Eliot Engel

Mr. ENGEL

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

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. We are here because some have again chosen to reignite the same tired battles of years past--and bring our government to the brink of shutdown--to restrict women's control over their own health and bodies. I should not be deciding what is best for a woman's health. She should, and her doctor should. That we are even having this debate--based on contrived, unsubstantiated allegations--about an organization that provides critical care to more than 2 million Americans is not only outrageous, it is downright irresponsible. More than half of Planned Parenthood centers are in rural or medically underserved areas where access to health care is already too limited. Yet my colleagues want to make it even harder for women and men there to access HIV and STI tests, breast cancer screenings, cervical cancer screenings, and other lifesaving services. Madam Speaker, this attempt to demonize Planned Parenthood is disgraceful. Again, it is important to underscore that Federal insurance coverage of abortion is already restricted, so to defund Planned Parenthood is to defund the preventative services that keep our constituents healthy. I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire how much time I have remaining.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Over the past 2 years, I have supported our negotiating team in the P5+1. I have favored giving time and space to achieve a diplomatic breakthrough to foreclose Iran's pathways to a nuclear weapon. I am grateful for the tireless efforts by President Obama, Secretary Kerry, Secretary Moniz, Secretary Lew, and Undersecretary Sherman. I appreciate the work of our P5+1 partners in concluding an agreement with Iran. But, unfortunately, I cannot support the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, and I plan to oppose this resolution. Let me say at the outset, I was troubled that Iran was not asked to stop enriching, while we were talking, despite several U.N. Security Council resolutions calling for a pause; and after using this review period to assess the details of the agreement, I am not convinced that this deal does enough to keep a nuclear weapon out of Iran's hands. I have raised questions and concerns throughout the negotiating phase and review period. The answers I have received simply don't convince me that this deal will keep a nuclear weapon out of Iran's hands. It may, in fact, strengthen Iran's position as a destabilizing and destructive influence across the Middle East. First of all, I don't believe that this deal gives international inspectors adequate access to undeclared sites--24 days is far, far too long a time. Iran can stall, and, in 24 days, they can cover up whatever they have. I am especially troubled by reports about how the Iranian military base at Parchin will be inspected. With these potential roadblocks, the IAEA inspectors may be unable to finish their investigation into the potential military dimensions of Iran's nuclear program. I don't think it is essential that Iran provide a full mea culpa of its past activities, but we should have a clear picture of how far Iran has gotten in developing a nuclear weapon. I also view as a dangerous concession the sunset of the international sanctions on advanced conventional weapons and ballistic missiles. I was told that these issues were not on the table during the talks; so it is unacceptable to me that, after 5 years, Iran can begin buying advanced conventional weapons and, after 8 years, ballistic missiles. Worse, if Iran were to violate the weakened provisions in this agreement, such an action wouldn't violate the JCPOA and wouldn't be subject to snapback sanctions. In my view, Iran is a grave threat to international stability. It is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. It continues to hold American citizens behind bars on bogus charges, and our prisoners still languish there. We have an agreement. Their release was not part of the agreement. Iran's actions have made a bad situation in a chaotic region worse. Even under the weight of international sanctions these past few years--when Iran had no money, when its currency was worthless, when its economy was in the toilet--Iran found money to support international terror. Iran has been able to support terrorist groups, such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and other violent extremists. Awash in new cash provided by sanctions relief, Iran will be poised to inflict even greater damage in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, Israel, and our Gulf partners. Iran's leadership has every interest in shoring up support from hard-liners. After all, if a deal goes through, hard-liners will need to be placated. I can tell you that, within the next few years--in the next Lebanon war with Israel--Hezbollah will have missiles raining down on Israel, and some of those missiles will be paid for by the windfall that Iran is going to get as a result of sanctions being lifted. I think that is unacceptable. We can have no illusions about what Iran will do with its newfound wealth. We can have no doubt about the malevolent intent of a country's leader who chants ``death to America'' and ``death to Israel'' just days after concluding a deal. The ink was not even dry on the deal, and 4 days later, the Supreme Leader led a chant of ``death to America.'' After negotiating with us and agreeing to this agreement, he could not even wait more than 4 days--back to the same old ``death to America.'' Finally and very importantly, I have a fundamental concern that, 15 years from now, under this agreement, Iran will be free to produce weapons-grade, highly enriched uranium without any limitation. What does that mean? It means Iran will be a legitimized nuclear threshold state after the year 2030, with advanced centrifuges and the ability to stockpile enriched uranium. So, in reality, this agreement does not prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon; it only postpones it. If Iran pursues that course, I fear it could spark a nuclear arms race across the region. After years of intransigence, I am simply not confident that Iran will be a more responsible partner. Before I finish, I