Eliot Engel

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In closing, as you have heard from everyone who has spoken, the recent surge of Palestinian violence against Israel must stop. It must stop to save innocent lives. It must stop so that negotiations can go forward. It must stop because acts of terrorism are not to be tolerated. Any way you look at it, these are terrorist acts, and the only way we can have peace and the only way we can have a two-state solution is if both parties sit opposite each other, with no preconditions, and start negotiating. I do support a two-state solution--a Palestinian Arab state and an Israeli Jewish state--living together in peace and harmony; but it is not going to happen if the Palestinian leadership, which is bankrupt in more ways than one, refuses to teach its people the right thing, if it refuses to repudiate acts of terror. Mahmoud Abbas, or Abu Mazen--the leader of the Palestinians--is, I think, on the eighth year of his 4-year term. He is not really legitimate anymore. The more he talks with rhetoric and incitement, the less relevant he becomes. It is really a shame because I do think that the Palestinians deserve better and I do think that, ultimately, they deserve their own state; but they will not have their own state if they resort to terror. It is bankrupt, and it is a dead end for them. Instead of encouraging these kinds of acts of terror against innocent civilians, the leadership of the Palestinians ought to be dismissing it, ought to be condemning it, ought to be taking strong stands against it. We have yet to hear, and that is why this resolution is so important. This resolution sends the signal that Palestinian leaders have a responsibility to repudiate this violence and put an end to the horrific campaign of incitement against Jews and Israelis. Everyone who spoke today is saying the same thing. We are saying the same thing because it is clear as night and day what is going on over there. So I urge all of my colleagues to support this measure. The United States will always stand with the people of Israel, and the United States will always stand against violence and terrorism wherever it rears its head around the world. I again thank my good friend, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, for her leadership and Mr. Deutch for his leadership as well. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutch), the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of this measure. Let me start by thanking our former chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, for sponsoring this resolution. I agree with every word she just said. She has been a good friend to the state and people of Israel, and this measure, which I am happy to cosponsor, shows once again that support for Israel in Congress is not a partisan issue. Israel has much bipartisan support in this Congress, and we intend to keep it this way. As the Congresswoman has mentioned, the violence in Israel has gone from bad to worse in recent days. Day after day, we hear new reports of innocent Israeli victims of stabbings or shootings at the hands of Palestinian terrorists. I use the word ``terrorist,'' Mr. Speaker, because what they are doing are acts of terrorism. If random people, average citizens, have nothing to do with policy, have nothing to do with politics--they are just civilians that are walking in the street--if they are attacked by a knife or something else that harms them, that is a terrorist attack. Imagine if we had such things going on in the United States. It would have a chilling effect on what people can do, and whether they can move around or can't move around as a result of it. So this is not something that is random. It is not something that is confined. It can strike anybody at any time, any place, and it is terrorism. I have often said that while I support a two-state solution, if the Palestinians continue to use terrorism because they think it will get them closer to their state, they are wrong. It will prevent them from ever having a state if they don't renounce terrorism. That is what this is all about. It is the incitement. It is the encouraging of hatred for Israelis and the Jews and for the United States as well. This goes on time and time and time again, and then we wonder why we have these acts of violence, because you cannot fan the fires and be a leader in it and then suddenly look the other way and say, ``Well, you know, we are not encouraging it.'' The Palestinian Authority has been irresponsible, and they have been irresponsible for many, many years. So, as it has every right to do, Israel has defended itself against these attacks, these stabbings and shootings. But this bloodshed must be brought to an end. I have no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that it could be in a hurry if Palestinian leaders would do the right thing: repudiate the violence and, most importantly, the ceaseless campaign of incitement that demonizes Jews and Israelis and glorifies terrorists. Chairman Royce and I will soon send a bipartisan letter signed by more than 350 of our colleagues in both parties. I am very, very happy with the overwhelming support we have gotten from our colleagues on both sides of the aisle for this letter. That is why Chairman Royce and I try to do things in a bipartisan manner: because something like this is bipartisan; support for Israel is bipartisan; support against terror is bipartisan. We have to stand together as Americans, regardless of party affiliation, and say: we will not countenance terror. And we are going to point fingers at the Palestinian Authority, who has been utterly irresponsible in this whole thing. So if Palestinian leaders would do the right thing and repudiate the violence and, most importantly, end the ceaseless campaign of incitement that demonizes Jews and Israelis