Lincoln Diaz-Balart

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the amendment.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I think it is quite curious that the distinguished gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Skaggs] began his remarks by saying this is not about Cuba and this is not about Castro. It is very much about Cuba, about Castro, and about the oppression that the Cuban people have to live day in and day out at the hands of the dictatorship and that denial, the attempt to deny information to the Cuban people that is so primary in the agenda of the Cuban dictatorship. The gentleman from Colorado must have forgotten that, in 1994, in this Congress, we paid for this report, Mr. Chairman, this report, two volumes, and we had an agreement that we would support the creation of this panel and that the panel would be asked, after its creation, some very clear questions and would have to report not only to the administration but then that the director of the USIA would have to report to Congress based on this report. Mr. Chairman, I will at this time refer precisely to the recommendations and the findings of the panel, and specifically of Joseph Duffey, the director of the U.S. Information Agency, with regard to the very systematic and deep study that was engaged in; and here it is, two volumes by the panel, that we in this Congress created in 1994 to look at this issue. Mr. Duffey, the Director of the USIA, states in his letter to Congress: I hereby submit my findings and recommendations regarding the report of the advisory panel on Radio Marti and Television Marti, specifically with regard to Television Marti, which is what today the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Skaggs] seeks to kill. Other times, very often, he has sought to kill Radio Marti as well.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, that is not correct, I have not misrepresented his position. At other times, the gentleman from Colorado has sought to kill both Radio and Television Marti. Today he is targeting Television Marti. Let us see what the report, after we spent the money to create this panel, let us see what the findings and recommendations were of Mr. Duffey of USIA with regard to the panel that we set up in this Congress and that we agreed to set up objectively and of distinguished membership. One, the best interests of the United States are being served by maintaining television broadcasting to Cuba. Two, maintaining television broadcasting to Cuba is technically sound and effective. Three, Television Marti broadcasting is consistently being received by a sufficient Cuban audience to warrant its continuation. This is the report of Mr. Duffey, findings and recommendations based on the panel created by Congress; and here are the two volumes. But, no, it is not enough for the gentleman from Colorado. Year after year after year my colleague rushes to this floor with his mission not to increase the receptivity, the reception, of Television Marti or Radio Marti for the Cuban people, not to ask Castro for elections, not to ask Castro to permit the Cuban people to get news, but to kill this program, which is meant to get objective news to the Cuban people. That is the reality of the effort year after year after year by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Skaggs]. During the height of the cold war, Mr. Chairman, during the height of the cold war, at times the Soviets were able to achieve 97, 98, 99 percent effectiveness in their blocking of Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe. What would have been the position, what would have happened if the attitude maintained by our distinguished colleague from Colorado would have prevailed at that time in Congress? Oh, the Soviet Union is jamming Radio Free Europe. The Soviet Union is achieving 99 percent jamming of Radio Liberty. So we will throw in the towel, we will give up. As my colleague even mentioned, we are in the midst, Mr. Chairman, of going to UHF, which will increase receptivity. But my point is this, we will go to UHF and we will increase receptivity despite the fact that Mr. Duffey, his recommendations, and pursuant to this two-volume report, I have mentioned they are clear enough with regard to the viability of the existing program of Television Marti. But I maintain the following: The American thing to do is, if we do not increase receptivity sufficiently by the steps that we are taking now, then we will take further steps. Just like Mr. Aristide's voice was able to get to the Haitian people because they flew a C-130, we will do that with Cuba. We will not throw in the towel. We will not surrender. That is not the American way. Approve my amendment and defeat the amendment of the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Skaggs].

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fox].