would also like to say a few words about the debate surrounding this issue so far. We can disagree on the issues. We should debate the details of any important policy, such as this one, and we must rely on our democratic institutions to carry us forward as they have for so long; but we cannot question the motives of any Member of Congress no matter where he or she stands on this issue. So, instead of using this time to grind a political ax, let's, instead, look down the road. After all, we know that this deal is going forward, and when that happens, we need to ask how we can make this agreement stronger. How do we ensure the security of Israel and our other friends and allies in the region? How do we keep resources out of the hands of terrorists as sanctions are lifted? What support does Congress need to provide so that the United States and our partners can hold Iran to its word and ultimately keep it from getting a bomb? The time to start answering these questions is now. That is why, in the days and weeks ahead, I will reach out to colleagues--Republicans and Democrats alike--to chart a path forward. I will be working with Chairman Royce and others on both sides of the aisle. I will develop new legislation to counter Iran as it dumps its soon-to-be-acquired billions of dollars into terrorist groups and weapons programs. I will work with other lawmakers toward new initiatives that support Israel and our Middle East allies so that they can stand up to an unleashed Iran; and I will work here in Congress and with the administration to make sure the deal is fully implemented to the letter. We need to focus on strengthening our deterrence in the region; and, most importantly, we have to work hard to continue to enhance the U.S.- Israel relationship. We must reinvigorate the bipartisan consensus which has been the foundation of America's relationship with Israel; and we must ensure that Israel is able to maintain its qualitative military edge and its ability to defend itself. The world is watching us this week. The United States is being looked to, not for rhetoric and outrage, but for leadership and resolve. So let's present our arguments and cast our votes. Then let's work together to move forward in a productive way. I appreciate how we have worked together on the Foreign Affairs Committee with Chairman Royce. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

Mr. ENGEL. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Vargas).

Mr. ENGEL. I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. ENGEL. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price).

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman), a very valued member of our committee and one of the subcommittee ranking members.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutch), a very important member of the committee, the ranking member of the Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, a community is only as strong as the commitments of its citizens to its success. Albert Sorano has been one of those committed citizens, a true visionary in the city of Yonkers. Albert was born in the Bronx and became a communicant of St. Bartholomew's Church. A graduate of New York City Schools, Albert served honorably in the United States Military during the War in Vietnam. Following his service, Albert moved to Yonkers where he became one of the most sought after mentors in the city. Albert dove into serving the Yonkers community by assisting and leading in Career training and Job Placement. He excelled as a major Fundraiser and Event Coordinator for non-profit organizations, including organizing a major fundraising effort to benefit the Ursuline Sisters in New Rochelle. The $125,000 raised was used to establish an infirmary for ill and disabled retired Sisters has been a Yonkers resident for close to 40 years. In 2004, Albert became a strong member of the Exchange Club of Yonkers, rising to the position of President for three terms from July 2006 to June 2009, and has been on the Board of Directors for many years. Albert continued using his gifts to rally the community to fundraise for the Child Abuse Prevention Center in White Plains, College Scholarships for Yonkers High School graduates, the Yonkers 5th Grade City Wide Spelling Bee, and the Freedom Shrine installations in schools, libraries and city facilities with recognition of outstanding private citizens. Albert's greatest commitment however has always been serving the young people in the neighborhood, including those individuals that had been at risk or just released from jail. This year, the Exchange Club of Yonkers is honoring Albert at the club's annual ``Book of Golden Deeds Gala.'' He is incredibly deserving of this recognition, and I count myself fortunate to represent such a fine individual in the Halls of Congress. Congratulations to Albert for receiving this wonderful award.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the co-chair of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission and a longtime supporter of the Dalai Lama and of Tibet.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of H. Res. 337. I am proud to have offered this resolution that calls for the Chinese Government to sit down with Tibet's leaders without preconditions, listen to their grievances, and work toward an agreement that guarantees the rights and security of the Tibetan people. It also marks, as the Democratic leader pointed out, the 80th birthday of the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people, His Holiness, the 14th Dalai Lama. I have had the privilege to meet His Holiness, who is truly a remarkable man, such a gentle spirit driven from within by incredible strength and courage, a person of such humor and kindness whose life has been marked by struggle and setback. I first met him here in Washington many years ago. When you meet him, no matter your faith or background, you cannot help but feel the bond of common humanity and be drawn into his cause and the cause of the Tibetan people; indeed, many in Congress have gotten behind this effort. Let me, again, especially thank Leader Pelosi. There has been no greater champion in Congress for the Tibetan struggle for freedom. For years, she has held a light to the challenges the Tibetan people face in preserving