[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 19]
[House]
[Pages 25570-25575]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               SUPPORT FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY IN HONDURAS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2009, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart) is 
recognized for the remaining time until midnight.
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, it is no secret that 
there are many challenges to democracy in our hemisphere. There are a 
number of anti-democratic regimes within our hemisphere that are doing 
everything they can to expand their influence, to expand their anti-
American, anti-democratic, anti-freedom agenda across the hemisphere. 
But tonight I want to speak about a little country in Central America 
that is fighting a heroic battle to stop that trend, to keep their 
democracy alive, to keep their freedoms, their rule of law, their 
electoral process intact, and that is Honduras.
  The people of Honduras, Madam Speaker, have for decades had a 
democratic process. It has been a process that, frankly, has been a 
model for many around the world. They have great established democratic 
institutions. They have had presidential and other elections on regular 
cycles. And that took place again in November of 2005 when a new 
President was elected. Mr. Manuel Zelaya was elected.
  What happened though, unfortunately, Madam Speaker, is that president 
then started going in the same direction as other authoritarian regimes 
had gone, like Mr. Chavez in Venezuela.

                              {time}  2310

  And he started violating the Constitution. He started violating the 
rule of law, not to mention obviously, other things like massive 
corruption and theft and allegations of ties with the narco--with drug 
trafficking. But again, he also was violating the Constitution.
  On March 23, 2009, right almost at the end of this man's term, he 
then started an illegal effort to try to change the Constitution so 
that he could stay in power, remain as President after his term had 
expired. Now, it's very interesting, we need to understand something, 
that because Honduras had had dictatorships in the past, their 
Constitution, which is revered by the people there, was very clear that 
you could not do that. You could only serve one term as President and 
that's it for life. You could not do it again. Article IV of that 
Constitution states very clearly that a President's term may never--is 
one term, and that that part of the Constitution can never be amended. 
In other words, a President cannot try to stay on after his term.
  March 25, the Office of the Public Prosecutor, as again I mentioned, 
because President Zelaya tried to start the process so that he could 
remain in power, the Office of the Public Prosecutor begins 
investigating what President Zelaya is doing, focusing on the legality 
or the possible illegality of that proposed referendum to change the 
Constitution.
  May 2009, because President Zelaya's actions were a clear violation 
of the Constitution, the Attorney General also petitioned the 
Administrative Law Tribunal to annul, to stop this illegal process that 
President Zelaya was trying to do, a referendum again so that he could 
keep himself in power.
  May 11, 2009, the Office of the Public Prosecutor publicly states 
that the referendum violates the Constitution. On May 12, 2009, the 
Administrative Law Tribunal issues a temporary injunction, prohibiting 
this referendum that President Zelaya is trying to do to keep himself 
in power from taking place.
  May 27, 2009, the Administrative Law Tribunal rules that the 
referendum violates the Constitution and orders suspension of all acts 
in its support. May 28, 2009, despite the referendum already having 
been declared illegal by the Administrative Law Tribunal, then 
President Zelaya continues to advocate for that referendum so that he 
can stay in power.
  On May 29, 2009, the Administrative Law Tribunal clarifies its 
previous May 27 ruling, explaining that any and all acts that would 
lead to any vote or poll similar to the referendum that President 
Zelaya was trying to put forward is a violation of the Constitution.
  On June 9, 2009, the appellate court, now, of the Administrative Law 
Tribunal unanimously, unanimously rules that Zelaya's actions violate 
the Constitution. I think you're starting to see a pattern here; that 
there is a broad consensus in the courts and everywhere that what Mr. 
Zelaya's trying to do to keep himself in power is in violation of their 
country's Constitution.
  June 19, 2009, the Honduran appeals court orders the Honduran Armed 
Forces to not provide any support for this proposed referendum that the 
President was trying to do to keep himself in power.
  June 24, 2009, Zelaya orders the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff and the Secretary of Defense to violate the constitution and to 
carry out the referendum, which again has already been ruled 
unconstitutional. You know, why would he ask the Armed Forces to do 
that? Because under article 272 of that country's Constitution, it 
states that the Armed Forces is the one that carries out the elections 
and helps in the election. But the Armed Forces says, No, Mr. 
President, we're not going to violate the Constitution and the court 
rulings.
  So when the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary 
of Defense refuses to carry out the illegal orders of the President to 
violate the Constitution, what does President Zelaya do? He fires them 
both. On June 25, 2009, the Office of the Public Prosecutor files a 
motion with the Honduran Supreme Court of Justice to reinstate the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, Mr. Velazquez.
  June 25, same day, the Honduran Supreme Court of Justice now 
unanimously rules that Zelaya's dismissal of General Velazquez is 
another violation of the Constitution. Again, this constitutes one of 
multiple violations of the Constitution by President Zelaya, and he's 
trying to do all this so that he can stay in power, despite the 
Constitution.
  Now, since this referendum that President Zelaya continues to try to 
do had been ruled illegal and they can't print the ballots, what does 
President Zelaya do? He has ballots printed in Venezuela by Hugo 
Chavez. Everybody in our country knows who Hugo Chavez is. Those 
ballots are then flown into the country to try to go ahead with this 
illegal referendum to change the Constitution, I repeat, so that Mr. 
Zelaya can stay in power.
  Well, June 25, 2009, the Honduran Supreme Electoral Tribunal declares 
that the referendum violates the Constitution, once again, and orders 
that the Armed Forces take custody of those illegal ballots printed in 
Hugo Chavez's Venezuela. The same day, June 25, the Office of the 
Public Prosecutor files a criminal complaint against President Zelaya 
for treason, abuse of authority, and usurpation of power.
  June 26, 2009, Zelaya makes public a secret executive order 
rescinding his original intent referendum, replacing it with another 
one, and basically, again, continuing to go forward to try to change 
the Constitution so that he can stay in power and stay in power as 
President. I don't know for how long he had the intention of staying in 
power.
  June 27, Zelaya then leads a mob of supporters because, remember, the 
Armed Forces had held these illegal ballots. Well, he then leads a mob 
in violation of court orders of the Supreme Court, et cetera, and he 
breaks into where those ballots had been held by the military, a 
military base, and he takes them out with the intention of starting to 
distribute them, despite the fact that there had been multiple court 
rulings saying that they're illegal.
  Well, then, June 28, 2009, the Honduran Supreme Court of Justice 
issues an arrest warrant for President Zelaya and orders the Armed 
Forces, orders the Armed Forces to arrest him. Remember, this is a 
court order by the Honduran Supreme Court of Justice ordering the 
military, and I mentioned before that the military are the ones in 
their Constitution who are responsible to enforce that. They order the 
military to go ahead and arrest him. So, yes, the Armed Forces carry 
out those