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

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

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman], the distinguished chairman of the Committee on International Relations. (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], the chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes 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, H.R. 159 provides for the consideration of two bills dealing with foreign policy reform. The first bill, H.R. 1757, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, fiscal years 1998 and 1999, is to be considered under an open rule providing for 1 hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled between the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on International Relations. The rule further provides for consideration of the bill for amendment under the 5-minute rule, considering the bill by title rather than by section, and each title shall be considered as read. Also, under this open rule, in which any Member will be free to offer germane amendments, the chairman of the Committee of the Whole is allowed to postpone votes during consideration of the bill and to reduce votes to 5 minutes on a postponed question if the vote follows a 15-minute vote. In addition, this portion of the rule provides for one motion to recommit H.R. 1757, with or without instructions. The rule also provides, in section 2, Mr. Speaker, for consideration by the House of a second bill, H.R. 1758, the European Security Act of 1997, under a closed rule providing for 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on International Relations. Further, the rule provides for one motion to recommit H.R. 1758. Finally, section 3 of the rule provides that in the engrossment of H.R. 1757, the Clerk shall await the disposition of H.R. 1758, pursuant to section 2 of the rule; the Clerk shall add the text of H.R. 1758, as passed by the House, as a new matter at the end of H.R. 1757; and make conforming and designation changes to the titles within engrossment. Lastly, the rule provides that upon the addition of the text of H.R. 1758 to the engrossment of H.R. 1757, H.R. 1758 shall be laid on the table. I would like to note that this rule is the best compromise available for dealing with the myriad of issues that are before us in foreign policy reform legislation in an orderly fashion. Our committee heard testimony from over two dozen Members on a variety of subjects, with a wide range of views, and their testimony was not in vain. The State Department portion of H.R. 1486 is essentially H.R. 1757, the first bill provided for in this rule. The rule will enable any Member wishing to amend the reauthorization of the State Department the ability to do so under an open rule amending process. H.R. 1758 is essentially the amendment filed with the Committee on Rules back on May 13, when the committee announced that Members should submit amendments for a possible structured rule. Chairman Gilman filed this language, which was amendment No. 85, which concerns NATO expansion, a critically important piece of legislation. Just as in the amendment filed by Chairman Gilman, the bill is entitled the ``European Security Act of 1997.'' As for the portions of H.R. 1486 dealing with the remaining foreign policy issues, for which we also heard testimony on Tuesday, the Committee on Rules will meet in the near future to mark up and grant a rule to consider those important matters. This rule, Mr. Speaker, is not without precedent. In the 103d Congress, the Committee on Rules split the issue and considered a State Department bill and a foreign aid bill, given the complex nature of the issues and the difficulty in passing these proposals. This was done under Chairman Hamilton, and both bills were considered under a structured rule. I look forward to a vigorous debate on these bills and fully support the rule that makes them both possible. The State Department authorization bill, Mr. Speaker, contains very important reforms. It includes reporting requirements for title 4 under the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act. It makes sure that enforcement is actually carried out on that very important piece of legislation. It also has provisions to make extraordinarily difficult assistance for completion by the Cuban dictator of the nuclear powerplants that he is trying to complete in obvious contravention in the national security interests of the United States. Obviously, the European Security Act of 1997 is also extraordinarily important, and I think that it is very, very appropriate that Congress is moving forward at this point on that very, very important and delicate piece of legislation. I would urge adoption of H.R. 159. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier], a distinguished member of the Committee on Rules. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Speaker, this Independence Day for the Republic of Cuba, May 20, finds the Cuban people still bound and gagged, more than by a Marxist-Leninist, and some have called him a fascist; more than by totalitarianism of those natures, by an Al Caponist, in his essence a gangster, an extortionist who is seeking the almighty dollar at all costs and in all ways. My community was deeply moved, Madam Speaker, last week when the news, and actually the video taken by the Brothers to the Rescue when they passed over a rock in the Caribbean that belongs to the Bahamas, appropriately named Dog Rock, and we saw a family there, actually it was a group of 14 Cuban refugees, one of them, Rolando Martinez Montoya, a pro-democracy activist, opposition leader and independent journalist. He had been given a visa by the United States to leave with his family in 1995. However, despite the agreement between the Castro dictatorship and our Government, when the Castro dictatorship, every time it wants it, it simply ignores that agreement, and even though his family had been given a visa by the United States to come to our country, the Castro regime simply ignored the visas and did not let them out. So he in desperation took his wife and four daughters to sea, and they landed on Dog Rock; and we saw last week how Adianet, the 11-year- old daughter of Rolando, died of exposure and lack of water and food on Dog Rock and how his youngest daughter, Camila, 4 years old, also died on Dog Rock. So that is where the Cuban people find themselves on this Independence Day, having to flee in that type of desperation from a 38- year-old tyranny led by an Al Caponist madman. We would expect, would we not, Madam Speaker, that the press and the international media might have had the sensitivity to cover the story of the 14 Cuban refugees last week, some of whom died on Dog Rock. No, I did not see a single story on our networks, national or international. What I do see is this week, interestingly, there seems a be a little campaign about visit the exotic islands. If we look at this week's U.S. News and World Report whose owner, of course, Mr. Zuckerman, is looking for a deal at a ferocious pace from the tyrant, you will see News You Can Use: Hemingway's Cuba. Go to the mojito at the Hemingway Marina. Smoke a Cuban cigar. The Washington Post, on May 18: Return to a forbidden island. Also, about how Americans can go and visit the exotic nature of the forbidden islands. The story of Cuba, the story of the discrimination, of the degradation, of the apartheid system imposed by the tyrant on the Cuban people, anyone who does not have access to dollars or is not a member of the hierarchy of the regime, is not a tourist, does not have access to the luxurious restaurants and hotels and the health care centers that are hard cash generators for the dictatorship, but we do not read about that. No. We read about return to the forbidden islands and Hemingway's Cuba. Madam Speaker, I would insert into the Record these infamous stories at the time, at the time that the real story of Cuba is the suffering of its people, the agony of its people, the fact that its people have to seek refuge, even by going to sea, risking the lives of little children, and many of them actually die. That is the real story of Cuba that because of some unwritten conspiracy of silence is simply not reported by the media. That is what we are facing. But the reality of the matter is that despite the little campaign of visit the exotic islands and another little campaign that is going on, interestingly enough, supposedly, we are supposed to have, according to another little campaign, a prohibition on the sales of medicines to Cuba when our law says, the Cuban Democracy Act that this Congress passed, said that we can sell, American pharmaceutical companies can sell medicines to Cuba as long as the medicines are not used for torture and are not used for reexport. So, Madam Speaker, we will continue talking about this. It is a dreadful situation, the situation the Cuban people are faced with, but we are going to stand firm, we are going to stand with the Cuban people, and we are not going to lose sight of our objectives. The American people will continue to stand with the Cuban people until the Cuban people are free. Madam Speaker, I include the following newspaper articles for the