Howard Berman

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 987, the International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act of 2010 and yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this legislation, S. 987, is the corresponding legislation to legislation introduced by our colleague from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), H.R. 2103. Child marriage is one of the most harmful practices affecting girls in the developing world today. Globally, more than 60 million girls under the age of 18, many only 12 or 13, are married, usually to men more than twice or three times their age. Between one-half and three- fourths of all girls are married before the age of 18 in countries such as Chad, Mali, Bangladesh, and Nepal. Should these numbers remain consistent in the next 10 years, there will be 25,000 new child brides every day. Marrying at such a young age comes at a terrible cost for these girls--girls who, in most developed countries, would otherwise still be happily playing sports and singing in their school choir. These young girls are at an increased risk for health problems like HIV/AIDS due to the sexual history of their older partners. In addition, young girls are at risk of complications during pregnancy and childbirth. In fact, childbirth complications are the leading cause of death for women 15 to 19 years old in developing countries. Not only are child brides at a higher risk for disease and death during childbirth, they are frequently victims of domestic abuse. Premature marriage deprives girls of their dignity and dooms these girls to a life of poverty and dependence. It is for these reasons, and many more, that child marriage is categorized as both child abuse and a violation of human rights. Poverty and a lack of education are both key contributing factors to why young women fall victim to child marriages. Girls who live in impoverished homes are twice as likely to marry under 18, and 60 percent of girls involved in child marriages have no education. Families struck by poverty cannot afford to keep their daughters in school and often do not have the resources to provide for their daughters at all. Marrying off female children is often the only alternative for struggling families. With an often false promise of a better life for their daughters, parents marry their girls off at an all-too-early age. However, there are undoubtedly better alternatives. This bill before us seeks to eliminate the harmful practice of child marriage overseas. It requires an integrated, strategic approach by our government to reduce the incidence of child marriage by authorizing the President to provide assistance through multilateral, nongovernmental, and faith- based organizations to prevent the incidence of child marriage and to promote the educational, health, economic, social, and legal empowerment of girls and women. It also requires the President to establish a multiyear strategy in developing countries and promote the empowerment of girls at risk of child marriage. Mr. Speaker, we need to invest in these young girls and provide safe spaces where they can evolve socially and become self-sufficient. Empowering young girls through education can help prevent child marriages and lead to a brighter and healthier future for millions worldwide. I want to thank Representatives McCollum and Crenshaw for their leadership on this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to support the bill, which will be an invaluable investment in the future of millions of girls around the world. Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 7 minutes to the gentlelady from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the author, along with Congressman Crenshaw, of the corresponding House legislation.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott). (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BERMAN. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 20) calling on the State Department to list the Socialist Republic of Vietnam as a ``Country of Particular Concern'' with respect to religious freedom, as amended.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ms. Lofgren, the chairman of the subcommittee, for bringing this legislation to the floor. For 30 debate-time minutes we have heard the other side's arguments, and so many of them have been filled with scare tactics and blatant inaccuracies. We have been working on this bill for nearly a decade. We have recently made a number of changes to make clear our intentions about who the bill should cover and who it shouldn't. Nearly every speaker on the other side has used the term ``amnesty.'' Think about that. Amnesty, amnesty, amnesty. If you say it enough, you can scare a lot of people into being against this bill. We are talking about a group of people who didn't do anything wrong. They didn't possess the intention to commit a crime or to cross the border illegally. They were brought here. This is a universe of people who deserve special consideration because the absence of wrongdoing is so clear. And for that you use the term amnesty? That's outrageous. Next, we hear scare tactics regarding chain migration. My good friend Dan Lungren says these people, once we give them this status, will be able to petition for their adult siblings. We have taken away petition rights for adult siblings, young siblings, grandparents, grandchildren; and it will be 25 years before any person whose status is adjusted under this legislation will be able to petition for the parent that brought that kid here, because we never undid my friend Lamar Smith's provision that required 10-year absence after the petition is filed for anyone who came to this country without authorization. The chain migration argument is another bogus argument, just like the amnesty argument. Then we hear from the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) about the affirmative action amnesty legislation which will give preference to all these people. This is a group of people who under this legislation will not be allowed to receive Pell Grants, will not be able to get into the health insurance exchanges. I know you plan to repeal them, but they will not be able to get into them. They will not qualify for food stamps. They are ineligible for the Medicare program. They are ineligible for the SCHIP program. And you are talking about tremendous preferences over U.S. citizens? Another bogus argument. In closing, I would just say one sentence. In the end, this bill is less about the kids who deserve to benefit from the legislation than the country that will get the benefit of having them use their skills and their talents on our behalf. I urge an ``aye'' vote.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1735) condemning North Korea in the strongest terms for its unprovoked military attack against South Korea on November 23, 2010.