their unique culture, language, and religion. I am honored that she is cosponsoring this resolution. Let me also thank Asia Subcommittee Chairman Matt Salmon, and co- chairmen of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, Representative Jim McGovern and Representative Joseph Pitts, for supporting this measure. I thank my friend Mr. Smith of New Jersey as well. Since 1951, the people of Tibet have lived under the shadow of the People's Republic of China, without guarantees of even the most basic rights and with no say in deciding Tibet's future. The Dalai Lama has described the cultural genocide the Tibetan people have endured, forced assimilation and loss of language and cultural identity. Today, as human rights conditions for the Tibetan people deteriorate and continue to deteriorate, as more monasteries come under government control, as more people are arrested, the desperation of the Tibetan people grows. Tragically, more than 140 Tibetans have burned themselves alive in protest of growing oppression; yet the Chinese authorities have not changed course. Despite talk of mutual respect and social harmony, the reality in Tibet tells a very, very different story. Today, we look to the example set by the Dalai Lama and call for meaningful change for the Tibetan people. The Dalai Lama's life has been a peaceful journey toward a better future for his people. It is in that spirit that we call on the Chinese Government to negotiate without preconditions. His Holiness has shown that democratic institutions can thrive alongside spiritual leadership. It is in that spirit that we urge the Chinese Government not to involve itself in the spiritual succession process for the next Dalai Lama, should there be one. The Dalai Lama has championed freedom of expression and freedom of conscience to promote mutual understanding and harmony. It is in this spirit that this resolution calls on China to allow unrestricted access to officials, journalists, and other America citizens. Let's not forget the United States has an obligation to hold up these freedoms as well. That is why this measure also calls on our own government to press the issues of human rights, political rights, and religious rights at the highest levels of the Chinese Government and to call for the immediate release of Tibetan political prisoners. Throughout his life, the Dalai Lama has worked for a peaceful path forward for the Tibetan people. We are grateful for his example and his wisdom. With this resolution, we urge China's leaders to do the right thing for Tibet. I enthusiastically support this resolution; I urge my colleagues to do the same, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close. I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 337. I think everyone who spoke made excellent points, and we are all of one mind. This is the right thing to do. We should support this resolution to honor the deep humility, respect, and peace that the Dalai Lama represents to us and to people around the world. We should support this resolution to underscore our friendship and commitment to the Tibetan people and to all people who are oppressed and deprived of their basic rights. Let me say that again, and to all people who are oppressed and deprived of their basic rights. And we should support this resolution on behalf of the Chinese people themselves, the growing number of people inside China who understand China itself will be more prosperous and more successful when their government chooses to be genuinely open and respectful of all peoples and cultures. I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 337, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 337, and I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), our leader and one of the greatest champions of Tibet's struggle for freedom.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H. Res. 310. I am the lead sponsor of this resolution. And I remember 20 years ago being in this Chamber when that massacre happened. It is hard to believe that it has been 20 years since the Srebrenica genocide, and it certainly was a genocide. During the Bosnian war, the United Nations declared the area around this small town a safe zone. On the eve of the massacre, tens of thousands of displaced Bosniak civilians had gathered under the protection of the U.N. in what they thought was a safe zone. They all rushed to that place, only to be slaughtered a little while later. But the 400 U.N. peacekeepers could put up scarce resistance to the army of the Republika Srpska, whose leaders were bent on wiping out the Bosniak population. Over the next few days, men and boys were lined up and mowed down by machine guns. Children were murdered in front of their mothers. Women and girls were raped and beaten, as onlookers stood powerless to intervene. Bulldozers piled bodies into mass graves. I remember that happened in our lifetime. It is hard to believe. When the killing had ended, more than 8,000 Bosniaks--mostly men and boys--had lost their lives in one of the bloodiest episodes on European soil since World War II. This resolution tells their tragic story. It praises the efforts to hold the guilty accountable. It demands that those efforts continue. It underscores solidarity with the victims and calls for a reconciliation that will one day see the lies, hatred, and violence of the past replaced by true friendship and community. This resolution tells the truth about what happened because telling the truth--however painful--is the starting point for healing to begin. We remember the Srebrenica genocide to honor the victims and to remind ourselves of the costs of indifference, of what can happen when we say, well, that is somebody else's problem. As this region of Europe heals--I have just come back from the Balkans--and charts a course toward a brighter future, I hope the lessons of this tragedy will be a guide for the United States and for countries around the world fighting against tyranny and oppression. Today there was a disgrace that happened at the United Nations. Unfortunately, there are many disgraces that happen at the United Nations. Two international courts have called the slaughter of Bosnian Serbs of some 8,000 Muslim men and boys who had sought refuge in what was supposed to be a U.N.