and glorifies terrorists, this could stop. This letter that Chairman Royce and I have done, signed by more than 350 of our colleagues, to Palestinian President Abbas urges him to take that course, but I cannot say that I have high hopes. After all, this type of rhetoric by Palestinians against Jews and Israelis and even just Americans, in general, is nothing new. In Palestinian books and newspapers, on the television and radio, we see and hear a constant message of hatred and incitement. From a young age, Palestinians are taught that the people of Israel are their enemies and those who use violence are heroes, and this is very, very infuriating. It is the fuel that fires the violence we are seeing today, and it is a roadblock, as I said before, on the path towards a two-state solution. Palestinians will never build their own state on the backs of terrorists. It is a dead end for them, and it is counterproductive. They ought to know it. They are doing their people a tremendous disservice. This resolution calls on Palestinian leaders to show real responsibility to reject the violence and end incitement and to return to the negotiating table with no preconditions, sit down and negotiate. It reaffirms our commitment to our Israeli allies and our desire to see peace for both Israelis and Palestinians. I urge my colleagues to support this measure. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in support of this measure. Mr. Speaker, I want to also thank Mr. Salmon from Arizona, who chairs our Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, for authoring this bill. I am proud to be a cosponsor. The International Criminal Police Organization, what we call INTERPOL, helps law enforcement agencies around the world collaborate with one another. Thanks to INTERPOL, a task force in New York can share information with a police agency in Hamburg or flag a terrorist suspect for authorities in Tokyo. Sensitive information about criminals or missing persons is available at the push of a button for INTERPOL's members. For decades, it has been a vital tool for global security. Until 1984, Taiwan was a member of INTERPOL; but since the People's Republic of China applied for membership, Taiwan has been left out. This is ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous. Taiwan has the 16th or 17th largest economy in the world. And anyone who has ever been to Taiwan, as I have and as my colleague has, will just be amazed at the democracy they have built themselves on that tiny island. The fact is that they look to the United States for protecting them and helping them. Because just like we share the same values with Israel, we share the same values with Taiwan, and that is why we work with them. Taiwan has been left out, and this gap in INTERPOL's membership creates a public safety risk for the people of Taiwan and also for the rest of the world. So nobody is saying that China should not be a member, but China should not have the right to exclude Taiwan. This legislation would close that gap. It would instruct the administration to push for Taiwan to be granted observer status in INTERPOL. Observer status, that is what we are asking for. There are countries around the world that function as countries, that have everything that all other countries have, and yet, because of politics, they are excluded from these international organizations. Taiwan is one such country. Kosovo is another type of country. We have to stop this. People that live in these countries need to not bear the brunt of politics, but really need the protections that citizens of other countries have. By our not giving them the protections, we leave ourselves a bit unprotected as well. So this legislation would instruct the administration to push for Taiwan to be granted observer status in INTERPOL. As an observer, Taiwan would have access to the information that law enforcement agencies already have. It would also allow Taiwan to contribute information to INTERPOL, information that could be used to stop crime or thwart terrorist activity, arrest human traffickers, or sideline other bad actors. Good precedent exists for giving Taiwan this status. Taiwan is an observer in the World Health Assembly, where it has played a vital role in contributing to public health and fighting pandemic disease. In fact, Taiwan has repeatedly shown itself to be a constructive, positive force in the global community. Countries around the world stand to benefit from Taiwan's inclusion in international organizations like INTERPOL. So not only does Taiwan benefit, but the rest of the world benefits. It is a no-brainer. It is a win-win situation for everybody. I support this legislation wholeheartedly. I urge my colleagues to do the same. I thank my colleague from Florida, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and the chairman from California, Ed Royce. Again, we are all in this together. This is great bipartisan legislation of the Foreign Affairs Committee. It is important for Taiwan and important for the United States. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), my good friend and the ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in support of this measure. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Royce, again, for being on top of all these very important issues. Under his leadership, the Foreign Affairs Committee has really taken the lead on important issues such as this. I want to also thank Mr. Smith from New Jersey for sponsoring this resolution. As the chair of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations, Chris Smith has been focused on the disturbing surge of anti-Semitism in Europe. He is always there. He always speaks out forcefully about anti-Semitism and other things that are important to him. I am grateful for his leadership. It is disappointing that we still need to take up this sort of measure. As we all know, anti-Semitism, that ancient hatred, has continued smoldering through the centuries. Week after week, we hear reports of new anti-Semitic attacks: the vandalism of the Babi Yar Holocaust site in Kiev--I have been there a number of times. It is very disheartening that that would be desecrated--the targeting of the Great Synagogue in Copenhagen; and, of course, the unfathomable attack, as Chairman Royce mentioned, in Paris last January. We would be foolish to dismiss this surge in anti-Semitism as the work of violent, fringe individuals. In countries like Hungary and Greece, shamefully, we see explicitly anti-Semitic political parties winning seats and elections. It is deeply troubling, very disturbing. It wasn't even a century ago that we heard this canary in the coal mine. You can draw a straight line from early indifference and inaction to the darkest chapter in human history. The lessons of the Holocaust are seared in our collective consciousness. Those lessons are telling us to throw water on this fire before it burns out of control. I was born after World War II in New York, and I remember hearing family members talking about anti-Semitism. The general prevailing thought was, well, this is something that will never happen again, that the Holocaust was so horrific that world humanity would understand that something like this could never happen again. When I say ``never happen again,'' I mean to any group--not just to Jewish groups, to any group. This cannot be tolerated, and one has to just look around the world to see all the hatred and all the people who are being slaughtered because of who they are or what tribe they are from or what people they are from. It is particularly galling in Europe, where so many people--6 million Jewish people--perished during the Holocaust, that anti-Semitism would rear its ugly head again. One would think that people would be ashamed and would not want to go down the anti-Semitic path again. Here it is, barely 70 years after the end of World War II, and we see an alarming rise. And it is an alarming rise from a lot of different communities. There are skinheads and people who have always uttered anti-Semitic remarks. We also, unfortunately, have a number of people living in Europe of Middle Eastern descent who also are using the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians to, again, fan the fires of anti-Semitic hatred. As the numbers of people from Arab lands go to Europe, some, unfortunately, are fanning the fires of anti-Semitism. That has to be condemned and stopped as well. Anti-Semitism needs to be condemned no matter who is espousing it, no matter where it is coming from, and no matter what they are saying. It is really time to call it the way it is. So we need greater vigilance by law enforcement when Jewish communities in Europe are under threat. But it is not that simple. We also need greater leadership from officials by speaking out against anti-Semitism. We had a bill just a couple of hours ago--maybe not even a couple of hours ago--which talked about the Palestinian leadership not condemning anti-Semitism and having incitement of things that result in anti-Semitic attacks. So this is the same thing. It is the same thing, whether it is in Europe or the Middle East. It is rearing its ugly head, and it is time for us to continue to speak out against it. The United States of America has always been the bastion of society, and the world looks to us for leadership. I think it is very important that the United States Congress is doing this now. So we need greater vigilance by law enforcement when Jewish communities in Europe are under threat, but it is not that simple. We also need greater leadership from officials by speaking out against anti-Semitism. We need stronger partnerships with Jewish communities to help them develop their own safety responses, community policing techniques, and information sharing with government agencies. We need to foster cultures that respect diversity and don't ostracize minority groups. I condemn any kind of ostracizing of any minority group in this country or around the world. We need to step in and say that we will not tolerate it. So this resolution encourages these efforts, and I encourage my colleagues to support it. Anti-Semitism is rearing its ugly head, but it can be defeated. I think what the Congress is doing today is a very good step in that direction. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 597, as amended. It is mystifying to me why there is such vociferous opposition to the Export-Import Bank among a majority of our Republican colleagues. For decades, a solid majority of Republicans have joined with Democrats to support the Bank and its vital role in creating and sustaining jobs for American workers. But not now. Why? The Export-Import Bank should appeal to all Republicans, as it does to us Democrats. The Bank supports the American private sector, both exporters and lenders. It steps in only when needed to level the playing field in international competition. Virtually all of its financing is issued as guarantees and insurance of loans by commercial lenders. It finances only American-made goods and American-provided services. Some 90 percent of its financing is for exports by American small businesses, last year some 3,300 firms. The result last year was 164,000 jobs for American workers, 6,500 in New York. What could be more business- friendly? The Bank should appeal to fiscal conservatives as well. It is operated on a business-like basis. It charges fees, premiums and interest, at full market rates. Those receipts fully cover all the Bank's expenses. It even generates a surplus that goes to the U.S. Treasury to reduce the federal deficit. Last year, that deficit reduction was $675 million. What could be more fiscally prudent? The Bank is