ago, Deputy David March, a 7-year 
veteran of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, was shot and killed in 
the line of duty. David March was 33 years old, a husband, a father, a 
son, a brother, a neighbor, a stalwart in our community. The suspect 
who took his life was a Mexican national, a convicted felon. He fled to 
Mexico to avoid prosecution.
  Historically, the Mexican government has refused to extradite Mexican 
nationals who commit crimes and flee to Mexico unless there are 
assurances granted by the United States that the death penalty would 
not be sought. Then in October, 2001, the Mexican Supreme Court ruled, 
in addition to the death penalty, they would not extradite criminals 
who also face life imprisonment sentences in the United States. For the 
crime that was committed, one of those penalties would be required. As 
such, Deputy March's killer roams free in Mexico; and the United States 
is unable to threaten a sentence commensurate with this murderer's 
horrific crime.
  It should be noted this is not an isolated case for it is estimated 
that more than 60 suspected killers from Los Angeles County alone are 
in Mexico, along with countless more individuals who are suspected of 
rape, child molestation, attempted murder and other serious, violent 
crimes.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an outrage. We cannot allow the most heinous 
criminals to escape the bar of justice. They must pay the penalties for 
their crimes, and the victims and their families must have reprieve 
through a judicious process.
  Just imagine the turmoil that these families feel. David's younger 
sister went to school with my youngest daughter, good friends growing 
up. It is a great family. Every day they have to get up knowing that 
their son, brother, husband, father, is no longer with them, and the 
person who committed the crime, that took his life, is free. It is just 
not fair.
  As such, my amendment expresses the sense of Congress that the United 
States Government should work closely with and encourage the Mexican 
government to persuade its Supreme Court to reconsider this October, 
2001, ruling so the possibility of life imprisonment will not have an 
effect on the timely extradition of criminal suspects from Mexico to 
the United States.
  It also should be noted that, historically, the United States 
government and the Mexican government have cooperated on many issues of 
mutual concern to our bilateral relationship, including elements of 
extradition as it pertains to drug trafficking. I am confident that, 
with further cooperation between our two governments, we can continue 
in like manner to address all of the points of concern within the issue 
of extradition to the point of complete resolution.
  I thank the chairman for his help in getting this bill to the floor. 
I thank the ranking member. I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Dreier), the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Berman), the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert) 
and other Members who have been supportive in this important effort.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McKEON. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this is an outstanding amendment, and we 
support it, and we are pleased the gentleman has offered it.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page 18149]]

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does any Member rise in opposition to the 
amendment?
  If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McKeon).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 41 printed in House Report 108-206.


                 Amendment No. 41 Offered by Ms. Waters

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

       Amendment No. 41 offered by Ms. Waters:
       At the end of Division B, insert the following:

     SEC. __. REPORT ON PROGRESS MADE IN MODIFYING THE ENHANCED 
                   HIPC INITIATIVE.

