Lincoln Diaz-Balart

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 952 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. (Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Virgilio Mantilla Arango, a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba. Mr. Mantilla Arango is a pro-democracy leader in totalitarian Cuba. Because of his steadfast conviction in human liberty and his constant work to bring freedom to an island enslaved by the nightmare that is the Castro regime, he has been a constant target of the dictatorship. According to multiple reports, Mr. Mantilla Arango was arrested on March 4, 2002, for peacefully protesting at a provincial hospital. The reports outline how, at the hospital, the group shouted ``Long live human rights'' and sat on the floor. After 2 years in the gulag, and after a sham trial in April 2004, Human Rights Watch reports that Mr. Mantilla Arango was ``sentenced'' to 7 years in the totalitarian gulag. The ``sentence'' included 4 years for his participation in the March 2002 protest and 3 years for continuing to peacefully protest against the nightmare that is the Castro regime during his time in the gulag before his ``trial.'' The U.S. Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices--2005, describes the deplorable conditions in the totalitarian gulag as, ``harsh and life threatening.'' Sadly, this is all too true for Mr. Mantilla Arango. According to reports published on Net For Cuba, Mr. Mantilla Arango has suffered savage beatings by dictatorship thugs for denouncing the tyranny and hanging signs above his bed that say ``Down with Fidel'' and ``We Need Freedom.'' In July, Mr. Mantilla Arango informed the Cuban Human Rights Foundation that he has been in brutal, solitary confinement since putting on a T-shirt last month that carried the words, ``Down with Fidel.'' Mr. Speaker, Dr. Mantilla Arango is the face of the real Cuba. No matter how intense the beatings, no matter how remorseless the repression, no matter how inhumane the conditions, he will never relent in his belief that the people of Cuba should be and will be free. Mr. Speaker, it is as inconceivable as it is unacceptable that, in the 21st century and only 90 miles from our shore, brave men and women are locked in grotesque dungeons because they believe that all people have basic human rights. It is a profound embarrassment for mankind that the world stands by in silence and acquiescence while political prisoners are systematically tortured because of their belief in freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. My colleagues, we must demand the immediate and unconditional release of Virgilio Mantilla Arango and every political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 921. Let us be very clear from the outset of this debate: the current conflict was caused by the violent attacks of two terrorist organizations on Israel, in Israel. Israel has the sovereign right and responsibility to protect and defend itself from these terrorists. The roots of this problem must be addressed if there is to be any true cessation of violence. Iran and Syria must cease their financial and military support of terrorist organizations. Hezbollah must be disarmed and no longer be allowed to operate. U.N. Resolution 1559 must be fully implemented. The government of Lebanon must be allowed to govern the whole of its territories. President Abbas must guarantee peace, exercise full control over the Palestinian-controlled territory and the Hamas terrorist attacks originating in Palestinian-controlled territory must be permanently stopped. This latest violence only confirms what we have known since 9/11: the forces of extremism and terrorism must no longer be allowed to terrorize peoples and countries who desire to live in peace and freedom. The approach taken by President Bush has been appropriate. Without an end to terrorist operations by Hamas, Hezbollah, and other enemies of Israel, there will be no hope for peace. The United States should not negotiate with terrorists and neither should Israel. Despite the recent set-backs, however, we should continue to try to promote peace in the Middle East because it is vitally important to the safety and security of America. We must continue to encourage peace, but all parties must be willing to truly accept Israel's existence and come to the table if peace is to have a chance. Unfortunately, without an end to terrorist operations against Israel by Hamas and Hezbollah, there is no hope for a lasting peace in the Middle East.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague and good friend on the Rules Committee, Dr. Gingrey of Georgia.