a careful lender. Its loss rate is below 2 percent, far lower than any commercial bank. The Bank maintains cash reserves against the risk of loss, currently amounting to $5 billion. All of those reserves are generated from its user fees, not the taxpayer. Why doesn't that record appeal to Republicans, as it does to Democrats? The Bank is a fiscally-prudent solution to a real-world problem: foreign competition that has its own financial support. Some 60 foreign governments operate export finance programs. Some, like China's, Japan's, Germany's and even Canada's, are much larger than Ex-Im. Financing is a crucial element of trade competition: a company that can bring customer financing to the table often wins the transaction. When foreign governments back their exporters, American exporters and their workers lose. Ex-Im Bank is our answer. So I simply cannot understand why a majority of Republicans in this House forced the Bank to close its financing window in July. It can't be due to subsidy, because there isn't any. It can't be due to government competition with the private sector, because the Bank doesn't do that. It can't be for any budgetary reason, because the Bank is self-financing. For those of us who support Ex-Im Bank and the American firms and workers that the Bank sustains, the only conclusion we can draw is that the excessive campaign against Ex-Im Bank is another example of hard- bitten, intransigent ideology eclipsing the need to embrace a business- friendly, budget-conscious, prudent program for America.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a spiritual leader in the New Rochelle community, Reverend Dr. Paul Allen Weaver, who for 35 years has led the Bethesda Baptist Church of New Rochelle congregation with great distinction and remarkable integrity. Originally from Orlando, Florida, Reverend Weaver answered the call to join the ministry at age 17. He graduated from Florida Memorial University in 1969 with a B.S. in Religious Education, and graduated with his Masters of Divinity Degree in 1972. In July 1980, Reverend Weaver came to New Rochelle as Pastor of Bethesda Baptist, and began what has been an incredible multi-decade partnership with the community. During his formative years at Bethesda Baptist, Reverend Weaver helped institute many social programs to address the needs of the neighborhood. He created the Lad's Lunch Ministry, which fed over 100 people for over 25 years. Through the Helping Hand Ministry, the church was able to address the lack of adequate clothing for those less fortunate in the community. And the development of the Family Life Center as part of the church's 120th anniversary has created a beautiful community facility for thousands to enjoy. Reverend Weaver's list of accomplishments also extend beyond Bethesda Baptist. He has taught as an adjunct professor at New York Theological Seminary in New York, served as President of the prestigious Baptist Ministers Conference of Greater New York, and was President of the New Rochelle branch of the NAACP. But Reverend Weaver's greatest joy has always been derived from his family. He married the love of his life, Deacon Nettie J. Weaver, and together they have two sons, Allen and Cyrus-Charles, a daughter-in- law, Ijnanya, and one grandson, Noble Xavier Weaver. This year, Bethesda Baptist is holding a commemorative luncheon in Reverend Weaver's honor celebrating his 35 years as pastor. Congratulations to Reverend Weaver on this great honor.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, the city of Yonkers has been privileged for 85 years to be graced with strong community commitment from the Portuguese-American Community Center. With gratitude, it is an honor to congratulate them on their anniversary. The Center was inaugurated on October 5, 1930 under the name ``Clube Social Portugues.'' Originally, the ``Centro Social Portuguese-American Citizens & Yonkers Portuguese American Club'', the PACC dignified the lives of Portuguese immigrant families throughout Yonkers, weaving families into a strong community. On the 30th Anniversary of its founding, the Center settled on ``Portuguese American Community Center, Inc.'' Early in the club's existence, under the presidency of the Ambassador of Portugal, Dr. Joao Bianchi, a language school called ``Escola Joao de Deus'' was opened to help the local children. After decades of success, in 2012 ``Escola Joao de Deus'' joined the ``Instituto de Cames,'' an entity of the Portuguese Government, which oversees the teaching of Portuguese abroad. To this day, the school plays a huge role in the Portuguese-American Community Center's role in the neighborhood. Faithful to its founding principles, the Center continues its independent streak of focus towards the community rather than towards political organizations or religious sects. It also keeps the youth physically active by having a soccer team department, ``Portuguese Stars,'' with over 65 children enrolled. On October 3rd, the Portuguese-American Community Center will be hosting its 85th Anniversary Gala-Diamond Jubilee. I congratulate them on the occasion and wish them another 85 years of great success in Yonkers.