Record: [From the Washington Post, May 18, 1997] Return to a Forbidden Island: In Impoverished Cuba, Nothing--and Everything--Has Changed (By Elinor Lander Horwitz) Maritza smiles wistfully and passes her tongue slowly over her lips. ``The '52's and '53's are best,'' she says. ``Fifty-four was not so good a year, but '55--it was really excellent.'' She's not talking wine: She's talking Chevrolets. Parked randomly along a street near the Plaza de Armas in Havana's old city, where she has taken me sightseeing, is a particularly dense grouping of 40- to 50-year-old American cars, predominantly Chevrolets plus one Dodge, an Oldsmobile, a Buick and a Plymouth. These are not rich people's collectibles. They are poor people's means of transportation. Maritza, a Cuban woman whom a friend had urged me to contact, casts a connoisseur's eye on a red-and-white, wide-finned 1953 relic parked next to her midget 1972 Polish-made Fiat. How in the world do the owners get replacement parts? She laughs at my simple-minded question. ``We make them, we improvise,'' she says. ``Cubans are very good mechanics.'' I feel caught in a time warp. The decaying Chevys--the very ones I might have seen hot off the assembly line more than four decades ago--suddenly take on the status of metaphor for the once elegant, now deteriorating city. This is the second visit my husband, Norman, and I have made to Havana. The first, a few years before the 1950 revolution, was on our honeymoon. I was a college student-bride who longed to go abroad, and Havana was the only patch of abroad we could afford. And it was so easy to get there! This time we arrived via three tedious flights: Washington to Miami, Miami to Nassau, and Nassau to Havana. With long waits in between. We carried impeccable visas and letters from the U.S. Treasury Department and our sponsoring organization verifying our permission to visit (there are severe restrictions for U.S. citizens trying to travel to Cuba). Norman, a neurosurgeon, was coming as a volunteer with an international relief agency in a program it runs jointly with the Cuban Ministry of Health. He would spend a week conferring with colleagues, examining patients, teaching interns and residents, and presenting research material. I was licensed to tag along. Earlier participants in the program had given us the names of people they'd met here, which is how I came to know Maritza and a number of other engaging Habaneros. We had always hoped to return to Havana and, according to the laminated Cubana Airlines boarding pass I handed over as I boarded the flimsy-looking old Russian plane in Nassau, the feeling was mutual. ``Cuba te espera,'' it said in decorative script. ``Cuba is waiting for you.'' The bright yellow card was decorated with three red hearts. The 1950s Cuba, under the repressive rule of Fulgencio Batisa, had plenty to offer American tourists. It was romantic, and it was glossy! Most people stayed in the pricey and glamorous Hotel Nacional, with its luxurious accommodations, highly regarded dining room and nightclub, and private talcum powder beach. We stayed at the Ambos Mundos on Obispo Street, in the heart of Old Havana. Hemingway, still very much alive when we first visited the island, had lived in the Ambos Mundos while writing-- depending on your informant--either ``A Farewell to Arms'' or ``For Whom the Bell Tolls.'' We ogled the room he had occupied, dined at the rooftop restaurant where he had often dined, and drank daiquiris at the Floridita, which we were assured was his favorite bar. When we had dinner at a sidewalk cafe, ragged children came up to the table and begged for the bread on our table. We gave them that and pesos and smiles, and we told each other it was wrong to be having such a good time in a country where so many lived in unconscionable splendor while others didn't have enough to eat. And then a man with a guitar strolled over to our table and began to sing while we held hands across the table and blissfully dug into dinner. Maritza is amused by my honeymoon tales. First stop on our 1996 tour is the Ambos Mundos. The hotel was closed for many years and has been in the process of renovation for many more. The place is entirely gutted and a man on the ground is sending a small bucket of plaster up to the fifth floor on a pulley-and-rope contraption. A pamphlet I've picked up says that you can learn about the life of Ernest Hemingway by staying there. ``Ambos Mundos Hotel will open up in summer 1996 with 53 rooms of which 4 suites,'' it promises, but it is now fall, and it still looks like it's going to be a while. Nearby, in the palace occupied by Batista way