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. A little over a week ago on November 23, North Korea launched a brazen daytime artillery barrage on a South Korean island inhabited by civilians. North Korea fired over 100 rounds at Yeonpyeong Island, killing two South Korean civilians and two young Marines. The shelling also caused considerable damage to the island. This provocative military act by North Korea was one of the most serious attacks involving civilians since the end of the Korean War and is in violation of the Armistice Agreement. This bipartisan resolution strongly condemns North Korea's unprovoked attack, calls on the North to renounce further acts of aggression and abide by the terms of the Armistice Agreement. I would also like to express my deepest sympathies and condolences to the South Korean victims and their families. This resolution expresses the House of Representatives' firm solidarity with the people and the government of South Korea. We stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them at this time of national crisis. This resolution also expresses support for the continued close security cooperation between the United States and South Korea and for the alliance between our two nations. Indeed, a U.S. aircraft carrier strike group is currently conducting exercises with the South Korean Navy in waters west of the Korean Peninsula. This exercise demonstrates the strength of the alliance and of U.S. commitment to regional stability through deterrence. The United States is committed to the security of South Korea, maintaining stability on the Korean Peninsula, and ensuring peace in Northeast Asia. We are ready to encourage cooperation and dialogue with our allies and other countries in the region to promote peace and security in the Asia-Pacific. Last week's artillery attack was just the latest in a long line of provocations by North Korea. The recent revelations about a new North Korean uranium enrichment facility are very troubling, as it will enable North Korea to again expand its nuclear arsenal. The construction of this enrichment facility is a clear violation of Security Council resolutions that were passed in 2006 and 2009. We call on North Korea to cease its uranium enrichment activities, take concrete steps to dismantle all of its nuclear facilities, and fully and transparently abide by the relevant Security Council resolutions. Finally, this resolution urges China to restrain North Korea from further acts of belligerence and to work constructively with the rest of the world to promote lasting peace on the Korean Peninsula and stability in Northeast Asia. A longtime treaty ally of the North, China can clearly exercise significant leverage on that nation. No one wants to see another war on the Korean Peninsula, but North Korea must understand that its actions have consequences, that it cannot violate the Armistice, kill innocent civilians and break its international obligations. I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a very distinguished member of our committee, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner).

Mr. BERMAN. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I join in asking for an ``aye'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to my friend and colleague from the committee, as well as the Financial Services and Agriculture Committee, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today and pay tribute to an outstanding citizen of our country, my good friend Janice Kamenir-Reznik. She is being honored as the Co-Founder and President of Jewish World Watch (JWW) at the Global Soul event on February 1, 2011. Janice is one of Los Angeles' most dedicated activists, as seen by her relentless advocacy for human and civil rights worldwide. Through co-founding JWW with Rabbi Harold M. Schulweis, Janice has directed the energies of this effective Jewish movement to focus attention on ending current and future genocides and mass atrocities. Her dedication and efforts to end the current crises in regions such as the Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo are clear examples of her compassionate and caring nature. JWW urges individuals and communities to take local action to produce powerful global results in the fight against genocide. The organization has impressively enlisted 65 synagogues, and works in coalition with schools, churches, individuals, communities, and partner organizations that share a vision of a world without genocide. JWW has successfully influenced legislation that ends the trade of conflict minerals from Congo which funds armed groups committing atrocities in the region. They also provide high-impact relief and development projects that improve the lives of survivors and help build the foundation for a stable region. Janice is a pillar of society and a role model for all of us. As President of JWW, she has demonstrated not only the influence of advocacy but the power of action as well. She ensures that this important movement will not ``stand idly by'' as she continues to provide educational awareness, advocacy and direct relief efforts in the killing fields of Sudan and war-torn Congo. Madam Speaker and distinguished colleagues, I ask you to join me in saluting Janice Kamenir-Reznik for her invaluable contributions and dedication to the JWW cause.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I would ask that this exchange of letters between myself and Chairman Filner and Chairman Skelton regarding H. Res. 1672 be submitted. Congress of the United States, Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, November 15, 2010. Hon. Ike Skelton, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H. Res. 1672, commemorating the Persian Gulf War and reaffirming the commitment of the United States toward Persian Gulf War veterans. This measure was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. I agree that the Committee on Armed Services has certain valid jurisdictional claims to this resolution, and I appreciate your decision to waive further consideration of H. Res. 1672 in the interest of expediting consideration of this important measure. I understand that by agreeing to waive further consideration, the Committee on Armed Services is not waiving its jurisdictional claims over similar measures in the future. During consideration of this measure on the House floor, I will ask that this exchange of letters be included for the record. Sincerely, Howard L. Berman, Chairman.