[[Page 25571]]

orders. Now, June 28, the legislature, the Congress of that country 
votes 124-4 also to remove President Zelaya because of his violation, 
multiple violations of the Constitution.
  June 28, 2009, a special congressional commission issued a report on 
Zelaya's action, a special congressional commission, and based on this 
report the Congress votes 124-4 to remove Zelaya and replace him with 
the person who, in their Constitution, was next in line. And that was, 
who was available was the Speaker of the House, Mr. Micheletti. He 
becomes the President.
  June 28, the Armed Forces, as a defender of the Constitution, decides 
that instead of imprisoning Mr. Zelaya as they had been told to do, 
following those court orders, instead of imprisoning him, what they do 
is they put him on an airplane and they send him to neighboring Costa 
Rica.
  Now, that is what has happened. The democratic process continues in 
Honduras. The elections that were convened before this whole issue and 
this whole crisis started, those have continued to go forward. So 
here's the good news, that despite that challenge, the Honduran people, 
the democratic institutions, that democratic country is going forward 
with their elections. Those elections are going to be taking place the 
29th of November. And obviously, we here in the United States and the 
world should be applauding, applauding that heroic people, the way that 
they're following their Constitution, they're preserving their 
institutions, they're preserving the rule of law, their freedom and 
their democracy. But, unfortunately, Madam Speaker, that's not the 
case.
  Because of the pressure of individuals like the Castro dictatorship 
and Hugo Chavez, unfortunately, even the United States is now saying 
that the Honduran people should not have elections, that they don't 
deserve those elections, that they should not go forward with those 
elections.