back then, is the Museo de la Revolution. There are photographs of the rebels in the mountains, bloody shirts and pants, canteens, rifles, the engine of an American plane shot down over the Bay of Pigs, and other mementos of turbulent times. One display titled in English ``The Hall of Cretins,'' features huge, cartoonist figures of Batista in military garb, Ronald Reagan dressed as a cowboy and George Bush dressed as a Roman senator. Above the figure of Reagan, the caption says, ``Thank you cretin for strengthening the Revolution.'' Bush's caption is, ``Thank you cretin for consolidating the Revolution.'' In the nearby Plaza de la Catedral, craftspeople hawk costume jewelry, maracas, woodcarvings and other knickknack. Che Guevara's face appears on key rings, ashtrays and T- shirts. Why doesn't Castro's face appear on T-shirts and key rings? I ask Maritza. ``It wouldn't be respectful,'' she says and it's impossible to determine whether her inflection is dead serious or mocking. I am trying hard to recapture the city I remember. One afternoon Norman and I journey uptown to peek furtively into the splendidly titled lobby of the Hotel Nacional, fearful of being accosted and asked whether we are paying guests. (Reopened and refurbished after years of being shut down, the hotel is as handsome and crowded as ever.) We gape at the splendid Spanish colonial mansions on the tree-lined avenues of the Vedado and Miramar districts. And then we retreat to the colorful narrow streets and shady squares of Old Havana, where we remember Cubans strolling, singing aloud. Our memories of this are so vivid, it must have been true, although there is no evidence of such today. West of Old Havana is the Vedado neighborhood and our hotel, the Victoria, which is across the street from a row of picturesquely decaying Spanish colonial mansions, now occupied by many poor families. Up close, things aren't quite so picturesque. Laundry hangs from the windows, balusters are missing from the galleried rooftops, stairs are broken, garden statues are headless, yards are littered with trash. Nothing has been painted or repaired in decades. And venturing out at night onto the darkened, crumbling sidewalks and streets--where hordes of bikes without lights scoot by-- is dangerous whether or not you encounter the street crime everyone warns about (we didn't). Tourism has been revived in Havana, and crowds of Europeans, Asians, South Americans, Canadians and a much smaller number of Americans can be seen in the more celebrated restaurants. There is the luxurious new Melia Cohiba hotel, a joint venture between Cuba and Spain; much talk of further foreign investment in tourism; and work is going on around the clock on a new airport. Baseball games and performances by the excellent national ballet company provide stimulating entertainment, yet information about schedules is difficult to glean. Restaurant food ranges from so-so to bad. The Cubans we invited to dine with us all chose paladares--the small, often-excellent restaurants families are now permitted to run in their own apartments. Families licensed to establish a paladar may set up no more than 12 chairs, arranged in whatever grouping of tables they prefer. Some paladares have signs, but most are known only through word of mouth. You ring a doorbell and enter a lobby, push the button for the proper floor and walk into someone's living room, where tables are prettily set and family members graciously rush to serve you. At one paladar, we are seated on a breezy balcony, overlooking the water. At another, a particularly pleasant three-course dinner with assorted tasty appetizers set up on a small buffet table, a roast lamb entree and dessert of a rich fig pudding costs $12 a person, including beer and coffee. These paladares, named for a family-run restaurant dubbed Paladar in a popular Brazilian TV sitcom, are one of the few forms of self-employment now permitted in Cuba. Since they accept payment only in U.S. dollars, paladar owners have the means to buy a wide range of foods at the hard currency stores. The Hemingway shtick is still going strong here. Several restaurants and bars in the old city claim to have been his favorite. One of these, the tiny, crowded La Bodeguita del Medio, a block from the cathedral, still has ambiance aplenty. Since the 1920s, customers have carved their names on wood paneling, and there's no more space. Above the bar is a blow-up of a scrawled message by the great man himself. ``The best mojitos are at the Bodeguita,'' it reads. ``The best daiquiris at the Floridita, Ernest Hemingway.'' Squeezed into a corner, in full view of this snippet