Lincoln Diaz-Balart

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 327 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, again supporting the rule, supporting the underlying legislation, I also yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I think that the rule is fair. The underlying legislation is obviously extraordinarily important. Mr. Speaker, I would urge support not only for the rule but for the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a true humanitarian, an outstanding Cuban-American physician, a genuine hero, Dr. Pedro Jose Greer Jr., whose love for mankind, especially for the poor and homeless, is an admirable example for contemporary American society. My uncle and aunt, Alfredo and Isabel Caballero, recently sent me a book authored by Dr. Greer with the cooperation of another admirable Cuban-American: Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Liz Balmaseda. The book is titled, ``Waking Up In America'', and I highly recommend it to you, Mr. Speaker, and to all my colleagues. Dr. Greer courageously denounces how society neglects millions of Americans who lack adequate health care. Dr. Greer is the medical director and one of the founders in South Florida of the Camilus Health Concern, a free clinic for the poor, and the San Juan Bosco Clinic for the poor. He has won a MacArthur Fellowship ``Genius Grant'' and was recognized by Time Magazine as one of Fifty Top Young Leaders Under 40 in 1994. Dr. Greer has also been honored by two U.S. Presidents. Dr. Pedro Jose Greer Jr. was brought up in a family with a tradition of love and service for our fellow man, formed by his father Dr. Pedro Greer, a prestigious Cuban gastroenterologist, and his mother, Mrs. Maria Teresa Medina Greer. Dr. Greer's great-grandfather fought for Cuba's freedom in 1898. I would like to express my gratitude and congratulations to Dr. Pedro Jose Greer Jr. for his love and work for America and also extend this congratulatory message to his proud parents, his wife Janus Munley Greer, his children Alana and Joey and his sister and brother in law, Sally and Brian Belt.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I assume that the distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) was referring to the Kyoto Treaty, which has to be, pursuant to our constitutional system of advice and consent of the Senate, has to be given consent by the Senate. So that is an issue obviously that is of great importance and is a decision that the Senate will have to make. Mr. Speaker, we have no further speakers at this time with regard to the rule. It is a procedural rule. This is a procedural rule. We seek to bring the conference report to the floor. That is why we have to pass the rule first. Once we pass the rule, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan), the prime author of the conference report who has provided a tremendous amount of leadership, as well as hard work on this issue, is ready. The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan) is ready to delve into the details. He has pointed out how any and all requests that were made of him by our distinguished friends on the other side of the aisle, he did his utmost to comply with. Yet, we are seeing now systematic opposition generally because our friends on the other side of the aisle want more money. But they want more money for everything. So what we are trying to do, Mr. Speaker, is to bring forth, get to the debate on this foreign aid conference report. But in order to get to the debate on the foreign aid conference report, we have to pass the procedural rule to do so. That is what we would like to do. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall), 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. Speaker, House Resolution 307 is the standard rule waiving points of order for the conference report to accompany H.R. 2606, the foreign operations appropriations bill for fiscal year 2000. The rule waives points of order against the conference agreement and its consideration and provides that the conference report shall be considered as read. I support this rule, and I support the underlying conference report as well. There are many important programs which are being funded in this conference report, and because there are no country earmarks, the President and the Secretary of State are afforded great flexibility to conduct foreign policy as they see fit in this area. I thank the gentleman from Alabama (Chairman Callahan). I think he has done an extraordinary job, as has the ranking member, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi). They have done a lot of hard work on this important conference report, and I urge both the adoption of the rule by our colleagues, as well as passage of the conference report. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as with so many other of the appropriations bills this year, we are hearing opposition from our good friends on the other side of the aisle because of the fact that they wish that more money was being spent. There is no doubt that proposals to spend money in myriad ways will be heard, and will continue to be heard, some of which, I am sure, make a lot of sense. We made a decision on this side of the aisle, and I think it is important to commend the gentleman from Alabama (Chairman Callahan), the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young), and the leadership, the Republican leadership, the Speaker, the majority leader, the whip, the conference chairmen, the entire leadership. They made a decision, on our side of the aisle we made a decision, that we will not in these appropriations bills tap, we will not get into the Social Security trust fund. And we are sticking to that decision. So we are going to see a lot of opposition based on the fact we are not spending enough money on these appropriations bills. This is the foreign aid bill. It is a very important bill. But we believe we are doing a good job, and we are doing the job within the existing resources that we have, while not tapping into, not going into, the Social Security trust fund. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time on the resolution bringing the conference report to the floor. The distinguished chairman of the subcommittee is ready, the gentleman from Alabama (Chairman Callahan), to explain the details of this legislation in great depth. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan), the chairman of the subcommittee on the Committee on Appropriations who has done superb work on this bill. (Mr. CALLAHAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I simply want to reiterate something very important that the gentleman from Alabama (Chairman Callahan) said. The gentleman pointed out that obviously there could always be more requests for more money. But he explained what was done within the resources available, not doing three things which we refuse to do. Raise taxes. We refuse to raise taxes. Bust the balanced budget. We refuse to bust the balanced budget. Or go into the Social Security Trust Fund. We refuse to go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So not doing those three things, we are doing a good job of funding the Government's needs, including the very important programs that our friends on the other side of the aisle have pointed out. So, Mr. Speaker, this is very important work that the subcommittee has brought forward in the context of this conference report. We need to get it passed. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray). (Mr. BILBRAY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to point out just a few things. The essence really of the debate today is whether, as the gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray), the previous speaker, pointed out, more money which, except for one speaker on the other side of the aisle, insufficient amount of money is the reason for their opposition to the bill. That is a legitimate discrepancy. We refused to go into the Social Security Trust Fund. Now, with regard to what the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel) just stated, U.S. embassies and consulates, they are in another appropriations bill in the State Department; Commerce, State, Justice, that bill, not in this one. Now, it is important to point out again, and I reiterate it, we made a decision, the leadership, and we are standing firm behind our leadership on this. We are not going to go into the Social Security Trust Fund. We are not going to do it. We made that decision. We are sticking to it. Obviously, it subjects us to pressure. We see argument after argument after argument that they want more and more and more money. Many of the programs that they talk about are probably good programs. But we are going to stick to our commitment. We are not going to go into the Social Security Trust Fund. We are not going to do it. This is a good work product. We want to bring it to the floor. This rule does so. We deserve to get into the details of the debate. The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan), our chairman, the prime author of this legislation is ready to provide the details and go into the details of this debate in depth. But we need to pass this rule in order to get that debate. It is a procedural rule. It is a standard procedural rule, bringing forth the negotiation between the House and Senate known as the conference report that is finalized for foreign aid. So we are ready to go, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We heard multiple speakers on the other side of the aisle with regard to the issue, and all but two said that their opposition to this foreign aid bill was because there was not enough money. I just want to be clear that even though we on this side of the aisle are standing firm behind our leadership in not raising taxes, in not busting the balanced budget, in not going into the Social Security Trust Fund, despite that, on this bill for foreign aid we have $12.617, that is almost $13 billion. That is almost $13,000 million for foreign aid. I want to commend the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan) for his extraordinary job. I think this has been a very good example of the underlying difference that separates the two sides of the aisle. With only two exceptions, every single speaker on the other side of the aisle got up and opposed this legislation because there is not enough money in it. And so there is a fundamental difference, but a very good job has been done by our side, our leadership, the chairman of the subcommittee, and so I support not only this rule but the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, this is important, we need to get it passed, and that is why at this point I support the rule and urge my colleagues to vote for it. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we saw a magnificent, as I said before, demonstration of the clash of views in a democratic process. Again and again, we saw the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller) feeling so strongly about the fact that in his view the bill spends too much money; and despite the fact that it breaks usual tradition, I allowed him time to speak twice with regard to that point of view. He believes it spends too much money, and we had a number of speakers on the other side of the aisle say that this bill spends too little money. That is a clash. That is what democracy is about. We had some allegations made which I think deserve reference, some of which because I believe they were incorrect. For example, one of the speakers mentioned that with regard to the Cuban market a billion dollars of sales are possible there. Let us remember that a few years ago, even after the Cuban dictator had destroyed that economy, he was receiving $6 billion a year in subsidies from the Soviet Union, and that is why he could maintain his tyranny functioning and purchasing things. He does not have that subsidy anymore. How could he now have a billion dollars from American farmers? It would seem that any intelligent analysis would see how illusory that is and how patently absurd that is, and yet we hear it. Now, the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) made one point which was very important, and I disagree with his conclusion; yet I think it is important to mention it. He said that while he disagrees with our sanctions policy, the Senate language, the Senate rider which was on this legislation, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) mentioned, I think correctly, it was very sloppily drafted and overly broad and it would have facilitated terrorist states obtaining hard currency. That points to the fact of why the authorizing committee, the Committee on International Relations that has hearings on this issue, was so adamant, as made clear through a letter by its chairman, that this rider-way of legislating on appropriations bills on such delicate issues is not the appropriate way to proceed. So wisely I believe because of the point brought out by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the sloppiness of the Senate language and the underlying seriousness of the issue as brought out by the authorizing committee why it was wise that legislating through a rider was not permitted by the conference committee. So I now close and urge support for this rule because of the importance of the underlying legislation, Mr. Speaker. My colleagues know very well that this legislation is needed by American farmers, that there are a myriad of critical programs in this legislation that are going to be funded; that there are many families that will benefit directly and immediately in our country from this legislation. That is why we need to bring it to the floor, and that is why we need to vote for the rule, and that is why we need to vote for this underlying legislation, and that is why I support it, and that is why I urge my colleagues to vote for it. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 317 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), 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. DIAZ-BALART asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 317 is the standard rule waiving points of order for the conference report to accompany H.R. 1906, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2000. The rule waives points of order against the conference report and its consideration and provides that the conference report shall be considered as read. I strongly support the rule. I also strongly support the underlying conference report. There are many important programs which are being funded. I commend the conferees for their dedication to their work and to the American farmer. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record an editorial from the Miami Herald. The document referred to is as follows: [From the Miami Herald, Sept. 24, 1999] Food Sales to Cuba--Will Benefit Only the Repressive Regime The idea of allowing U.S. firms freely to sell food and medicine to Cuba seems unassailable from afar, a humanitarian gesture toward deprived people, as well as good business for American farmers. But that's a huckster's pitch being promulgated by U.S. business interests that either misunderstand the way Cuba's politically regimented economy works, or that are trying to break the U.S. trade embargo. Congress shouldn't fall for the pitch to legalize unrestricted food and medicine sales to Cuba. This isn't about humanitarianism: Selling supplies to the totalitarian regime responsible for so much human misery in no way ensures that any benefits would trickle down to the people of Cuba. This is about money--including money for the regime's repressive machinery. In Washington this week, the U.S. farm lobby is bringing to a climax its orchestrated campaign against trade sanctions in general and to open Cuba to grain sales specifically. Dreaming about yearly sales that they think could reach $2 billion within five years, farm groups appear eager to extend plenty of credits and take Cuban sugar or rum in barter. Listen to David Frey, the Kansas Wheat Commission administrator: ``With Cuba's stressed economic situation, we are talking about a long-term deal before they are paying cash for a lot of wheat. There will be a time when they will be able . . . to pay cash.'' Mr. Frey and his allies are deluding themselves if they believe that selling wheat to a government with no hard currency and a history of stiffing business partners is going to save America's farmers. Equally deluded are those well meaning people who think that selling such materials will alleviate the suffering of the average Cuban. Remember that this is the regime that ruined Cuban agriculture and other industry in the first place. While Cuba's fertile soil and waters no longer produce enough to feed its ration-card weary people, the regime serves lobster to tourists. While Cuban children can't get asthma medication on any given night, foreigners paying for surgery get first- world medicines. Measures to allow licensed sales of food and medicine were attached to an agriculture appropriations bill by the Senate last month. U.S. Reps. Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros- Lehtinen, both from Miami, helped kill the deal by attaching a provision that would make such sales contingent on Cuba having free elections. That should end it. Better access to food and medicine isn't going to solve Cuba's biggest problem. Ridding itself of an odious state will. Mr. Speaker, as many of my colleagues will recall, this was the first appropriations bill to come to the House floor for the fiscal year 2000 cycle. It passed the House in June. I think it is important and appropriate that we commend the subcommittee chairman the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Skeen) and the ranking member the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) and all the conferees and those who worked so hard along with them to move this process along. They have done an extraordinary job. They have worked extremely hard to produce legislation which provides approximately $60 billion in total budget authority for agriculture. We know that spending levels are tight, but I believe the conferees did a very good job of working within their limits. The agriculture appropriations bill funds programs that help benefit each of us each and every day. From improving nutrition, to helping ensure safe and nutritious food to put on our tables, to fund in this bill so many programs. The reality is that less than 2 percent of the American population provide food that is safe and nutritious and affordable for the over 270 million Americans as well as for countless millions of others abroad. Much of the funding in this conference report goes towards food stamps, over $21 billion; child nutrition programs, almost $10 billion; farm assistance programs, $1.2 billion; the supplemental nutrition program for women, infants and children, known as WIC, over $4 billion. I have consistently supported agriculture, Mr. Speaker, and I commend the hard work of the conferees. Again, I think it is so just and proper that we thank the gentleman from New Mexico for his hard work on this conference report. There are many, many programs that are being brought forth that are important. It is important that this legislation be acted on as soon as possible. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of both this rule bringing forth this conference report and of the conference report itself. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood). (Mr. LaHOOD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller).

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I think that we have just seen in the last two distinguished speakers a beautiful example of democracy genuinely at work. The first speaker that we heard said that he was opposing this legislation because he feels that it is spending approximately $10 billion too much; a very distinguished Member of this House, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller). We then heard another very distinguished Member of this House, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) explain in detail why she is opposing this legislation, one of the reasons being why, it is, in her estimate, not spending billions enough. There is obviously a disagreement, but that is democracy. Some feel too much is being spent, others feel too little is being spent. I think it is appropriate at this time, if I may, if I could take just a few minutes to explain what the bill is doing. It has been on line since we finished meeting in the Committee on Rules last night and has been available for reading. Thirteen, almost 14, billion dollars, $13.988 billion, are in this conference committee report for agriculture; $8.7 billion to provide emergency aid to help farmers, including 1.2 billion for natural disasters; 5.5 billion for market loss payments, including 125 million for dairy producers; 650 million for crop insurance premium subsidy and for crop insurance associated costs. With regard to supporting farmers in rural America, the Farm Service Agency, salaries and expenses are increased by $80 million over last year to continue the delivery of the farm ownership, farm operating, and disaster loan programs. Total funding is $796.8 million, which is the same as the President's request. Total loan authorization levels for agricultural credit programs are increased by $798.3 million over last year. Total loan authorization funding is $3.083 billion which is 74.6 million above the President's request. Rural housing loan authorizations are increased by $337.7 million over last year, including 334.7 million for single family housing. Total loan authorization funding is $4.589 billion which is $14.3 million above the President's request. Rental assistance programs are restored to the fiscal 1999 level of 640 million, an increase of 200 million over the President's request. The rural electric and telephone loans are 1.05 billion above the fiscal year 1999 levels. Total loan authorization funding is $2.612 billion, which is 1.54 billion above the President's request. The Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program loan authorization is increased by $50 million over last year, bringing fiscal year 2000 loan level to $200 million, which is the same as the President's request. Agricultural research activities are increased by $76 million over last year. Total funding is 1.837 billion, which is 12 million over the President's request. Conservation operations activities are increased by $20 million over last year, bringing them to 661 million, 19 million below the President's request. Protecting human health and safety, the Food Safety Inspection Services, increased