                              {time}  2320

  Now, Madam Speaker, think of the sacrifice of the American people, 
particularly our men and women in uniform who have done so much and 
sacrificed so much so that people around the world can have elections.
  And here we have a neighboring country, an ally of the United States, 
who is about to have elections, who is about to fulfill their people's 
dreams. They're going to have presidential elections, municipal 
elections, and congressional elections. Are we celebrating it? Are we 
encouraging them? Are we helping them? No. We're trying to stop them. 
We're trying to impose a dictatorship, and we're trying to stop them. 
How unfortunate and how shortsighted, Madam Speaker.
  Madam Speaker, I am joined today by a number of individuals that I 
have the highest admiration and respect for.
  I would like to first recognize Mr. Roskam from the State of 
Illinois. Mr. Roskam has been looking at this issue, has been analyzing 
this issue, speaking up on this issue. And it is a privilege to 
recognize him for 3 minutes.
  Mr. ROSKAM. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, a couple of weeks ago I was out with a group of 
Members in Congress and my BlackBerry went off. And I read my 
BlackBerry, and there it was: it was a message, and it said that 
Senator DeMint was going to be going to Honduras and the Senator from 
South Carolina was making that journey available to other Members of 
Congress who had a desire to go. And I made the decision, I said, Hey, 
I want to go down to see what's going on there, to see with my own eyes 
what's happening in Honduras.
  I was joined by the gentleman from Illinois, Representative Schock; 
the gentleman from Colorado, Representative Lamborn. And the four of us 
went down on what's called a congressional delegation.
  In we flew. It was a 1-day trip, a short trip. In we flew, and we 
landed in Honduras. And what a great privilege to meet with those 
people.
  Let me tell you a little bit about that trip, Madam Speaker.
  We met with President Micheletti and his leadership team. We met with 
the Honduran Supreme Court. We met with the leading presidential 
candidates who are running for office in the races that the gentleman 
from Florida mentioned that is going to convene on November 29 of this 
year. We met with the independent election commission, and we met with 
members of civil society, in other words, those people who are 
participants in the culture and economy and religious life of Honduras, 
including Americans who have lived down there, Madam Speaker, for as 
long as 25 years.
  And as the four of us gathered and listened and asked questions of 
these folks who represented the leadership and a wide range of 
perspectives across Honduras, there is one word that comes to mind that 
was universal in how they were perceiving the United States of America. 
And that single word was ``bewilderment.''
  They were bewildered because, from their perspective, they had been 
coloring within the lines. From their perspective, they look to the 
north at this Nation that they admire, this Nation that they have a 
relationship with, this Nation that they look to, and yet this Nation 
was looking at them askance.
  Now, think about that. This is a Nation, the United States of 
America, that is willing to enter into conversations directly or 
indirectly with Ahmadinejad of Iran; we're willing to enter into 
conversations directly or indirectly with the Castro brothers of Cuba; 
but we are not willing to be in a conversation with this group, this 
long-time ally, the country of Honduras.
  Let me tell you where it breaks down from my perspective. We met with 
President Micheletti, and all of us who are Members of Congress and 
members of the general public, we've all been in meetings that have 
been highly manipulated and we know when there's a hustle going on, and 
you can kind of feel it. You know when it's scripted, when somebody is 
saying, Oh, you say this and you say this and you say this.
  But I am telling you, in this meeting, there was a great deal of 
spontaneity. And that was true of all of these meetings, Madam Speaker, 
all five of these meetings that I just described, they were 
spontaneous.
  And in the course of the meetings, President Micheletti admitted two 
mistakes. He was very transparent. He said, Look, we didn't have the 
authority to remove President Zelaya from the country. We didn't have 
the authority to do it. It was a mistake.
  Now, he was charging the military base and so forth, but President 
Micheletti acknowledged that they didn't have the authority to do it.
  He also said they didn't have the authority to shut down two 
television stations. They were small stations. They were broadcasting 
insurrection. We didn't have the authority to shut them down. It was a 
mistake. We regret it. We are moving to open them up, and so forth.
  But I cannot even begin to convey to you the sense of bewilderment, 
Madam Speaker, that the Hondurans expressed.
  Here we are, Members of the United States Congress, and we're seated 
with the Honduran Supreme Court. And I am thinking to myself, frankly, 
who am I or who are we to pass judgment on the Honduran Supreme Court 
on how they're interpreting their own Constitution, right?
  But they say to us, Look--and they made it very, very clear--we 
issued the order that the military followed. The military didn't tell 
us what to do. We, a civilian supreme court, issued the order and told 
them what to do. And I think that that's pivotal.
  When I was down there with Representative Schock, who's joining us 
tonight, and others, it was clear to me there's more police officers, 
Madam Speaker, around the United States Capitol tonight than there are 
around the presidential palace around Honduras. So the characterization 
of this as a military coup is casting it, frankly, in a false light.
  So all kinds of drama going back in the past, all kinds of situations 
as you look back in the past. Some mistakes, some not mistakes, some 
things characterized a certain way, some things not characterized a 
certain way.
  Where do we go from here? We go to November 29.