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Gemstone Foundation, a not-for-profit organization in my home state of California working to improve reading skills of low-performing students. The Gemstone Foundation's work is based on the theory that many students with poor or below grade level reading skills suffer from low ``eye-brain coordination''. Their research shows that children who read below grade level often have problems with coordinating the two eyes, tracking and scanning, or re-focusing their eyes rapidly. Most students' eyes glide across a page as they read without difficulty; however, up to 50 percent of poor readers experience one of the problems Gemstone identified. This may prevent those readers from being able to finish reading a line without stopping or skipping, significantly impairing their reading and comprehension. Through an innovative, computer- and Internet-based course, Gemstone helps people who demonstrate ocular discrepancies to train their eye muscles, improving their reading abilities. In 2009, the foundation used ARRA grant funding from the National Institutes of Health to complete a pilot project of their technique at a Los Angeles Unified School District campus. Low performing elementary school students who participated in the project, called ``The Eyes Have It!'', demonstrated an average 25 percent improvement in reading fluency in just two months. I applaud the Gemstone Foundation for their special focus on helping people who otherwise would not have access to visual skill development programs: children in low-income or low-performing schools; juvenile offenders; and people in adult literacy programs. I commend the foundation and its board members for their work and encourage my colleagues to learn more about it.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 3847) to implement certain defense trade cooperation treaties, and for other purposes.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the bill, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the bill before us, the Security Cooperation Act of 2010, has three major components. First, it includes implementing legislation for the defense trade treaties between the United States and two of our closest allies, the United Kingdom and Australia, respectively. These treaties will support the longstanding special relationship shared by the U.S., the United Kingdom, and Australia by streamlining the processes for transferring certain controlled items among our items to support combined military and counterterrorism operations, cooperative security and research, and other defense projects. The implementing legislation also provides a clear statutory basis for enforcement of the treaties, including the prosecution of those who violate their requirements. Second, S. 3847 gives Israel the same status as our NATO allies Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea with regard to the length of the congressional review period for U.S. arms sales. The security relationship between the U.S. and Israel is vital and strong, and Israel deserves the same treatment as these other nations. Finally, this bill authorizes the transfer by grant and sale of excess naval vessels to India, Greece, Chile, Morocco, and Taiwan to better assist them with their legitimate defense needs, and in so doing strengthens our relationship with these nations. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1326) calling on the Government of Japan to immediately address the growing problem of abduction to and retention of United States citizen minor children in Japan, to work closely with the Government of the United States to return these children to their custodial parent or to the original jurisdiction for a custody determination in the United States, to provide left-behind parents immediate access to their children, and to adopt without delay the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, as amended.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am in strong support of this resolution. It is a bipartisan resolution, and if I might just take a second to mention that the two real leaders in the movement to this resolution and in pushing the underlying issue, a very important one, Mr. Moran of Virginia and Mr. Smith of New Jersey, are on the floor, both I believe to speak on this resolution. What it does is it addresses the abduction of American citizen children to Japan, as you might imagine, a very, very important issue for the families involved and for the governments of both the United States and Japan. Japan is a vital partner and a friend of the United States, but on the issue of international parental child abduction our two countries's viewpoints are substantially different and progress has been painfully slow. Once American children are abducted to Japan, the left-behind parents have little or no access to them, even though their children are dual U.S. and Japanese citizens. Currently there are 136 U.S. citizen children abducted to and held in Japan. Japan is the only G-7 country that is not a signatory to the Hague Convention that governs international parental child abduction. We urge the Japanese government to ratify the convention as quickly as possible. The Japanese government also needs to create a process to resolve existing cases of American children who are being held in Japan against the wishes of their parents in the United States, and in many cases in direct violation of a valid U.S. court order. Steps need to be taken immediately to help facilitate dialogue, visitation, and greater access for the left-behind parents with their children. Our children are the most important and cherished resource, and it is a tragedy for everyone involved when they are taken away and denied access to one of their parents. These children have a right to enjoy the love of both parents and the benefits of both their Japanese and American cultures. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, pursuant to subsection (c)(2)(C) of House Resolution 1493, ``Sense of the House on Deficit Reduction,'' requesting Committees of the House of Representatives to submit findings which identify changes in law that would help achieve deficit reduction by reducing waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement and which promote efficiency and reform of government and control spending in programs under committee jurisdiction, I submit this report. It includes an accounting of Committee legislation that: (a) has been enacted into law; (b) has been passed by the House and/or considered by the Committee; or (c) is presently being drafted in Committee under my direction. In each case I have ensured that legislation accomplishes, or will accomplish, the objectives called for the Budget Enforcement Resolution. Enacted Legislation The Committee reported out the Pakistan Enduring Assistance and Cooperation Enhancement Act of 2009 (H.R. 1886), which streamlined and developed tighter benchmarks and accountability measures for the substantial American economic and military assistance being provided to the Government of Pakistan. In conference with the Senate, this bill was passed as the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009, which became Public Law 111-73. Passed by the House On June 4, 2009, the Committee reported H.R. 2410, authorizing appropriations for the Department of State and the Peace Corps for