       Within 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     and annually thereafter, the Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     submit to the Committees on Financial Services, on 
     Appropriations, and on International Relations of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committees on Foreign Relations 
     and on Appropriations of the Senate a written report that 
     describes the progress made in modifying the Enhanced HIPC 
     Initiative (as defined in section 1625(e)(3) of the 
     International Financial Institutions Act) as called for in 
     section 501 of of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
     AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003.
       Conform the table of contents accordingly.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 316, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, a few years ago, at the end of 20th century, the world 
community came together under the leadership of several of the world's 
most influential churches and created the Jubilee 2000 movement, a 
worldwide movement to cancel the debts of the world's poorest 
countries. The Jubilee 2000 movement included the Catholic Church, the 
Episcopalian Church, the World Council of Churches, Bread for the 
World, many other Christian, Jewish and other faith-based 
organizations. Student groups, HIV/AIDS activists, development 
specialists, business leaders and labor unions also joined this diverse 
movement.
  In 1999, Jubilee 2000 convinced the G-8 group of industrialized 
countries to develop the Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries 
Initiative, known as HIPC, a program to significantly reduce poor 
country's debt. In 2000, Jubilee 2000 convinced the United States 
Government as well as the governments of other G-8 countries to 
authorize this debt relief program and appropriate the funds to carry 
it out.
  Unfortunately, the Enhanced HIPC Initiative has failed to provide a 
lasting solution to poor country debts. At least 18 heavy indebted poor 
countries are still spending more money on debt payments than they are 
on health care.
  The goal of Jubilee 2000 was to completely cancel the debts of the 
world's poorest countries. We must do more to accomplish this goal. We 
must do more to proclaim Jubilee for the poorest of the poor.
  Earlier this year, I introduced H.R. 643, the Debt Cancellation for 
the New Millennium Act. This bill would urge the President to negotiate 
with the IMF and the World Bank to completely cancel 100 percent of the 
debts of the world's most impoverished countries who owe these 
institutions and give these countries a fresh start in the new 
millennium. This bill has 45 cosponsors.
  H.R. 1298, the Global AIDS bill, included a debt relief provision, 
Title V, urging the administration to advocate deeper debt relief 
within the Enhanced HIPC Initiative. Title V states that the Secretary 
of the Treasury should immediately commence efforts with the IMF, the 
World Bank and other creditor countries to modify the Enhanced HIPC 
Initiative to reduce poor countries' debts to ensure that poor 
countries are not required to spend more than 10 percent of their 
annual current revenues on debt payments. For poor countries facing a 
public health crisis as a result of HIV/AIDS, the limit would be 5 
percent. The Global AIDS bill was signed into law by the President on 
May 27, 2003, and is now Public Law 108-025.
  Title V of the Global AIDS bill, which was added in the Senate by 
amendment and subsequently approved by the House, reflected provisions 
in H.R. 1376, a bipartisan debt relief bill introduced by the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Frank), the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos), the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), 
the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus) and the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Maloney). H.R. 1376 would have required the Secretary 
of the Treasury to submit reports to Congress describing the efforts 
and progress made in negotiating improvements to the Enhanced HIPC 
Initiative. Unfortunately, Title V of the Global AIDS bill does not 
require the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress on the 
administration's effort.
  My amendment would require the Secretary of the Treasury to report to 
Congress on the progress made in modifying the Enhanced HIPC Initiative 
as called for in Title V. This simple reporting requirement would 
enable Congress to monitor the administration's effort to achieve 
deeper debt relief for poor countries. A reporting requirement also 
could provide an incentive for multilateral development institutions 
and other creditor countries to support proposals for deeper debt 
relief.
  Deeper debt relief for the world's heavily indebted poor countries 
will remove a major obstacle to HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention, 
poverty reduction and economic growth. I urge my colleagues to support 
my amendment.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. WATERS. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the gentlewoman's 
amendment. It is sorely needed. I could not think of a more noble 
project than to assist Buddhist countries with huge debts with debt 
relief. This is a measure that deserves bipartisan support. I ask all 
of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for it.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. WATERS. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, the amendment points to an important 
subject, the need for prompt implementation of the Act, and we 
certainly think that the Committee on International Relations and other 
relevant committees ought to receive periodic reports and hold hearings 
and briefings, if necessary.
  The reporting provisions in the legislation require the Secretary of 
Treasury to inform the Congress of his progress in implementing the 
Act, but we have no objection to the amendment of the gentlewoman at 
this point. Unless we figure something differently, we are entirely 
supportive.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) for his words of support. I do not think 
there would be any other information which would lead to opposition to 
the amendment, and I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) 
for his support and superb leadership on this committee.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does any Member rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Waters).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Walden of Oregon) having assumed the chair, Mr. Bereuter, Chairman pro 
tempore of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 1950) to authorize appropriations for

[[Page 18150]]

the Department of State for the fiscal years 2004 and 2005, to 
authorize appropriations under the Arms Export Control Act and the 
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for security assistance for fiscal years 
2004 and 2005, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution 
thereon.

                          ____________________