[[Page 25572]]

  Now we, as a country, historically, have looked to elections of a 
free people as the remedy moving forward. We have historically said, 
notwithstanding the background of a nation, if there is a free, fair, 
and open election, we are going to recognize and acknowledge the 
government that is subsequent to that.
  And I wholeheartedly believe and I wholeheartedly hope that the Obama 
administration, Secretary Clinton will lay out a parameter by which the 
Honduran Government can satisfy the administration that they're going 
to move forward. In other words, if the Honduran people make a decision 
on November 29--and let's remember, President Zelaya, former President, 
is not going to be on the ballot; President Micheletti, who is 
currently in office for this collapsing duration of time, is not going 
to be on the ballot. It's several other individuals who campaigned, got 
their nominations. They're on the ballot for their parties. Those are 
the individuals who are campaigning for office. And when we met with 
those individuals, not a one of them had a suspicion that there was 
anything that was untoward in this upcoming election. They all felt it 
was going to be pure as the wind-driven snow.
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROSKAM. Yes, I will.
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. You just mentioned the election 
that's going on. It is accurate to say, is it not, that that's a 
process that's been going on for about a year? And those candidates 
that you met with are the same candidates that have been in this 
process that were elected in open primary elections to represent their 
respective parties. So that has not changed. There is no change there. 
That process is the same, clean, clear democratic process that has been 
going on way before any of this controversy has been going on, and 
they're the same candidates, are they not?
  Mr. ROSKAM. Reclaiming my time, they are exactly the same candidates, 
absolutely.
  And when Representative Schock and I met with the individuals who are 
those that are in charge of administering the elections, frankly, they 
made it very clear to us they were not happy to meet with us at the 
place where we had to meet. They felt like we shouldn't--they shouldn't 
be there in the presidential palace.
  But they were humoring--they were accommodating us and being very 
gracious to us, but they made it very clear that they weren't happy to 
meet with us there. Why? Because their job is to ensure the integrity 
of the ballot.
  So here's where we go. So we're looking at November 29, the Honduran 
people are going to make a decision. They're going to choose one of 
these nominees who has been nominated by their party, and the United 
States Government then is going to have a decision to make.

                              {time}  2330

  I think it is wise. I think it drives toward stability. I think it 
drives toward prosperity and toward a really good, solid foundation for 
us, for the American people, to recognize the legitimately elected 
officials of that government that the Honduran people, themselves, 
choose on November 29.
  I think it would be a devastating mistake if we were to look the 
Hondurans in the eye and say, You know, we really don't care who you 
choose. We're going to manipulate, and we're going to decide who your 
next president is going to be. Heaven help us if we go that route when 
we're a nation that historically has stood up and has said that we're 
going to stand for free, open and fair elections.
  I'm the first to say--and I think you are, too, Mr. Diaz-Balart--that 
if there were any nonsense to go on in an election, you would be the 
first one to jump in; but there has been no indication whatsoever, 
none, even from the presidential candidates who are currently running 
nor from the conversations that Representative Schock and I had and 
that I know you had with others when you went with Ms. Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen and others down to Honduras. So I think it is incumbent upon 
us to stand up, to stand with the Honduran people, to stand alongside 
them in this time of real turmoil.
  In closing, I just want to make one observation. In the meeting that 
we had, the United States has, I think, unfortunately, cut off very 
pivotal aid right now to the country of Honduras. Yet, as one of the 
Honduran individuals said to me, You know, we can endure the lack of 
aid, but what good is aid to us if we give up our country?
  I think, Madam Speaker, that is a good watchword, one upon which we 
need to rest our foreign policy, and I would encourage the Obama 
administration to take that to heart.
  With that, I yield back to the gentleman.
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I want to thank the gentleman.
  The gentleman mentioned bewilderment and that the Honduran people 
are, frankly, in awe, wondering what is going on. All they want to do 
is to continue to have their democratic process--to have their 
elections that were prescheduled.
  A person who asked that question and who tried to get some real 
answers is an individual you already met and who went with you to 
Honduras. He is a person who is, obviously, dedicated, who is young, 
but who has led a very productive life in public service. So I would 
like to recognize the other gentleman from your State, who was also 
down there with you--Mr. Schock.
  It's interesting. I know you had some of the same questions. I guess 
you asked the Library of Congress to look into it, right?
  Mr. SCHOCK. Correct. Thank you, Mr. Diaz-Balart.
  Look, shortly after I was born, which was in the 1980s, much of Latin 
America and Central America was struggling with the issue of democracy. 
Through much of that decade, it was the goal of the administration and 
the goal of this country to promote and to transition to democracies in 
that region. So, through much of my life, I have watched these 
countries continue to grow, to continue to strengthen their 
relationships with the United States, to continue to be friends and 
allies to the United States. That was my understanding of that region 
of the country.
  Now, I'm not an attorney. I'm not a constitutional law expert. I 
certainly do not know the Honduran Constitution chapter and verse. So 
when the events took place on June 28 and when our State Department and 
this administration quickly said, Well, this was a coup d'etat and that 
what occurred there was wrong and that what occurred there was a 
violation of their Constitution, and when they began demanding that the 
Honduran people and the government there turn back on the decisions 
they had made, I didn't know what to think. Before jumping to 
conclusions, before getting on board with our State Department's 
position or opposing our State Department's position, I enlisted the 
support of the many resources that we have as elected Members of 
Congress, namely, the Congressional Research Service.
  In July, I wrote to the Congressional Research Service, and I asked 
them to look into the events that had occurred in Honduras. I asked 
them to look at the Honduran Constitution and to tell me chapter and 
verse whether or not what occurred there in Honduras was, in fact, in 
keeping with Honduran law or whether or not it was a violation of their 
Constitution.
  The Congressional Research Service then reached out to the law 
library--to the Library of Congress--and I patiently waited for over 2 
months for them to generate this report. In September, they provided 
this report on Honduras and on the constitutional law issues that we 
had raised about this situation. They did a very thorough analysis, and 
they went through, basically, chapter and verse of the Honduran 
Constitution and on what had occurred in Honduras.
  Basically, they came to the conclusion that what had occurred there 
was in keeping with the Honduran Constitution, that the Congress and 
the Supreme Court have the authority to hold their elected 
representatives accountable, that they have the authority to vote and 
to take action when they believe that the leaders of their