by $32 million over fiscal year 1999 for a total of 649 million, approximately the same as the President's request. The Food and Drug Administration is funded at $1.186 billion, $83 million more than fiscal year 1999, $69 million below the President's request. Fulfilling commitments to important food and nutrition programs, the child nutrition programs are funded at almost $10 billion, an increase of $377 million over fiscal 1999, 11 million below the President's request. The special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, WIC, is funded at $4.032 billion, an increase of $108 million, 73 million below the President's request. The Food Stamp Program is funded at $21.073 billion. The Food For Peace Program is funded at 976 million, an increase of 38.7 million above the President's request, and yet a decrease of 105 million below the fiscal year 1999. Title IX of the bill provides provisions regarding mandatory livestock price reporting which will provide information regarding the marketing of cattle, swine, lamb, and livestock prices that can be easily understood by packers and will encourage competition. My colleagues saw I had not mentioned the issue of sanctions, and I feel very strongly about that issue. The authorizing committee feels very strongly. The chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), sent a letter saying that if there is one issue that should not be dealt with in the Committee on Appropriations as a rider but that should be dealt with by the authorizing committee, it is an issue as sensitive as authorizing and financing sales to terrorist states. Yet the issue has been brought up. I just want to make one point with regard to Cuba, because the distinguished gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) mentioned it. One word to those interests who feel that it is appropriate now to sell to and finance to the Cuban dictatorship: irrespective and over and above the ethical questions, which obviously are important, it is not good business practice to do business, to make sales and finance them, with the jailers of the Vaclav Havels and Lech Walesas of that imprisoned island. They will be the future leaders of Cuba that will be making the decisions that are of so much import, that are so important, to so many interests. If you do not want to base yourselves on ethics, base yourselves on the fact that the future leaders of democratic Cuba, many of them are in prison today, and it is not good business practice to be cozying up and financing sales with their jailers. I bring that point up because it was brought up previously; secondly, because the authorizing committee made its views known very clearly; and, thirdly, because the Committee on Appropriations as well voted earlier in the summer on that issue and rejected it. So I wanted to bring that out on the Record. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), in the spirit of democracy.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, on September 22, Burning Punjab reported that Devinder Singh, a young Sikh, died in police custody at the Ropar police station on September 18. A witness said that third- degree methods were used to extract ``false information'' from him. His brother and two associates said that he died of injuries inflicted by the police. The two associates were unable to walk due to injuries from torture. About a week earlier, another young Sikh was killed by the police in the Sarhali police station. On August 16, Lakhbir Singh Lakha was tortured to death in police custody at police post, Chohla Sahib. Mr. Inder Singh, father of the deceased said they had to wait for the body as his son had died 48 hours earlier. Gurpreet, a 17\1/2\-year-old Sikh girl, was abducted and raped repeatedly by the son of a Punjab Akali minister and his brother-in-law. Another Catholic priest was murdered in Orissa by allies of the governing party. The Indian government says that there are no more human-rights violations occurring in Punjab, yet incidents like these keep coming to light. These terrible incidents are just part of a pattern that has seen the Indian forces allegedly murder over 250,000 Sikhs since 1984, as well as more than 200,000 Christians in Nagaland since 1948, over 65,000 Muslims in Kashmir since 1988, and thousands of other minorities such as Tamils, Manipuris, Dalit ``untouchables,'' and Assamese people. I thank Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the Council of Khalistan, for bringing these terrible incidents to my attention. These incidents show that for minorities like the Sikhs and others, there is no security in India. That is why the Sikhs of Khalistan, the Muslims of Kashmir, the Christians of Nagaland, and others seek their independence. I call on my colleagues to support an internationally-supervised plebiscite in Punjab on the question of independence. These people should be given the same opportunity that citizens of Puerto Rico and Quebec have received--the chance to decide their political future and status in a democratic vote. Many believe that the breakup of India is inevitable. Since India now has nuclear weapons, the democratic countries of the world, led by the United States, must work to make sure that if this happens, it happens peacefully like in Czechoslovakia (now the Czech Republic and Slovakia), not violently like in Yugoslavia. We can prevent another Yugoslavia type crisis from breaking out in South Asia by encouraging the democratic process in the subcontinent. Let us take this stand and help ensure democracy and stability throughout the region.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 312 and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.