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a true leader in the Riverdale community, Ruth Friendly, who has been actively involved in several different neighborhood organizations for many years. A former school teacher, Ruth was extensively involved in the curriculum development for the Scarsdale public school system before leaving the classroom in 1981 to join her husband, Fred Friendly, to work in media. Ruth served as a researcher, editor, producer, and executive producer for many landmark PBS series, and was an integral part of a team that received countless awards, including several for the series The Constitution: That Delicate Balance. Ruth also produced over 200 non-televised programs for civic, legal, business, and educational organizations, often moderated by Fred. For 16 years, she served as Vice President and Senior Editorial Director at Fred Friendly Seminars. Yet, in spite of her busy schedule, Ruth always found time to help the community. For the past eight years, she has been an active Board Member of Riverdale Neighborhood House. Ruth has also served on the Riverdale Senior Services Board, the Riverdale Mental Health Board, and the Fieldston Property Owners Association. She has also been active in the New York State court system, where she currently serves as Commissioner of the New York State Commission on Judicial Nomination, Court of Appeals, and as a panel member for the Disciplinary Committee of the Appellate Division, New York Supreme Court. This year, Riverdale Neighborhood House is honoring Ruth at their 2015 Annual Benefit. I want to congratulate Ruth on this honor and thank her for her years of dedicated service to the community.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the National Collegiate Honors Council as they celebrate their 50th anniversary this year. The National Collegiate Honors Council represents 800 colleges and universities and is composed of 325,000 students dedicated to achieving educational excellence in diverse subject curriculum areas, in order to achieve professional career goals. In my district, the Iona College Honors Program attracts the most talented and motivated students from all majors and disciplines. The honors program challenges students to develop their talents, stretch their capabilities, and prepare themselves for postgraduate study and professional careers. In order to mentor and challenge Iona's exceptional students, the honors program provides them individual academic and career counseling, small class sizes, and advanced courses. Iona College honors students go on to achieve prominence in a diverse range of professional fields including law, advertising, banking, education, and law enforcement. Grounded in an interdisciplinary rigorous curriculum marked by an accelerated course of study, students in the Honors Program embody the mission of Iona College, the Christian Brothers, and Catholic higher education. The National Collegiate Honors Program, after decades of growth and experience, continually prepares our students for successful professional careers. I invite my colleagues to join me in recognizing the program's contributions to our nation's educational and professional communities for the last 50 years.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, baseball has often been called the national pastime, and those of us in New York have watched this past week with pride as the New York Mets have advanced to the World Series, representing the National League. I have watched those players play as a team, and they have worked really, really hard. Perhaps we in the Congress can learn a little bit from them, that teamwork is possible and that we need all of us to pull together to move ahead. I am going to be at the World Series. I am going to really enjoy watching the New York Mets win. I am going to really enjoy the young players. I want to congratulate the ownership, Fred and Jeff Wilpon and Saul Katz. I want to congratulate all of the great players of the Mets, from Daniel Murphy to David Wright, to Yoenis Cespedes, and the great young pitching of deGrom and Harvey and Syndergaard. They really, really make us proud. I just want to sum up this 1 minute in three little words: Let's go, Mets.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. As President Reagan used to say, ``Here we go again,'' on the 61st attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act, I mean, give us a break. It is a waste of everybody's time. I don't know why we are going through this exercise. I do understand, Mr. Speaker, the need to reconcile our budget. I do not, however, understand the impulse to do so by gutting both the Affordable Care Act and an organization that provides vital preventive services to more than 2 million Americans, and that is Planned Parenthood. Investing in preventative care saves money in the long term. Yet this shortsighted measure would abolish the Affordable Care Act-created Prevention and Public Health Fund, which is our government's sole investment in prevention. This isn't merely a talking point. I have seen the ample returns on this investment in my hometown of the Bronx, where the fund sponsors healthier meals, antismoking campaigns, and increased access to vaccinations. This fund should not be gutted. This bill ignores the progress that the fund is making not only towards saving money but, more importantly, towards saving lives. This bill, again, as I said, bars the funding for Medicaid reimbursement to Planned Parenthood--again, yet another politically motivated attempt to demonize Planned Parenthood based on discredited allegations of wrongdoing. As I have said repeatedly, more than half of Planned Parenthood centers are in rural or underserved areas where health care is already hard to come by. Yet some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to make it even harder to access HIV and STI tests, breast and cervical cancer screenings, and other lifesaving services. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill and to continue to provide preventative care to our country's most underserved citizens. This is what we should be doing, not making it harder for them to get the help they need.