[[Page 25573]]

country are dilatory in their duties and to ask that they be removed.
  However, the report also found that the expulsion of Mr. Zelaya from 
the country was a violation of their Constitution, and they cited the 
portion of the Constitution that clearly says, even if you violate 
Honduran law, you are to be prosecuted, and you can be imprisoned, but 
you cannot be expelled from the country.
  Now, it's pretty clear to me what was legal and what wasn't legal. In 
stepping back and in looking at the current State Department's 
position, I kind of scratched my head, and wondered, Well, where is 
their justification? Where is their chapter and verse? Where is their 
black-and-white outline of justifying their position which says that 
what occurred there was not legal? Other than to say, well, we don't 
like what happened, that we don't like the tone, that we don't like the 
precedent, and that we don't like the way it looks, I haven't seen a 
counterpoint. I haven't seen a counter report from the State Department 
that has gone through chapter and verse and has given a legal opinion 
on why this was a violation of the Honduran Constitution.
  Furthermore, we can all have a debate here tonight about what should 
happen with those issues which we all agree should not have occurred, 
namely, the expulsion of Mr. Zelaya from the country, but what I want 
to say is this:
  First of all, we as a country must uphold the rule of law, and we as 
a country must respect other countries' constitutions. Whether they're 
the way we would write the constitutions or whether we like the way the 
constitutions are written really is irrelevant. The fact of the matter 
is, for us to suggest otherwise--for us to suggest, well, your 
constitution has to look like our Constitution, and your process has to 
look like our process--really is giving us the symbol of the ugly 
American, if you will, in the world, that somehow we believe everyone 
should look like the United States of America in all of our forms, 
including in our Constitution. What is important, however, is that the 
constitution is written by the local citizens, that it is respected and 
that the rule of law is upheld.
  I have to think back to just a year ago at about this time. Prior to 
my being in Congress, I was in the statehouse in Illinois. In December 
of last year, our legislature, of which I was a member, started a 
process according to our constitution in the State of Illinois to 
remove our duly elected leader--our Governor. Now, our Governor had not 
been convicted of any crime. He had not been indicted for any crime. He 
had not been brought to trial for any crime, but our constitution 
clearly said, in the State of Illinois, when a majority of the 
legislature deems that the Governor is dilatory in his duties, it can 
have him removed, and our legislature followed that constitution, and 
had him removed.
  I'm going to tell you right now that not everybody in the State of 
Illinois agreed. Certainly, not everyone in this country agreed with 
removing a sitting officeholder from office, namely, a Governor, prior 
to a conviction. However, it was allowed for in the constitution. You 
saw no one in the Federal Government, certainly not our President of 
this United States, who happens to come from Illinois, call out and say 
that this would somehow fly in the face of democracy or that some great 
injustice had occurred.
  A few years earlier, in the same decade, the citizens of California 
decided that their Governor was dilatory in his duties and that their 
Governor, who was duly elected, who had not been convicted of any 
crime, and who had not gone to trial for any malfeasance, should be 
removed from office. However, their constitution required that his 
removal be done by a different process--through voter referendum and 
through a recall provision.
  Now, the reason I point this out is that we have 50 States in the 
Union, and every State has a different constitution. Every State has a 
different process. Each process is different, and each process is 
unique. What is important is not that each process is the same but that 
the rule of law is upheld.
  I would argue, Madam Speaker, that the same is true in Honduras. The 
Honduran people have a different Constitution. However, based on the 
findings of this law review and based on the findings of many legal 
experts, what occurred there up until the point of Mr. Zelaya's 
expulsion was in keeping with the Honduran Constitution.
  What is important in moving forward is not necessarily whether or not 
Mr. Zelaya is held in the Brazilian Embassy or whether he is brought to 
trial or whether he gets amnesty or whatever. What is important is that 
we continue to promote democracy and that we continue to promote free 
and fair elections around the world, specifically in Honduras.
  I can't help but think that, as we start to celebrate the elections 
that are upcoming in Afghanistan, which will take place in less than 2 
weeks and where men and women from our Armed Forces have fought and 
died, much the similar in Iraq, we would look to a friend of the United 
States for over 30 years, a democracy in Central America, and say to 
them, You know what? Because of this issue with the removal of your 
president, we're not going to uphold democracy in your country. We're 
not going to seek free and fair elections in your country.