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. (Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the rule provides 90 minutes of general debate, evenly divided and controlled by the chairman and the ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary, and it also provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, I think it is appropriate to begin by quoting the 15th amendment to the United States Constitution: ``The rights of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude.'' As enshrined by the 15th amendment, there really is no more fundamental right in our democratic system than the right to vote. However, the history of the United States is marked with occasions where minorities were in multiple ways, and by multiple ways, blocked from having their voices heard at the ballot box. One of the great advancements in our American democracy was and is the Voting Rights Act. This historic legislation was the first comprehensive Federal statute to enforce minorities' constitutional right to vote. The provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act provided swift relief to those citizens who were victims of discriminatory voting tactics and provided them access in a concrete and effective way to the voting booth. Since it was enacted, the Voting Rights Act has enfranchised millions of racial, ethnic, and language minority citizens to have access to that sacred right that is voting by breaking down barriers and permitting increased minority participation in elections for candidates at all levels of government. After 41 years of breaking down walls, walls to participation in our democratic process, the Voting Rights Act would soon expire if not reauthorized. With this in mind, the Committee on the Judiciary began hearings to determine whether the legislation is still needed. The committee held 12 hearings on the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, listening to testimony from State and local elected officials, scholars, lawyers, representatives from the voting and civil rights communities. The testimony and evidence presented before the committee brought to light the fact that even though we have made great strides to stop the discriminatory practices of the past, there still is ample evidence that minorities today face discriminatory practices at the ballot box. Mr. Speaker, in my community for decades we saw the voting power of minorities diluted to the point that they were for many years unable to elect the representatives of their preference. The Voting Rights Act helped correct that wrong, helped enfranchise countless citizens into our democratic political system. The underlying legislation will reauthorize the expiring provisions of the Voting Rights Act for 25 years. I would like to point out one provision which I think is very important, especially to my community, as well as communities throughout the country. The bill extends section 203, the existing language assistance requirements that provide that election materials be provided in select languages in covered jurisdictions. These provisions of the Voting Rights Act require that non-English voting materials be made available in jurisdictions where 5 percent of the citizen voting age population consists of a single language, limited English proficient minority and in which there is a literacy rate below the national average, or more than 10,000 citizens who meet those criteria reside. These provisions, brought out in the hearings, cover approximately 12 percent of the counties in the United States. It certainly has benefited the counties that I am honored to represent. The bilingual language assistance provisions play a critical role in assisting both native-born and naturalized citizens to fully participate in our democratic form of government. Older residents, Mr. Speaker, who have been legal residents of the United States for many years when they apply for citizenship, they are exempt when they take their citizenship exam to become United States citizens. They are exempt under our law from the English requirements. In other words, they take those elderly legal residents of the United States who have been here for many, many years, they are allowed to take, if they so wish, the naturalization exam to become a United States citizen in the language of their origin. In addition, many native-born citizens have limited English skills because they primarily speak other languages and they require assistance. These citizens should be given the opportunity to understand the ballot. Whether it is a simple, but critically important, choice between two or among candidates or a complicated ballot initiative, those citizens of the United States should have the opportunity to fully participate, fully understand what they are voting on and that way be active participants in our democratic system. That is what the legislation does. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 9 was introduced by Chairman Sensenbrenner, Speaker Hastert, Minority Leader Pelosi, and reported out of the Committee on the Judiciary by an overwhelming vote of 33-1. It is good legislation, and I am very proud to be bringing it to the floor today. I hope and expect that we are going to see a very significant bipartisan show of support for this legislation today. I think it is fair and appropriate to commend Chairman Sensenbrenner for his determination and his leadership and strength of character in moving forward this legislation. And also the ranking member, Mr. Conyers, for his hard work, diligence, and leadership as well on this legislation. I know they put long hours into this process with determination, perseverance, and extraordinary good faith. I urge my colleagues to support both the rule and the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 910 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my good friend, a champion for human rights wherever it is threatened in the world and here in the United States as well, Mr. Chabot of Ohio.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend and distinguished leader from Minnesota (Mr. Kennedy).