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Planned Parenthood Hudson Peconic (PPHP). For years, PPHP has been an instrumental partner in keeping my constituents both healthy and educated about their reproductive health. Operating 11 health centers in Westchester, Rockland, Putnam and Suffolk Counties, PPHP served over 33,000 men and women in 2014 alone. In addition, last year PPHP provided 13,113 HIV tests, 81,941 individual STI tests, 5,896 breast examinations and education and training programs to over 42,000 participants. While these figures alone are laudable, it is important to note that PPHP affords these invaluable services to our area's most vulnerable patients. In 2014, 76 percent of PPHP patients had incomes at or below 150 percent of the Federal Poverty Limit. For low-income New Yorkers, care is already too hard to come by. I am so pleased to know that these New Yorkers can rely on PPHP. In recent months, Planned Parenthood has faced prolonged, politically-motivated attacks. It is during times like this that it is most important for us to remember not only the work that Planned Parenthood does, but the people Planned Parenthood serves. PPHP is keeping thousands of New Yorkers healthy, many of whom might have nowhere else to turn. I am pleased to have this opportunity to thank PPHP and its allies for their work. As a Member of Congress, one of my primary responsibilities is to ensure the well-being of my constituents. I am honored to call PPHP a partner in that goal. On October 21, 2015, PPHP will honor Jill Scheuer, Keith Pattiz and the St. Faith's House Foundation during its Empower Gala. I commend these partners for championing Planned Parenthood's mission. It is only with the aid of allies like Ms. Scheuer, Mr. Pattiz and the St. Faith's House Foundation that Planned Parenthood can continue to provide those most in need with quality, accessible care.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of this measure. First of all, I want to thank Mr. Cicilline for drafting this resolution. With its passage, we will again be signaling that the United States stands with the people of Ukraine, that we want them to chart the future for their own country, and that we reject the aggression and unlawfulness of Russia's actions under President Putin. Let me also thank our chairman, Ed Royce. The hallmark of the Foreign Affairs Committee is our success in advancing good, bipartisan legislation, and this resolution is a prime example of business as usual for our committee. I am very proud of it. Our interest in Ukraine is nothing new. Over the past year, our committee has focused a great deal on this crisis. We have passed legislation aimed at assisting Ukraine. We want to see a successful democratic transition, we want Ukraine's territorial integrity to be restored, and we want to deter Russia from further aggression. The cease-fire in Ukraine finally seems to be holding. That is good news, but I still have deep concerns. First of all, while the upcoming elections are important, not all of Ukraine's citizens will have their voices heard. Only areas under Kyiv's control will be casting ballots--and Russia has a history of sticking its nose in Ukraine's elections. Putin has said that he won't interfere with this vote. But I am not holding my breath, nor should anyone else. So we will be looking for some specific benchmarks. For instance, the agreement in Minsk requires that elections in Donetsk and Luhansk be held after Russia draws down its forces there. Not just Russian personnel, but all military equipment, all mercenaries, all support for proxies must be out of these areas before elections. It is critical that the OSCE mount a full-scale observation mission and be permitted to monitor every stage of the process. We will be keeping a close eye on this as well. Yet, even if Minsk is followed to the letter--a cease-fire, followed by elections, followed by restoration of Kyiv's control over its own eastern border--the international order will remain compromised. This agreement does not address Crimea, nor does it hold the force of international law. And as much as we talk about Minsk, we shouldn't forget prior and far more important agreements, such as the Helsinki Final Act and the Budapest Memorandum, which reaffirmed the core principle of the Final Act: that the territorial integrity of states is inviolable. Ukraine was part of the former Soviet Union; and when the Soviet Union collapsed, Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons. As part of giving that up, Ukraine was guaranteed its territorial integrity--guaranteed by the United States, by Russia, and by others. Certainly they are being betrayed right now, and we should not stand for it. Lastly, we should have no illusions that this agreement will deter President Putin's aggression. Indeed, as Moscow dials up its intervention in the Middle East in Syria, Ukraine is looking more and more like just one element of a much larger scheme by President Putin to destabilize countries on Russia's borders. That is what Putin wants to do. He wants to keep Ukraine unstable and destabilized. So, with this resolution, we reaffirm our support for Ukraine, we express our hope that Minsk will keep the peace, and we make clear that we are keeping a watchful eye on Russia and that we are ready to continue assisting Ukraine to consolidate its democratic gains and restore its territorial integrity. Ukraine wants to be democratic. Ukraine wants to look toward the West. Ukraine does not want to be dominated by Russia. We should give them all the support that they deserve. That is what the United States does, that is what the United States is all about, and that is what this resolution does. I urge my colleagues to support this measure. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), the author of this resolution.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In closing, once again, I want to voice my strong support for this resolution. I again thank Mr. Cicilline for authoring this measure and his leadership, and I thank our chairman once again. Even with a cease-fire in place, the crisis in Ukraine is a major threat to the international order. The United States stands with the people of Ukraine as they try to chart the path forward for their country and restore their territorial integrity. So long as President Putin's aggression continues, we need to stay focused on this serious challenge. I urge my colleagues to support this measure. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend a warm welcome to the President of the Republic of Korea, Park Geun-hye, who will visit Washington, D.C. for the second time as President next week, on October 13, 2015. President Park Geun-hye has a long and distinguished career in government prior to her election as President and she has proven a most capable leader for the Korean people. The alliance between the United States and Korea is founded, first and foremost, on our shared values of democracy and our belief in the rule of law. The U.S.-Korea alliance is a critical aspect of the security architecture in the Asia-Pacific region and continues to grow and expand. Our partnership is critical in defending against the threat of an increasingly belligerent and unpredictable North Korean regime. North Korea continues to threaten stability on the Peninsula through its rogue nuclear program and dangerous conventional and cyber capabilities. The Republic of Korea, however, has been our close friend and ally in this most sensitive and serious endeavor, and we should strive to take our security partnership to new levels in the coming years. Korea and the United States have also cooperated closely in the development of our civilian nuclear programs for more than 50 years, and over the last several years our countries have been negotiating a new Nuclear Cooperation Agreement to upgrade and replace the previous accord. Today, the Korea 123 Agreement is under review in the U.S. Congress. I look forward to its passage and our continued work in this important area. A robust economic relationship between the U.S. and Korea remains an important aspect of our cooperation. The Republic of Korea is the United States' sixth largest trading partner, and during President Park's tenure, we saw the entry-into-force of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement. The U.S.-Korea alliance and the multifaceted ties between our two peoples will surely grow deeper as we continue to work together on myriad issues of common concern. I once again welcome President Park to Washington with my best wishes for a successful visit.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. I thank my good friend from New York. Mr. Speaker, this is the fourth time in less than 1 month that I have been compelled to voice my opposition to a measure attacking women's health care. This is just what Congress does not need, another polarizing battle in Congress. I have been on the Energy and Commerce Committee for 20 years, and this is the wrong thing to do. This is just absolutely the wrong thing to do. The American public wants to see us pass a budget, a transportation bill, keep the government open, do the Export-Import Bank and other things that are important. What are we doing, getting into another political brawl? We don't need another committee like Benghazi, which should be abolished. The Washington Post reported last week that more Americans have supported continued Federal funding for Planned Parenthood than opposed it in every single public survey taken this year. I don't want to infringe on women's rights to choose whatever is right between them, their doctor, their family, and their God, and I don't think Congress should either. My friends on the other side of the aisle talk about wanting smaller government. I don't want government to be so big that it intrudes on women's privacy and women's health. This is ill-thought and should be defeated.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In closing, let me say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, and they know this, no one has been more of an adversary of the Iranian regime than I have, but a number of us found the deal with Iran wanting. We voted ``no,'' but it didn't prevail, and now we have to figure out the best way forward. The best way forward, I sincerely believe, is not to keep trotting out these bills. No one is condoning anything that Iran has done, particularly with terrorism. It is a matter of how we combat it. The way I see it is that we have two paths forward: we can choose to mirror what we did with the Affordable Care Act, voting and revoting on an issue that has been settled to some degree, or we can choose the path that suits our Nation's interests the best. This path includes doing everything we can to strengthen the enforcement mechanisms of this agreement. The path also includes holding Iran accountable for its nefarious activities that destabilize the region, as well as pushing Tehran to release detained Americans and improve their human rights records in the interim, and, of course, taking care of the victims of terrorism and their families. This path requires the strengthening of bilateral partnerships and supporting our allies in the region, both of which help us in the long term. This is the course I hope we take. We cannot let this opportunity go to waste. So that is why I won't be supporting H.R. 3457. After that, we need to work together on measures that strengthen implementation of the agreement as much as possible. I hope we can do that in a bipartisan way, as we have for the past 3 years in the Foreign Affairs Committee. This path promises to bring us back to making foreign policy rather than using political bills that deflect from the important issues at hand. I do not doubt the sincerity of anyone who spoke today. We all are sincere and we all feel the same way: Iran is a bad actor and must be held accountable. But this bill is not the correct mechanism to do so, so I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in