                              {time}  2340

  It seems preposterous, and so I really, tonight, am asking the State 
Department, show us your plan. What is the end game for Honduras? What 
is the end game for democracy in that region?
  My friends who join me here tonight, we only see one solution to 
continuing to promote democracy in that region, and it's free and fair 
and open elections in Honduras. Six candidates were nominated by their 
parties in May. Six candidates have campaigned for this position for 
nearly a year, and six candidates will be the options for the Honduran 
people to vote on on November 29.
  Whomever the Honduran people vote for, the candidates for office we 
met with made it very clear they will support the outcome of the 
election. The interim President Micheletti made it very clear upon 
those elections he looks forward to surrendering the power to the 
incoming President and going back to his duties in the Congress.
  The end of the game that I see is we need to be pushing for free and 
fair elections. We need to be pushing for the rule of law and democracy 
in Honduras and making sure that the will of the Honduran people is 
respected on November 29. We, as the United States of America, 
promoters of freedom around the world, send election observers, send 
the resources and the support necessary to ensure that free and fair 
elections occur on November 29 in Honduras.
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I think you were very clear in 
illustrating exactly what did take place. You mentioned what is the end 
game, what is the solution? What is it that we should all strive for? 
It's elections. That solves the issue. Those elections are going to 
take place on November 29. That is a solution we should be applauding. 
We should be supporting those elections. Unfortunately, this 
administration is trying to do everything in its power to try to stop 
those elections from taking place.
  Now, frankly, one of the people I most admire in this process who has 
done so much to help push for elections, particularly where they have 
not been able to do so for generations, who was an advocate of freedom 
around the world, I am anxious to hear, Mr. Burton, what you have to 
say, because nobody knows and has fought for elections around the globe 
like you have. It's a privilege to have you here.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Hopefully, 
in the not so distant future, we will see fair elections in your former 
native land of Cuba.
  With that, let me just say I have heard in my years here in the 
Congress a lot of very thorough and eloquent expressions of concern 
about what's going on in foreign policy and foreign lands, but the 
young gentleman from Illinois just covered about everything