fiscal years 2010 and 2011, and to modernize the Foreign Service and other international affairs-related programs and agencies. Title II, Section 211, of the legislation requires the Secretary of State to improve coordination among all the various efforts within the government to conduct public diplomacy. Section 216 reauthorizes an Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy charged with conducting an in-depth review of public diplomacy programs, policies, and activities to assess their effectiveness. Section 302 of the legislation directs the development of a national review of diplomacy and development every four years in order to make policies and programs more effective and efficient. Section 303 authorizes the establishment of a Lessons Learned Center in order to provide support for best practices in our diplomacy and development efforts. The legislation also contains such cost savings proposals as limiting compensatory time off for travel by Foreign Service Officers and providing for the suspension of Foreign Service Officers without pay. Title VIII of the legislation, entitled ``Export Control Reform And Security Assistance,'' includes: Section 828 which require the Secretary to present plans to make defense trade licensing self-financing. Section 807, permits the Secretary to use registration fees for licensing functions currently supported by appropriated funds. Section 826 grants the President the flexibility to remove satellites and related components from the munitions list, thus reducing licensing costs for these items. Title IX, ``Actions To Enhance the Merida Initiative,'' requires the President to establish and implement a program to assess the effectiveness of assistance provided under the Merida Initiative. Legislation Introduced The Committee introduced the Initiating Foreign Assistance Reform Act of 2009 (H.R. 2139) that requires the Administration to develop a National Strategy for Global Development which would define and streamline the roles of each department and agency engaged in development policies. It includes a provision that requires the development and implementation of a rigorous system to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of United States foreign assistance. Legislation Being Drafted The Committee has also begun work on two major legislative reforms: The first is an extensive effort to rewrite the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. The purpose of the overhaul is to increase the accountability, transparency and effectiveness of foreign aid programs, which are currently fragmented across 12 departments, 25 different agencies, and nearly 60 government offices. In so doing, I hope to clear away many of the inefficiencies and program duplications which have developed since the last major re-write of the legislation in 1985. The current system of unclear mandates, fragmented authorities, overlapping responsibilities, antiquated rules and tortuous procedures hampers our ability to deliver aid to the people who need it at the lowest possible cost. One lesson of the 1990s is that reductions in force at USAID did not result in improved efficiency. Instead, a specialized and experienced federal workforce was largely replaced by a contractor bureaucracy that operates at higher cost and with less accountability. Another lesson was that elimination of the USAID office that conducted program monitoring and evaluation seriously hindered our ability to assess the performance of our aid programs and share and replicate best practices. When resource allocations are made without the benefit of quantitative program indicators and rigorous impact evaluations, there is little basis for determining which activities and approaches are most effective and where the needs are greatest. Both H.R. 2139 and the foreign aid reform bill currently being drafted contain mandatory requirements for monitoring and evaluation of all foreign assistance programs. The second is a redraft of legislation under the Export Administration Act of 1979 to reauthorize, streamline and update the Act to ensure that it is responsive to both current security threats and the international commercial environment in which U.S. firms must compete. The staff draft of the export administration legislation includes two provisions requiring a periodic independent evaluation of the system. One provision would require evaluations of the effectiveness of export controls in protecting U.S. national security and would require the evaluations, with recommendations for improvements, to be sent directly to the President and Congress. The second provision would require an evaluation of the effectiveness of U.S. diplomacy in engaging with the four multilateral export control organizations. These would be the first systemic evaluations of U.S. export controls and our diplomacy regarding controls. They would contribute to modernization of the current system, which is widely judged to be falling behind in its mission. On a related point, the Committee staff is engaged in oversight of both the Export Administration Regulations (dual-use) and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (munitions) to strengthen the effectiveness of regulations, licensing and enforcement. Such oversight led to enactment of a provision in the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act (P.L. 111-195) to strengthen the enforcement authority of the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security. Separate from the preceding, the Committee staff is drafting legislation that would provide the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee with new authority over agencies' programs and budgets. The draft legislation would require coordination of the federal government's 17 export promotion programs, to more effectively deploy existing budgetary and staffing resources to increase U.S. exports. The bill also would require a reallocation of resources in the U.S. Commercial Service to overseas markets with potential for increased purchase of U.S. exports. The draft legislation is in response to Committee staff inquiries and a series of GAO reports that have identified significant overlap, gaps and inefficiencies in these programs. Finally, in terms of the Committee's oversight of ongoing agency activities, Committee staff conduct assiduous review of agencies' advance notifications of grants and contracts under programs under the Committee's jurisdiction. The goal is to ensure that proposed expenditures are in line with applicable statutes, federal policy and program goals. Proposed expenditures that raise questions are examined and then blocked if found to be inappropriate. As an example, in August, Committee staff urged the Trade and Development Agency to reconsider a proposed contract for technical services that could be provided more cost-effectively by federal employees. The agency did so and cancelled the proposed contract.