of immortal prose, we order a mojito. It arrives in a tall glass, jammed with what appears to be seaweed but is, in fact, very soggy mint, and filled with a watery rum, lemon and sugar mixture. An undistinguished meal is tossed at us irritably. It is almost heartening to find that there still are tourist traps in Havana. Just about everything is in short supply in this underdeveloped island country. Everyone is short of soap, and I lift a few tiny bars from the hotel maid's cart and pass them along to my new friends. All food is rationed. Staples-- rice and beans--are cheap and abundant, although milk is available only for children under 7. At the Hotel Victoria, the milk is made from powder and manages to be foamy and lumpy at the same time. Meat, chicken and fish are not generally available, and at the time of our visit, the egg ration was seven a month. Each person is permitted one piece of bread a day. Cubans call this is a periodo especial, a special period that dates from the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the sudden cessation of what had been lavish subsidies. Gas, electricity, public transportation--all are in very short supply. When the periodic blackouts occur, not only the lights go out, but also the water, which is pumped by electricity. The glittering and bustling tropical city I remember is a drab and quiet place today. For decades, there has been no money to maintain buildings and streets. Automotive traffic is light at all times. Gas, at $4 a gallon, is too experience for most Cubans, who earn on average $12 to $15 a month. I ask a highly placed government official what he hopes, expects, fears the future will bring if Castro, now a fit- looking 70-year-old, retires? He laughs at the notion of retirement. ``When Fidel dies,'' he says, ``people won't be ready for raw capitalism. That's certain. They think they want more free enterprise, but they are too accustomed to free education and health care to ever give that up. It will be some sort of socialism. ``Don't misunderstand,'' he adds, when I ask about the one piece of bread a day. ``Things here are difficult now, but there is absolutely no question that life under Batista was far worse for most Cubans. What you have to recognize is this: Cuba has always had one corrupt form of government or another.'' While we are in Havana, everyone is talking about the International Trade Fair, an annual event that showcases products from countries worldwide (72 of them at this fair). Finally, I decide to go to the new exposition grounds outside the city with Robrto, a translator for the medical program that brought us to Cuba. The fair is jammed with people. Cuba is displaying pharmaceuticals, rum and cigars, and there are sparkling new cars from Japan and France, shoes from Italy, tablecloths from Mexico, furniture from Canada and children's clothing from Panama. As Roberto seats himself longingly behind the wheel of a shiny little yellow Fiat mounted on a revolving stand, may eyes falls on an Argentinean food exporter's display of Oreo cookies, Ritz crackers, Libby's Vienna Sausages, Wrigley gum, M&M candies, Kellogg's Frosted Flakes and Froot Loops. Will Cuban children get to eat Froot Loops despite the U.S. embargo? Roberto rolls his eyes, but declines further comment. I buy lunch at a sunbaked outdoor cafe, and we dine greedily on a cholesterol nightmare of fried chicken, french fries, beer and ice cream. Four musicians--two guitar players, a man on a bongo drum and another on maracas-- suddenly appear at my elbow, grinning with mock flirtatiousness and breaking into the songs their fathers sang to diners in the cafes of Obispo Street in the 1950s: ``Besame Mucho'' and ``Perfidia.'' I am overcome with nostalgia and tip generously, and they repeat the two songs over and over. And then, with almost manic zest, they break into a long song about Che Guevara. The next day, at the airport gate, waiting hours for our return flight, we Americans--doctors, missionaries, journalists--exchange stories about the charm of the people we've met and the hardships we've witnessed. No one has answers. The airport's air conditioning has been turned off to save electricity. Everyone is hot and avid to leave. But everyone wants to return ``someday.'' ``Bring soap,'' we remind each other. ``next time don't forget to bring everyone a few bars of soap.''

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, has the Chair made inquiry as to whether or not there is a Member who will rise in opposition?

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my distinguished colleague from south Florida [Ms. Ros-Lehtinen].