[[Page 25574]]

about as thoroughly as you possibly can.
  The one thing that I think I might add is that there are those who 
say the elections should be postponed and that there are reasons for 
that. But, according to what I have been able to learn from our 
research is that the Supreme Court of Honduras rendered a decision 
after careful study, and they said that what was done was 
constitutional, it was within the law, and they upheld that decision, 
and they have said that the elections should go forth, and they are now 
in control of the election process, and I believe that it should go 
forth.
  For the United States of America and our State Department and our 
very young and new President, whom I feel probably does not have the 
expertise that he requires to make these kinds of decisions, although I 
am sure that he would like to see his position supported, I think that 
we should support the Honduran people, support a free and fair 
election, and let our State Department know that the Members of the 
Congress here in Congress feel very strongly that they have made a 
miscalculation and a misdiagnosis of what the situation is or should be 
down in Honduras.
  They should change their mind and come back and support the 
constitutional elective process in Honduras and let the elections go 
forth with our support. The United States of America should support the 
free election process in Honduras and our State Department should share 
that view, and that's why tonight you have a number of Congressmen here 
on the floor of the House who are saying to the administration and to 
the State Department, You have made a mistake.
  As the young gentleman from Illinois said, this has been researched 
very thoroughly by our legal authorities and experts here in the 
Congress of the United States, and they have concluded that the only 
thing that was done that was not correct was forcing the former 
President out of the country. But it did not say anything that we would 
contradict the decision that was made by the administration that showed 
that there was some unconstitutional things done and supported by the 
previous President. The Supreme Court has rendered that decision and 
they said the election should go forth, and we should support that 
decision.
  If I were talking to our Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton, 
or the President, I would say that the administration and the State 
Department should support that position.
  I really appreciate you and your brother and the rest of the people 
that are here on the floor tonight, I really appreciate you staying so 
late. It's a quarter till 12. The people of this country, who I hope 
might be paying attention, will realize we feel this is extremely 
important for stability in our hemisphere, in our front yard, and we 
feel very strongly that the administration and the State Department 
should review this and come out in very strong support of the elective 
process which should be taking place very shortly.
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I want to thank you for those 
words.
  And, again, what we keep talking about is that there is a solution. 
There is a very simple solution. There's a very simple answer to this 
crisis, and that's the answer and the solution that men and women for 
generations, American men and women for generations have given their 
lives for, and that's for the ability of people to elect their leaders, 
for free and clear multiparty elections.
  There are people that are in that process already, a process that has 
been going on for over a year, a process that has not been interrupted. 
How we cannot support that process is, frankly, beyond me.
  I don't know. Maybe the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter), who 
is one of the keen intellects in this body, can have some explanation 
as to how elections are not, all of a sudden, the answer, why the 
Honduran people should not have the right to elect their next 
President.
  It is a privilege to have you, sir. I recognize Mr. McCotter.
  Mr. McCOTTER. I thank the gentleman. I know we are heading toward the 
witching hour, so I will try to put some remarks in a very succinct 
fashion.
  First, I would like to point out some of the principles which 
undergird our position in support of the Honduran people. One is that 
we, as Americans, understand our self-evident right to liberty is from 
God, not the government, and no tyrant nor terrorist can interfere with 
it. We also understand, as Americans, that our security is from 
strength, not surrender, and that our greatest strength is the 
expansion of liberty to others to ensure freedom for ourselves.
  We also understand, as is painfully evident with Honduras, that the 
United States and all free people are targets of tyrants and 
terrorists, not because of our actions, but because of our existence. 
The existence of free people, the rule of law, the pursuit of one's 
happiness in accordance with one's inalienable rights is a threat to 
all tyrants and despots throughout the world, for their thrones are 
unstable in the presence of free people and oppressed people who are 
inspired by such examples.
  With the Honduras situation, we see crystal clear that the United 
States, in many ways in our foreign affairs, has gotten away from these 
foreign principles and the concepts. The danger, not only to our allies 
like Honduras, is great.
  I pose one example. Can this administration, for the edification of 
individuals like myself who may not grasp the intricacies and the 
genius of their foreign policy, explain one thing. What is the 
difference between women being shot in the streets of Iran for trying 
to be free and the difference between a constitutional democracy in 
Honduras following the rule of law to protect itself from a would-be 
tyrant?
  This administration said these situations are distinguishable, 
because in the instance of the Iranians' murderous regime, that is an 
internal affair for the Iranian people; yet, when the free people of 
Honduras through the rule of law in defense of their constitutional 
democracy exercised their means of self-defense, we are told that that 
is of the utmost interest to the United States and we must demand an 
outcome in accordance with our will and the will of the OAS, which now 
includes Mr. Fidel Castro, no fan of elections.