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Res. 910 and insert extraneous material thereon.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of our time. Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to have brought forth this legislation today. It is historic legislation. The Voting Rights Act was one of the great advancements of American democracy, something that we all should, and I think we do, feel very proud about. And we are bringing it forth today, we are extending it for 25 more years, because more work needs to be done, even though there has been extraordinary progress in the last 40 years in this country. I want to thank again Chairman Sensenbrenner. I admire him. I think he has done an extraordinary job facing great pressures. Of course he is such a man of character, the pressure does not even get to him. I admire him for that and many other qualities. Again, I thank Ranking Member Conyers and all those who have worked hard to bring this legislation forward. I think we are all cognizant of the historic nature of what we as the House of Representatives are doing today. And so I would urge support for this rule, which is fair. It makes in order some amendments that I oppose, but I think it is appropriate that the House be able to debate even items that many of us in the Rules Committee don't agree with. But we are going to have a fair debate today.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my good friend from Georgia (Mr. Norwood). (Mr. NORWOOD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from south Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart), someone whom I love like a brother.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire as to the remaining time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time. I would like to preface my remarks by expressing my profound admiration for the author of this amendment who I think is a great American patriot. In the Rules Committee, I supported his right to be heard on the floor today. And I rise in opposition to the amendment. I think that we have made great progress. One of the beauties of America is we are constantly improving as a Nation. We have improved to the point that citizens, for example naturalized citizens, it is important to point out that the elderly, pursuant to our laws, when they have been residents, legal residents of the United States for many years and they seek to become an American citizen, according to our laws, they can take the exam to become an American citizen in their language of preference, their language of origin. What we said in amendments to the Voting Rights Act, those people have a right to understand what they are voting on. Whether it is a simple choice of candidate or a complex ballot issue, elderly citizens who are naturalized have a right to understand what they are voting on. Also, there are millions of native-born Americans whose language, primary language, is not the English language. And so we believe, just like we certainly are extremely proud of those citizens, whether they are naturalized or en route to be naturalized or native born and they defend this country, and we are certainly grateful to them and proud of them when they do so, we think they should have the right when they vote to be able to understand the ballot initiatives that they are voting on or other questions. So I really think, Mr. Chairman, that the fairer we are as a society, the greater we are. The more fair our country is, the greater our country is. This is an example. We have opened an opportunity for full participation, for citizens whose primary language is other than English, to the ballot box. And I think we should be proud of that as a country. So I again commend Chairman Sensenbrenner for bringing forth this legislation and oppose the amendment before us at this time.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remind my Colleagues about Dr. Jose Luis Garcia Paneque, a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba. Dr. Garcia Paneque is a leader of the opposition movement in Cuba. He is a surgeon by training, and a member of the Cuban Independent Medical Association. He is also a leading independent journalist. As a director of the independent news agency Libertad and a member of the Manuel Marquez Sterling Journalists Society, Dr. Garcia Paneque has also devoted his efforts to letting the world know the truth about the nightmare that is the Castro regime. On March 18, 2003, as part of the tyrant's heinous island wide crackdown on peaceful, pro-democracy activists, Dr. Garcia Paneque was arrested. After a sham trial, he was sentenced to 24 years in the totalitarian gulag. Let me be very clear, Dr. Garcia Paneque is a young doctor in a dungeon because he is a supporter of freedom, democracy, and because he worked to shine the light of truth on the depravity and horror that is the Cuban tyranny. The U.S. Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices--2005, describes the deplorable conditions in the totalitarian gulag, ``Prison conditions continued to be harsh and life threatening.'' Unfortunately, this is far too true for Dr. Garcia Paneque. According to various reports, he has lost over 40 kilograms while in prison. He has had to be hospitalized multiple times while incarcerated. The latest reports are especially disturbing. Once again hospitalized because of the depraved conditions in the totalitarian gulag, he is now suffering from various life threatening maladies. The Castro tyranny is not only murdering Dr. Garcia Paneque because he believes in liberty, they are also attacking his family. According to a report filed by Yamilet de los Angeles Llanes Labrada, ``Dr. Garcia Paneque's four children are psychologically affected by their father's imprisonment and by the constant harassment they are forced to sustain. At least three times a week, groups cry out dictatorship slogans from outside Garcia Paneque's home.'' This is the grotesque reality of living under Castro's tyranny: if you demonstrate your belief in freedom, the tyrant will lock you in a dungeon and regime thugs will mercilessly attack your family. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Garcia Paneque is the face of the real Cuba. Despite these gangster tactics, heinous threats, and life threatening illness, Dr. Garcia Paneque continues to demand human rights for the people of Cuba. He is languishing in an infernal gulag because he believes in freedom, truth, democracy, and human rights. His family is being constantly threatened because of these ``dangerous'' beliefs. Mr. Speaker, it is unconscionable that journalists and physicians like Dr. Garcia Paneque are locked in dungeons for writing the truth. At the dawn of the 21st Century, it must no longer be acceptable for anyone in the world, anywhere in the world, to be locked in a gulag for reporting the facts. My Colleagues, we must demand the immediate and unconditional release of Jose Luis Garcia Paneque and every political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Rafael Corrales Alonso, political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba. Mr. Corrales Alonso is a pro-democracy activist and a member of the 30 November Democratic Party, an island wide movement dedicated to the establishment of a democratic society, in opposition to the Castro tyranny. Unfortunately, those who believe that freedom, and human rights are the birthright of all men and women, are targeted by the tyrant's machinery of repression. According to Amnesty International, on February 28, 2002, Mr. Corrales Alonso was arrested by the dictatorship. More than 2 years later he was tried on the supposed ``crime'' of ``contempt'' and, in a sham trial, Mr. Corrales Alonso was sentenced to 5 years in the totalitarian gulag. Let me be very clear, Mr. Corrales Alonso is currently languishing in the depraved conditions of the totalitarian gulag for his belief in freedom. The U.S. State Department describes the conditions in the gulag as, ``harsh and life threatening.'' The State Department also reports that police and prison officials beat, neglect, isolate, and deny medical treatment to detainees and prisoners. It is a crime of the highest order that people are imprisoned in these nightmarish conditions simply for their belief in democracy and freedom. Mr. Corrales Alonso is one of the many heroes of the peaceful Cuban democratic movement who are locked in the dungeons of the dictatorship for their beliefs. They are symbols of freedom and democracy who will always be remembered when freedom reigns again in Cuba. President Bush addressed those brave men and women who spread the light of freedom in the darkest corners of the world when he said, in his second inaugural address, ``Democratic reformers facing repression, prison, or exile can know: America sees you for who you are: the future leaders of your free country.'' Mr. Corrales Alonso represents the very best of the Cuban people: No matter how intense the beatings, no matter how remorseless the repression, no matter how inhumane the conditions, he will never relent in his belief that the people of Cuba should be and will be free. Mr. Speaker, it is as inconceivable as it is unacceptable that, in the 21st century and only 90 miles from our shore, brave men and women are locked in grotesque dungeons because they believe that all people have basic human rights. It is a profound embarrassment for mankind that the world stands by in silence and acquiescence while political prisoners are systematically tortured because of their belief in freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. My colleagues, we must demand the immediate and unconditional release of Rafael Corrales Alonso and every political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, because I firmly oppose drilling for oil off the coasts of Florida, I believe that it is critical that a permanent, state-controlled ban on drilling around the entire state becomes law as soon as possible. This is why I believe the Pombo-Putnam compromise in H.R. 4761, the Domestic Energy Production through Offshore Exploration and Equitable Treatment of State Holdings Act of 2006, is essential in order to protect Florida's beaches. The Pombo-Putnam compromise would allow Florida to prohibit drilling for 100 miles. In negotiations with the legislation's authors and in the House Rules Committee, I worked to further protect Florida's environmental treasures. As successfully amended, the compromise would also codify the ban on drilling within the ``military mission line''-- approximately 234 miles from Tampa--to provide even more protection for Florida's west coast. This plan, in many ways, is better than a bill that the Florida delegation almost unanimously cosponsored in 1997. That bipartisan legislation sought to prohibit any leasing or drilling within 100 miles of Florida's coasts, but did not include the added protection provided by the ``military mission line.'' It also lacked the factor of state control of the drilling issue. Former Governor Lawton Chiles also supported, in writing, a 100-mile ban on drilling. Presently, Florida's only protections against offshore oil drilling reside with an expiring presidential promise (known as the ``moratoria'') and a year-to-year appropriations limitation amendment-- a technical legislative maneuver that prohibits Federal funds from being used to conduct offshore leasing. The stark reality Florida faces is not only the expiring ``moratoria,'' but also a strong push in Congress to allow drilling as close as 20 miles from our shores. On May 18 of this year, the House passed an amendment by a close 217-203 vote to prevent drilling as close as three miles from Florida's east coast and nine miles from Florida's west coast. Eight cosponsors of a bill (H.R. 4318) to allow drilling just 20 miles off Florida's coasts voted for this amendment because they felt that three miles was just too close. Had those eight cosponsors voted against that amendment, the vote would have been lost 211-209, and drilling would have been allowed as close as three miles from Florida's coast. Although they voted for this particular amendment, our colleagues assured us that they would vote in favor of legislation to allow drilling at 20 miles. Instead of relying on votes from over 400 Congressmen from outside of Florida, I support placing the fate of Florida's beaches in the hands of Floridians. In 2005, Congressional passage of a plan was possible that would have permanently banned drilling within 125 miles of our beaches. On June 29, 2006, we learned, by a vote of 65 to 353, that a majority in Congress no longer supports a 125-mile ban. Last year's offer of 125 miles has now been reduced to 100 miles from our coastline. The next step could very well be a horrible 20 miles. As a strong opponent of drilling, I believe that our window of opportunity in Congress for a permanent ban on offshore drilling is closing. This is why I support the Pombo-Putnam compromise.

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.