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. One of the cases that has most impacted me in the last months as I have looked toward August and the impending cutoff of SSI to legal, taxpaying immigrants is the case of Guido Diaz. Guido Diaz was a political prisoner for years in Castro's gulags, beaten daily as a prisoner of conscience. Finally, he managed to get out of the totalitarian nightmare that today is Cuba and arrive in the United States. Shortly after, apparently the cumulative effect of the daily beatings caused a stroke, a massive stroke for Guido Diaz, and he is in a wheelchair. He is incognizant, and as much as I am sure that he would love to become a citizen of this great country, he cannot do so. What we are doing today, Mr. Chairman, is making sure that the Guido Diazes who fell through the cracks in the reform that was implemented just some months ago are saved, and that those legal immigrants in the United States who cannot become citizens will not be cut off, those who were here legally in August of 1996. I commend my colleagues for their support and urge all of my colleagues to join in supporting this bipartisan amendment.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Mrs. Johnson], a distinguished member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Shaw], someone who has been instrumental in the area not only of welfare reform, but in precisely trying to formulate a solution to the problem that we are dealing with today and who was instrumental in making this, permitting this, amendment to come to the floor in the consensus fashion that it has. As I say, it is very much a part of the negotiations to find a humane and definitive solution to the very, very serious problem that brings us to the floor at this point.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this amendment, which is cosponsored by my dear colleagues, the gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Meek], as well as the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Shaw], the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Ros-Lehtinen], and the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Kennedy] obviously is a bipartisan effort which parallels very exactly the companion language that was passed in the Senate with 89 votes just a few days ago, language in the Senate that was submitted by Senators D'Amato and Chafee and DeWine and others, and it would restore vital supplemental security income, SSI, assistance to legal taxpaying immigrants for a 6-week period to allow time for details of the budget agreement to be finalized which will lead to a more long-term solution, Mr. Chairman. That in essence is the explanation of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee on Rules for the time. Mr. Speaker, I think it is known how strongly I feel about the right of legal, taxpaying immigrants in this country to be treated in a nondiscriminatory way with regard to the receipt of programs, the eligibility for programs as essential as Supplemental Security Income. I am very pleased that the Committee on Rules has made in order an amendment, with the support obviously of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] but also the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Moakley], the ranking Member, and the support of the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, and the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], the ranking member, an amendment to restore for the duration of the fiscal year the eligibility of legal immigrants in the United States to receive Supplemental Security Income. We owe a very special debt, Mr. Speaker, of gratitude to the gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Meek] for fighting so eloquently, so selflessly and yet so tenaciously on behalf of this very vulnerable population that this amendment addresses. There are also a number of Members who have distinguished themselves for a long period of time fighting for this issue on behalf of this issue, on behalf of this very vulnerable population. This amendment would not have been possible were it not for the leadership and concern of the gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Meek], as I have mentioned, the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Ros-Lehtinen], and the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Kennedy] and others. I want to make a special recognition as well of the cosponsorship of this amendment and of the leadership and the critical support of the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Shaw]. He has been instrumental in making this amendment in order, in facilitating the process moving forward, and I wanted to publicly thank him as well for his cosponsorship and, as I say, his leadership. So I am very encouraged that this amendment did not receive any verbal opposition at all in the Senate. It was passed overwhelmingly with 89 votes in the Senate. I look forward to a similar degree of support on a bipartisan basis in this House. I would hope that as contentious issues such as the CR question and others are debated, that issues such as those do not create a situation where a vulnerable population such as the legal immigrants of this country who are facing not a natural disaster, not a disaster by act of God, but rather by act of man, can be reassured today that they will be taken care of as the budget process takes place and a final solution is worked, a final resolution of this issue is developed for their tranquility and their benefit. Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers on the rule.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 127 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Slaughter], pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, Mr. Speaker, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 127 is an open rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 1274, the National Institute of Standards Technology Authorization Act of 1997. The purpose of the legislation is to authorize appropriations for the National Institute of Standards and Technology for fiscal years 1998 and 1999. House Resolution 127 waives points of order against the consideration of the bill for failure to comply with the 3 day availability of committee reports rule. In addition the rule provides for 1 hour of general debate, to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Science. After general debate, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science now printed in the bill. Each section shall be considered as read. Further, the Chair would be authorized to grant priority in recognition to Members who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional Record, and the rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, the National Institute of Standards and Technology is the Nation's oldest Federal laboratory, serving as the Nation's dispute arbiter of standards in complex technologies. I look forward to an open and full debate and will defer to the Committee on Science for an indepth explanation as to the bill's merits and complexities. The Committee on Rules' hearing on this bill was extremely cordial and bipartisan, which I believe is an accurate reflection of the manner in which the Committee on Science handled this legislation. Mr. Speaker, the rule before us, I believe, is an exemplary rule, it is fair, it is completely open, and I would urge its adoption. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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 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 126 and ask for its immediate consideration.