-protected site genocide. Now, what happened today at the U.N.? Russia vetoed a U.N. resolution calling Srebrenica a genocide. It passed the Security Council. Russia vetoed it. You would think that a veto would be used for something of substance, not a resolution. This resolution has substance, but you would not think that Russia or any country would veto it. Let me see what this defeated resolution stated. It stated that acceptance of ``the tragic events at Srebrenica as genocide is a prerequisite for reconciliation'' and ``condemns denial of this genocide as hindering efforts towards reconciliation.'' The vote was ten countries in favor; Russia casting a veto; and four abstentions: China, Nigeria, Angola, and Venezuela. The British Ambassador after the vote said that Britain was outraged by Russia's veto. And he said Russia's actions tarnish the memory of all those who died in the Srebrenica genocide. Russia will have to justify its behavior to the families of over 8,000 people murdered in the worst atrocity in Europe since the second World War. ``This is a defeat of justice,'' said Camil Durakovic, the mayor of Srebrenica. He added that the veto means that the U.N. is not recognizing a decision by its own judicial branch, the International Court of Justice, which has declared the tragedy a genocide. ``The world has lost. The world, and especially Serbia, will have to face the truth sooner or later.'' Our Ambassador Samantha Powell, who was a 24-year-old journalist in Bosnia at the time of the Srebrenica massacre, told the Council that, ``For all of the brutality of a horrific war, this was a singular horror. It was genocide, a fact now proven again and again by international tribunals.'' ``Today's vote mattered,'' Power said. ``It mattered hugely to the families of the victims of the Srebrenica genocide. Russia's veto is heartbreaking for those families, and it is a further stain on this Council's record.'' I read that into the Record because I think it is important to notice the actions of Russia. We see their actions in Ukraine. We see their actions at the U.N. And we see the actions of the U.N., itself. And it really is a shame. So, again, we remember this genocide to honor its victims. It is not somebody else's problem. It is all of our problems. In order to prevent it from happening in the future, we have to accurately recall what happened in the past. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I commend my friend from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for his leadership on this important resolution, and I am gratified that we held this timely debate ahead of the solemn commemorations that will take place in Srebrenica and around the world this weekend. I thank our chairman for his leadership, Chairman Royce, as usual. It shows that we worked again together on the Foreign Affairs Committee in a very bipartisan manner. This transcends everything. This is genocide, and these resolutions are very, very important. Now, Mr. Speaker, let's think about this. The chairman said something that really jostled my mind. I pointed out where a U.N. resolution was vetoed today by Russia. These men who were massacred in a genocide went to what they were told was a United Nations safe haven. For this to happen under the auspices of the United Nations and then for Russia to veto a United Nations resolution commemorating solemn, solemn 20 years, it is just an absolute disgrace and irony; and it is one of the reasons that the United Nations has trouble because of the hypocrisy, once again, that we see in that body. By passing this resolution, we put the House solidly on record honoring the thousands of innocent people killed at Srebrenica and all those who suffered during the Bosnian war. We stand alongside those who risked and continued to risk life and limb to defend the human rights of all people. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution unanimously, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, on May 24, 2011, President Obama issued a memorandum on Federal fleet performance that required that all new light-duty vehicles in the Federal fleet to be alternative fuel vehicles, such as hybrid, electric, natural gas, or biofuel by December 31, 2015. My amendment echoes the President's memorandum by prohibiting funds in this act from being used to lease or purchase new light-duty vehicles unless that purchase is made in accord with the President's memorandum. I have submitted identical amendments to 18 different appropriations bills over the past few years, and every time they have been accepted by both the majority and the minority. I hope my amendment will receive similar support today. Global oil prices are down. We no longer pay $147 per barrel. But despite increased production here in the United States, the global price of oil is still largely determined by OPEC. Spikes in oil prices have profound repercussions for our economy. The primary reason is that our cars and trucks run only on petroleum. We can change that with alternative technologies that exist today. The Federal Government operates the largest fleet of light-duty vehicles in America, over 633,000 vehicles. Almost 35,000 of these vehicles are within the jurisdiction of this bill. Mr. Chairman, when I was in Brazil a few years ago, I saw how they diversified their fuel use. People there can drive to a gas station and choose whether to fill their vehicle with gasoline or with ethanol. They make their choice based on cost or whatever criteria they deem important. I want the same choice for American consumers. That is why I am also proposing a bill this Congress, a bipartisan bill, as I have done many times in the past, which will provide for cars built in America to be able to run on a fuel instead of or in addition to gasoline. It is virtually very inexpensive, under $100 per car; and if they do it in Brazil, we can do it here. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, expanding the role these alternative technologies play in our transportation economy will help break the leverage that foreign government controlled oil companies hold over Americans. It will increase our Nation's domestic security and protect consumers. Mr. Chairman, I ask that my colleagues support the Engel amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.