opposition to the bill. Let me start by acknowledging my friend, Chairman Royce. The Committee on Foreign Affairs is the most bipartisan committee in Congress. We are collaborative, we are productive, and we have built a record advancing bipartisan legislation that promotes American interests abroad and keeps the American people safe. I want to state that Chairman Royce's leadership is to thank for much of our committee's good work. So I am disappointed that the House Republican leadership decided to ignore regular order on this bill. They have rushed it to the floor without any consideration by the Foreign Affairs Committee. As has been pointed out, we have had 30 hearings. We know a little bit about Iran on the Foreign Affairs Committee. So rushing it to the floor without any consideration by the Foreign Affairs Committee is wrong. I think it is a shame. Because I think, left to our own volition, we could have sent forward a bill that could make a difference for the victims of Iranian-sponsored terrorism. Iranian-sponsored terrorism is there, it is palpable, and we should do something to try to help the victims. But this bill, on the other hand, would not do that. Let me explain why. American courts have awarded roughly $46 billion to about 1,300 victims and their families. We all want justice for these families. We all want to hold Iran accountable for its act of terrorism against Americans. Iran should pay these claims. But this bill does nothing for the victims of Iranian terror. Here is the problem. Let's assume for argument that Iran's leaders did change course and decide to pay the claims. This bill would actually make it more difficult for Iran to pay these judgments. Iran owes American claimants $46 billion, but Iran has access to $20 billion of its cash reserves, not $46 billion. The rest--$95 billion-- is frozen in bank accounts in Europe and Asia. On top of that, Iran's oil revenues are frozen. When Iran sells oil, the payments are kept frozen under the threat of American sanctions, which I support. Iran can access these funds only for certain purposes. Paying court judgments is not one of them. Current U.S. sanctions don't allow it. And under this bill, all U.S. sanctions are kept in effect, absolutely no changes allowed, until Iran pays the full $46 billion. So where would Iran get the money to pay the American claims? The bill says: Iran, pay the claims, but you can't have any of the funds to pay them. So it is a catch-22. And who does it hurt? Not Iran. It hurts the victims. Not a single claim would be paid under this bill. So, in my opinion, this bill offers nothing but false hope. Now, I have heard some Members say, well, we can pay the claims by seizing Iran's frozen assets, but that is really not the case. Virtually all of Iran's funds frozen under our sanctions are overseas, not in the U.S. Though they are frozen by U.S. sanctions, they are beyond the jurisdiction of our courts to seize them. Another false promise: virtually all of Iran's assets will stay overseas. Under this bill, they would be required to be kept overseas because all U.S. sanctions would be kept in effect by law with no change allowed. So let's be honest. This bill is not really about helping these victims. It is about exploiting their plight and their tragedy to make a political splash. Look, everyone here knows I am no fan of the Iran nuclear agreement. I voted against it, but the other side won. Whether you are for or against the deal, it is time to be realistic about what happens next. In my opinion, there were two potential courses. The first is to do everything we can to strengthen enforcement of the agreement and hold Iran to its commitments. We should double down on our support for friends and allies in the region. We should crack down on Iran's support for terrorist organizations. We should push leaders in Tehran to release detained Americans and improve its abysmal record on human rights. That is the course I hope we will take. I will soon introduce legislation to pursue those aims, and I will work with members of both parties to get these measures to the President's desk. The other course would be doing to the Iran agreement what leaders on the other side have tried to do to the Affordable Care Act, and that is what I am afraid of here: vote after vote after vote after vote, whether we like it or not, on an issue that has already been voted on by this Chamber many, many times. I don't want the dispute on Iran to turn into the Affordable Care Act where we try to kill it 60 different ways. We should not be using this for political purposes. We should be passing legislation, which I know we can get out of the Foreign Affairs Committee in a collaborative way, that would really do something to help these victims, that would really do something to hold Iran accountable for all its reprehensible acts. So I hope that what we are doing today is not the path we are going down not only now, but in the future with other things. There was a measure in the Senate that was very similar to this, which tried to hold Iran to certain things and say that the funds couldn't be released unless Iran did this or did that. We could do this another 60 times; it would be counterproductive. Let's put our heads together. Let's figure out a way that we can continue to hold Iran accountable, and let's move on that way. So I hope we can move past this bill and start working on measures to ensure that the Iran agreement is implemented as strongly and stringently as possible. I hope we can get back to our regular practice in the Foreign Affairs Committee of which we have been so proud and focus on making policy that leaves politics at the water's edge. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

Mr. ENGEL. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), our colleague on the Foreign Affairs Committee.