                              {time}  2340

  Can you tell me why the freedom of the Iranian people is to be left 
in the hands of their murderers and why the freedom of the Honduran 
people is to be taken from theirs and put in the hands of butchers like 
Fidel Castro and others such as Chavez? I eagerly await a response, 
although I do not know that I will find it edifying, let alone 
satisfactory. I yield back.
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I thank the gentleman. And also 
coming with us tonight is a person who also has a distinguished and 
effective record of fighting for human rights and freedom around the 
globe, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart).
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Well, I want to thank you for 
calling this Special Order, convoking it and focusing in on this very 
important, really critical subject. Winston Churchill talked about the 
fact that facts are better than dreams. There are facts with regard to 
the crisis in Honduras. The people of Honduras acted constitutionally. 
Their institutions acted constitutionally in removing a President who 
was acting unconstitutionally, and they removed him. The institutions, 
the democratic institutions of Honduras removed a President who had 
been acting unconstitutionally on June 28. Those are facts.
  The Obama administration is wrong when, in this case, it sides with 
Chavez and Castro, Ortega, Correa, the other anti-democratic elements 
in this hemisphere who are pressuring for the imposition of the 
President who had violated the Constitution in Honduras for his return, 
his forceful return, unconstitutionally to power. The Obama 
administration is wrong. That's a fact.

[[Page 25575]]

  Now, there's another fact that is of importance, and that is we saw a 
number of Members of Congress here almost at midnight, because of the 
importance of this issue, tell the American people that after thorough 
study, they have come to the conclusion that the Obama administration 
is wrong and that the Honduran people acted appropriately. It's a fact 
that there is a growing number of Members of Congress who are becoming 
involved, educated and are expressing themselves with regard to this 
issue. That's a fact that the Obama administration needs to take into 
consideration, because as was mentioned before, even if the situation 
were different, and even if the Hondurans had acted unconstitutionally 
in removing President Zelaya from power, the solution to the crisis 
should be evident to all: free and fair elections, especially when the 
candidates were chosen before the crisis began by all of the political 
parties.
  So what is most not only incorrect, but almost inconceivable, Madam 
Speaker, is that the Obama administration is not only wrong with regard 
to what happened in Honduras, is not only wrong with regard to whom it 
is siding with and whom it is siding against, but that even if the 
administration were not wrong with regard to what has happened, the 
evident solution being the elections of November 29, are not being 
supported by the Obama administration, but the Obama administration is 
saying that they will not recognize the will of the Honduran people as 
expressed on November 29.
  That is inconceivable--beyond wrong. That is inconceivable, Madam 
Speaker.
  So, facts: Congress is aware of how wrong the administration is. 
Congress is aware that the Honduran people are proceeding with an 
election on November 29. The reason that the majority leadership is not 
bringing to the floor of this House a resolution to express support for 
the elections, the resolution was filed by Ms. Ros-Lehtinen and others, 
expressing support for the elections that are going to be held November 
29, the reason the majority leadership does not bring that resolution 
to the floor is because it would win a majority vote, because the fact 
is a growing number of Members of Congress, I maintain by now a 
majority of this House, are aware of the gross unfairness with which 
that small nation is being treated by this administration.
  So I think it's important for the administration, Madam Speaker, to 
take note, tonight, almost at midnight, that Honduras, despite the 
pressure, despite the fact that it's a small country, is moving forward 
with elections. Those elections deserve not only support and respect, 
but commendation. And further efforts to deny the Honduran people their 
right of self-determination, their right to express themselves freely 
by secret ballot on November 29 is wrong.
  That's a fact.
  More and more people in this Congress are learning the facts. And I 
hope, Madam Speaker, that the administration takes note and reverses 
itself, backs off from not supporting elections, from not supporting 
free determination and, rather, supports the Honduran people.
  I thank you, Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart, for focusing attention, 
for your leadership role on this critical issue. Not only do the people 
of Honduras deserve it, but the hemisphere requires the further 
attention of the American people to this critical issue. Thank you very 
much.
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I want to thank the gentleman from 
Florida for really summing it up so well that, yes, regardless of what 
may have happened, the solution is there, it's evident. It's the 
elections that are coming up.
  The American people need to understand, need to know that this 
administration, unfortunately, is siding, siding, is on the side, is 
siding with Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro in trying to stop the 
democracy, the democratic process, the elections that are about to take 
place in Honduras. They need to know that.
  This administration needs to understand that history will judge this 
administration if it does not reverse itself and sides with the people 
of Honduras, with their election, with their freedom. And also the 
Honduran people need to understand that we have great admiration for 
them, that we respect their process, their Constitution, and we commend 
them for going forward with their elections, their free, democratic, 
multi-party elections.
  Thank you, Madam Speaker, and with that, I will yield back the 
remaining part of my time.

                          ____________________