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the resolution, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this is the second time in 4 months we are debating a resolution under the War Powers Act. I welcome congressional scrutiny of the commitment of U.S. forces abroad, and I appreciate the gentleman from Ohio's effort to focus attention on one of the most sacred duties of Congress. But once again, I have to take issue with the invocation of Section 5(c) of the War Powers Act as the basis for this debate. That section authorizes a privileged resolution, like the one before us today, to require the withdrawal of U.S. Armed Forces when they are engaged in hostilities and Congress has not authorized the use of military force. Whereas the Afghanistan war powers debate focused on whether there was an authorization for U.S. military force, here we do not even reach that question because, based on everything I know, U.S. forces are not engaged in hostilities in Pakistan. The Wall Street Journal article distributed by my friend from Ohio refers to the U.S. military's role in training and humanitarian assistance programs in Pakistan. That's not ``engaging in hostilities.'' In fact, our Armed Forces participate in these types of programs in dozens of countries around the world. The gentleman refers to the terrible tragedy of three U.S. forces killed by an IED. They were on a humanitarian aid mission. We have people on such missions, people involved in military training, uniformed officers, who have been killed in many different parts of the world. From that, one does not draw the conclusion that the U.S. is engaged in hostilities with enemy forces. In fact, since U.S. forces are not engaged in hostilities in Pakistan, there is no factual basis for invoking the War Powers Act. Mr. Speaker, Pakistan is an important partner in the fight against extremism. Last year Congress demonstrated America's long-term commitment to Pakistan by passing the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009. Any attempt to cut the military ties between our two countries would be counterproductive for our national security interest in the region. No matter what your position on the situation in Afghanistan, whether you think we should withdraw tomorrow, shift from a counterinsurgency strategy to a counterterrorism strategy, or send in even more troops, there is no reason to automatically conclude that we should cease our efforts to help Pakistan address the dire threats to its security. In 1990, we stopped providing military assistance and training to Pakistan for what seemed like a good reason at the time. But as a result, a whole generation of Pakistani military officers rose through the ranks without any connection or affinity with the United States, and that contributed to some of the suspicion and mistrust that we are still struggling to overcome. Mr. Speaker, there is no question that Pakistan needs to step up in a number of important areas. We hope to improve cooperation on various security issues, strengthen the role of Pakistan's democratically elected government and achieve a greater parity between military and civilian assistance. The United States is aiding Pakistan because it is in our interest to ensure an economically and politically stable Pakistan does not provide sanctuary for al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. The reports in recent days that elements of the Pakistani intelligence service may have been aiding our enemies is nothing new to those of us who have been following this issue and is not a reason to abandon our many friends in Pakistan who are struggling to modernize their economy, their political system, and their military. The security forces of Pakistan are steadily taking on a Taliban-backed insurgency, taking direct action against those who threaten Pakistan's security instability, including military operations in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and the North West Frontier Province. Mr. Speaker, I am concerned that using the War Powers Act to call for the removal of U.S. combat forces, which do not exist, will only serve to inflame Pakistan's sensibilities and do nothing to strengthen the partnership that we need to achieve our goals in this critical region. I urge my colleagues to oppose the resolution. I reserve the balance of my time.